AMD Phenom II X4 965 vs Intel Core i3-2100 Sandy Bridge 3.1GHz for new build

[blueyfooey]

Hello,

I'm not sure which is better. The AMD Phenom II X4 965, I've been told, has less gaming capability than the Sandy Bridge, but if it's negligible, I'd rather not spend the extra money on the Sandy Bridge. I have a budget that I'm trying not to pass ($650) and I'd rather have more money to spend on the GPU. Anyone able to give a bit of advice?

Edit: The CPU's looked at are

AMD Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition Deneb 3.4GHz Socket AM3 125W Quad-Core Processor

Intel Core i3-2100 Sandy Bridge 3.1GHz LGA 1155 65W Dual-Core Desktop Processor Intel HD Graphics 2000

 

[DJDeCiBeL]

Get the 965 and overclock it. The extra two real cores will make a difference in games and other applications that can use them.

A comparison between the two, if you're interested: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/102?vs=289

The i3 is better in many areas, but overclocking the 965 will close the gap significantly.

Edit: Having said that, you'll need to factor in the cost of an aftermarket cooler, like a Cooler Master Hyper 212+ or Evo to OC the 965.

 

[blueyfooey]

Aftermarket cooler? Sorry, I'm new to the whole... well, everything related to computers. Do I need a cooler other than the one that comes with a bought case? Also, if I buy the Phenom, is there a guide on the forums to overclocking it? I wouldn't want to mess up.

 

[DJDeCiBeL]

Aftermarket cooler? Sorry, I'm new to the whole... well, everything related to computers. Do I need a cooler other than the one that comes with a bought case? Also, if I buy the Phenom, is there a guide on the forums to overclocking it? I wouldn't want to mess up.

An aftermarket cooler is something like this: COOLER MASTER Hyper 212 EVO RR-212E-20PK-R2 Continuous Direct Contact 120mm Sleeve CPU Cooler Compatible with latest Intel 2011/1366/1155 and AMD FM1/AM3+

The 965 will come with its own stock cooler, you just don't want to OC with it because temps would get out of hand pretty quickly.

And yes, there's a guide in the OC section on OC'ing Black Edition CPU's.

 

[Tmant123]

Get 965, you don't have to overclock it unless your running crossfire. Stock cooler will be fine with stock settings.

 

[DJDeCiBeL]

Get 965, you don't have to overclock it unless your running crossfire. Stock cooler will be fine with stock settings.

It's true that you don't have to overclock it, but to even it up with the i3 in gaming, it helps.

Regardless, even at stock speeds, it should be fine, in most cases, it would just be better overclocked.

 

[blazorthon]

Get 965, you don't have to overclock it unless your running crossfire. Stock cooler will be fine with stock settings.

Try telling someone with a Radeon 7950 that a stock Phenom II 960 will handle a 7950 at 1200MHz GPU and 1600MHz memory or better. It doesn't take CF to show a big difference between a stock 965 and a well overclocked 965.

 

[blueyfooey]

If I were using a
ASRock 970 PRO3 AM3+ AMD 970 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX AMD Motherboard
and
SAPPHIRE Radeon HD 6870 1GB 256-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.1 x16 HDCP Ready CrossFireX Support Video Card

Would it be necessary to overclock the 965?

 

[Smeg45]

I second OC a 965. It makes a substantial difference - I've pushed mine to 3.8GHz with 1.4v and the northbridge to 2400MHz. Gaming feels smoother and I'm certain I've squeezed out a few frames too. And yes I have a 7950. RAM's only 1333MHz though.

 

[DJDeCiBeL]

If I were using a
ASRock 970 PRO3 AM3+ AMD 970 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX AMD Motherboard
and
SAPPHIRE Radeon HD 6870 1GB 256-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.1 x16 HDCP Ready CrossFireX Support Video Card

Would it be necessary to overclock the 965?

"Necessary", no, but it would still help some.

If you don't want to spend the money on a aftermarket cooler, you should be ok not OC'ing with just a 6870.

 

[Tmant123]

If I were using a
ASRock 970 PRO3 AM3+ AMD 970 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX AMD Motherboard
and
SAPPHIRE Radeon HD 6870 1GB 256-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.1 x16 HDCP Ready CrossFireX Support Video Card

Would it be necessary to overclock the 965?

I'm running an FX-6100 and a Saphire 6870 1gb, You should be fine.

 

[satyamdubey]

+1 DJDecible . . . you may refer to our toms benches as well
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-fx-pentium-apu-benchmark,3120-9.html
Those are for gaming as that seems like your primary use
You'll notice that as far as gaming alone goes, an OC'ed Phenom comes close to an i3 (does not always beat it)... that means you have to take pains to install an after market cooler and carefully oc the chip which also translates to a higher power consumption
i3 would be better value for money IMO

 

[blazorthon]

+1 DJDecible . . . you may refer to our toms benches as well
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-fx-pentium-apu-benchmark,3120-9.html
Those are for gaming as that seems like your primary use
You'll notice that as far as gaming alone goes, an OC'ed Phenom comes close to an i3 (does not always beat it)... that means you have to take pains to install an after market cooler and carefully oc the chip which also translates to a higher power consumption
i3 would be better value for money IMO

Those benches don't include an overclocked CPU/NB frequency which could let the Phenom II x4s take the performance win over the i3s. Also, Newegg has a Phenom II x4 830 for $85. That and a $20-30 CPU cooler has more value than an i3 has. The i3's advantage at this point is its much lower power consumption.

 

[dudewitbow]

if your interested in the 965 BE, theres a 90$ for 965 be promo code this weekend EMCYTZT2108. should give you enough $ to buy a HSF

 

[blazorthon]

if your interested in the 965 BE, theres a 90$ for 965 be promo code this weekend EMCYTZT2108. should give you enough $ to buy a HSF

That's another good option.

 

[satyamdubey]

Those benches don't include an overclocked CPU/NB frequency which could let the Phenom II x4s take the performance win over the i3s. Also, Newegg has a Phenom II x4 830 for $85. That and a $20-30 CPU cooler has more value than an i3 has. The i3's advantage at this point is its much lower power consumption.

I may have misunderstood the benches but they do have 955 @ 4 Ghz.....

 

[blazorthon]

I may have misunderstood the benches but they do have 955 @ 4 Ghz.....

That's the CPU frequency, not the CPU/NB frequency which is still at a mere 2.2GHz.

 

[nekulturny]

Oc'd Phenom II > i3 any day in my book.

I may have misunderstood the benches but they do have 955 @ 4 Ghz.....

The benches are such that, contrary to the commentary of the article writer, are close enough that you could play on two different computers identical in every way except the CPU and you'd never know which is which. But the Phenom IIs have superior multi-threading performance than i3s. I personally want that quad core assurance for when I'm not playing a game.

 

[sincreator]

While I agree with the PHII 965 being the better option for building "right now" performance, I also feel it should be pointed out that the upgrade path kinda sucks from AMD right now as well. I still personally recommend to people to grab a cheap i3 and then later on grab an Ivy/Sandy bridge quad core when they can afford it. If not, they may end up switching platforms sooner than they would like, and then they will be spending even more money in the long run.

I myself have the x6 1090t @ 4.0ghz(4.2ghz for benching), and my brother grabbed a 2500k a few months back. His 2500k at stock benches about the same as mine does at 4.0ghz. Then when it's OC'd it flies right past my 1090t in most synthetic benchmarks. Doing so at 4.8ghz, and if he really wants to he can hit the 5.0ghz barrier as well. Overclocked the intel chip use alot less power than my 1090t at 4.0ghz and higher as well. I'm not sure of the exact numbers, but I know I read that in numerous articles.

This is one reason I make the recommendation that I do: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/362?vs=288

and here's the other:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/362?vs=288


Basically in the first link I put the highest stock clocked x4 PHII vs. the 2500k to show why going with an i3 for now and later upgrading to a quad sandy/ivy cpu is probally the better option.

In the second link I wanted to show that if someone buys a PH II chip right now the FX 8150 is at the top of AMD's food chain, so that's where there upgrade path would lead. That chip even gets beat by a stock 2500k in almost every benchmark. The games FPS differences seem pretty darn high too.

If I was to upgrade right now I would be switching over to Intel, and that would require a new mobo+cpu+aftermarket cooler(for OC). So I just personally can't recommend an AMD build for a new computer. I think Intel has my recommendation nailed down right now. If someone allready has an Athlon/Phenom x2, x3 in their current system, I would recommend the x4/x6 PHII for sure. Just not on a new build.

 

[nekulturny]

Fair enough, however, my opinion is that one should never buy a system for the "upgrade path". If you want i5 performance, save up for another pay check until you can afford it, rather than buying a $120 CPU today and then say 6 months down the road paying $200 for the CPU you wanted in the first place. That really doesn't make sense to me. As far as power consumption, a lot of people talk about it, I think few realize how insignificant the watts translate to on the electric bill.

 

[sincreator]

Fair enough, however, my opinion is that one should never buy a system for the "upgrade path". If you want i5 performance, save up for another pay check until you can afford it, rather than buying a $120 CPU today and then say 6 months down the road paying $200 for the CPU you wanted in the first place. That really doesn't make sense to me. As far as power consumption, a lot of people talk about it, I think few realize how insignificant the watts translate to on the electric bill.

What you are recommending will require a change of platform alltogether down the road because AMD seem to be getting further and further behind. They themselves say they aren't tring to beat intel in performance anymore. So that switch will cost alot more money than just dropping in a cpu in a year or so time. New mobo+cpu+cooler(if OCing). Also if the new build uses win7 OEM to save money, they would need a new copy of Windows as well since OEM copies get linked to the motherboard mainly. The price on the chip may even be lower by then as well. http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-intel-cpu-apu-processors,15741.html



The only reason I bought up the power consumpion was for OCing purposes as related to the size PSU being bought initially. You may need a larger PSU to take the PHII higher, and that will run a bit more money as well. It could be the difference between a 650w, and having to go to 750-850w depending on what GPU is being purchased and how many. I should of elaborated that more in my first post. Sorry.

 

[nekulturny]

What you are recommending will require a change of platform alltogether down the road because AMD seem to be getting further and further behin

What I am recommending is that if the OP wants to know what is the better of the two, between the i3-2100 and the Phenom II 965. I am sticking to that format, and that format only.

They themselves say they aren't tring to beat intel in performance anymore.

What is in the future is irrelevant when it comes to computers. TODAY the Phenom II overclocked performs on par with the i3 in gaming, and exceeds it in multithreaded apps, in some cases, substantially.. Beyond that, it doesn't matter what you buy today, its all "old trash" in 4-5 years just the same. Now, Intel is done with LGA 1155 socket. That means in a year, if you want to upgrade to the latest generation i5, you'll be buying a new motherboard.

Intel does not drop the price on prior generation chips. A quick search on Newegg or TigerDirect will show you that remaining LGA1156 chips are still about as expensive as they were when they were brand new, or they're just gone completely. Thats the problem with the "upgrade path" theory.

Like I said, I'm not saying one shouldn't buy an i5, but I'm sorry, it makes no sense to me that if you think you want the performance of an i5 to say "well, I think I'll get an i3 for now, and then upgrade it later". It costs you more money in the long run then if you were just to buy the right CPU to meet your needs in the first place.

The only reason I bought up the power consumpion was for OCing purposes as related to the size PSU being bought initially. You may need a larger PSU to take the PHII higher, and that will run a bit more money as well.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2011/07/13/amd-phenom-ii-x4-980-black-edition/7

Theres some power consumption data, now yes, a Phenom II 980 at 4.3GHZ, the whole system at the wall uses about 100 more watts than the 2500K. However, as far as having to buy a more expensive PSU. Most quality power supplies on the market have 500-600 watts anyway when you hit that sweet spot of good bang for the buck (I'd say around $40-$80). Its not like you'd be going out and buying a more expensive PSU than you normally would for the 2500K. I have a 750 watt PSU, but not because I actually need it. I got a good deal on it, and I bought it for the quality that Seasonic made Corsairs are known to have, I full well expect it to last me 10 years of builds.

Glad we can talk reasonably, lol. I'm not being sarcastic either, I'm seriously impressed this thread hasn't turned into a flame war yet. :lol:

 

[DJDeCiBeL]

Glad we can talk reasonably, lol. I'm not being sarcastic either, I'm seriously impressed this thread hasn't turned into a flame war yet. :lol:

Well, I guess you know that I'm about as die hard Intel as they come, but I 100% agree with you on the 965 over the i3 in this situation (or any situation, really).

For me, it's either get an i5 instead of the i3 or just go with the 965.

 

[sincreator]

No hostility whatsoever on my end. I'm not a troll by any means, and respect your views on this topic.

I know that that socket will be dead in a year, but i think that the whole ivy/sandy platform will last someone longer than the AMD platform is all. It is quite a bit further ahead perfomance wise than the AMD platform. The PHII may do someone for a year or two still, but where the ivy/sandy are so much further ahead performance wise than the AMD option, it should last someone for 3-4 years before needing another upgrade at least IMO. The PHII tech is around 3-4 years old and the sandy/ivy are alot newer, so that just makes sense to me. My brother got by on his e-8500 for a long time before upgrading to the 2500k, and I think the sandy/ivy chips should be still be very capable chips for a few years to come yet. It really takes alot to bottleneck those suckers when they are OC'ed. You won't be doing it with any current single or dual GPU setup. The AMD chips probally won't bottleneck any single card, but multiple is a different story. Quad SLI/Crossfire may bring it out with sandy/ivy, but most higher end 2 card configurations bring out a cpu bottleneck on 4.0ghz PHII/FX. So future generations of GPU's could bottleneck alot faster on an AMD platform. I know the tech industry changes pretty quick, but I don't think you need to upgrade all the time if you pick the right components and leave some room for upgrades if needed.


I can see why you say Intel probally won't be dropping prices as well. Why would they right? The only way that would happen is if AMD released something that was faster for the same price or cheaper.

I think either option is a good option for this guy. I just wanted him to see things from different perspectives so he could make an informed decision. I think we definitly showed him both sides of the coin. lol. Now he just needs to decide what option will suit him better, and what he may or may not want to do in the future.

 

[jessterman21]

My two cents:

After six weeks of owning an i3-2100, it acts like a quad-core in games, and a fast dual-core in everything else. However that's plenty for my needs - I built strictly to improve my gaming experience.