Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD FX-6100 vs AMD FX-4100. which one should i buy?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
September 4, 2012 12:29:06 AM

okay, im thinking of buying the AMD FX-4100 or AMD FX-6100
im on a bit of a budget .. well dont really have much money £300/ £400

im going to be playing games, skype, facebook, coding java and html, listening to muisc. on my computer and im wondering which one is the best to buy.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
or
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=19-103-...


please help me?

More about : amd 6100 amd 4100 buy

a c 146 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 4, 2012 12:39:40 AM

adamyjake said:
okay, im thinking of buying the AMD FX-4100 or AMD FX-6100
im on a bit of a budget .. well dont really have much money £300/ £400

im going to be playing games, skype, facebook, coding java and html, listening to muisc. on my computer and im wondering which one is the best to buy.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
or
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=19-103-...


please help me?


I wouldn't get either. Is that 300 (377 dollars) to 400 (503 dollars) for the whole build or just the CPU? I would go with a SB Pentium G or an I3 over the Bulldozer. The Bulldozer just really isn't that great of a CPU especially for gaming.
September 4, 2012 12:47:23 AM

umm i3 is only 2 cores, there are 6 and 4 cores..
Related resources
September 4, 2012 12:53:15 AM

adamyjake said:
umm i3 is only 2 cores, there are 6 and 4 cores..


Not real "cores" but modules. There's two integer cores with one floating point unit in each module. It's not a valid comparison, but clock-for-clock, Intel is faster in almost every regard.

a c 146 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 4, 2012 12:55:12 AM

First of all the Bulldozers aren't what they claim. They are modules not real cores. So the 4100 Bulldozer is really a dual core, the 6000's are really 3 cores and the 8000's are really 4 cores. Secondly more cores doesn't mean it's better especially with games Right now most games only use 1-2 cores. Very few actually make use of three or four cores. Lastly even at a lower clock speed and dual core Pentium G or I3 will outperform the Bulldozer in games.
September 4, 2012 12:56:23 AM

i dont really like the i3 :/  anything better then the i3? with quad cores?
a c 146 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 4, 2012 12:58:35 AM

The next level up is an I5 2500 or 2500K (depending if you want to overclock or not). It will be about 100 dollars more than the I3.
September 4, 2012 1:06:31 AM

i5 too expensive .. but with the AMD FX-6100 you can overclock??
okay, is AMD FX-6100 fast tho?
AMD FX-6100 vs i3 which one is faster? i3?
September 4, 2012 1:09:30 AM

Is there room to consider a 955 or 965?
a c 146 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 4, 2012 1:25:44 AM

adamyjake said:
i5 too expensive .. but with the AMD FX-6100 you can overclock??
okay, is AMD FX-6100 fast tho?
AMD FX-6100 vs i3 which one is faster? i3?


At stock clock for clock the I3 will be faster in most games. Is the FX 6100 fast, compared to a Pentium 4 yea but compared to real compition no. The older Phenom II's like the 955 or 965 are faster. As for FX vs Intel The Sandy Bridges and Ivy Bridges wins out even at less cores and slower clock speeds.
September 5, 2012 1:53:46 AM

You're better off getting a phenom II 965 BE than the shameful thing that is a bulldozer CPU. It's only like 110$ and I get twice the FPS I used to in games. ( I used to own an FX4170. It sucked.)
!