Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

FX-4170 vs FX-4300

Last response: in CPUs
Share
October 29, 2012 5:25:05 PM

Which would you choose? the FX-4170 has a higher stock clock and more L3 cache (8 MB vs 4 MB), but also a higher TDP. Why do you suppose Piledriver reduced the amount of L3 cache? Thanks!

More about : 4170 4300

a c 78 à CPUs
October 29, 2012 7:14:30 PM

Looking at the benches, the 4300 is the way to go. Although you might wait a bit to see if the "new toy" prices come down. (the prices aren't bad now)
Related resources
a c 78 à CPUs
October 29, 2012 7:41:20 PM

FX-4170s (or any Bulldozer) have more L3 cache than they need, at least as I recall reading a big long article about the Bulldozer architecture, that one of it's flaws, not strengths. I wouldn't focus on that too much as a selling point. The PileDriver 4300 is a step up, and thats the direction I'd probably go.
April 20, 2013 11:14:16 AM

Augray37 said:
Which would you choose? the FX-4170 has a higher stock clock and more L3 cache (8 MB vs 4 MB), but also a higher TDP. Why do you suppose Piledriver reduced the amount of L3 cache? Thanks!


April 20, 2013 11:18:47 AM

both are about the same performance- but 4300 is better- + you can OC it to the same 4.2 Ghz as the 4170 and it will outperform the 4170
a b à CPUs
April 20, 2013 11:32:09 AM

i would go for the fx 4300 becasue buldozer was crap and the fx 4170 was much of a upgrade form x4 955be
!