Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Is this cpu good/worth it?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
a c 146 à CPUs
December 17, 2012 5:41:54 AM



No it really isn't. Bulldozer was crap plain and simple. It did horrible in single threaded programs and wasn't much better in CPU intesive programs either. What motherboard do you have now and what are you going to be doing with this computer?
m
0
l
December 17, 2012 5:44:13 AM

rds1220 said:
No it really isn't. Bulldozer was crap plain and simple. It did horrible in single threaded programs and wasn't much better in CPU intesive programs either. What motherboard do you have now and what are you going to be doing with this computer?

I don't know yet I was looking to build a computer for gaming my budget is about 600 dollars could you help?
m
0
l
Related resources
a c 146 à CPUs
December 17, 2012 5:58:07 AM

Like I said Bulldozer was crap for gaming and the new Piledriver is better but still falls behind Intel in gaming benchmarks. I would go with an I3 with a Z77 motherboard and a video card like a GTX 660 or 660Ti.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
December 17, 2012 6:50:45 AM

+1 for an i3 over anything bulldozer
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
December 17, 2012 9:53:50 AM

rds1220 said:
Like I said Bulldozer was crap for gaming and the new Piledriver is better but still falls behind Intel in gaming benchmarks. I would go with an I3 with a Z77 motherboard and a video card like a GTX 660 or 660Ti.



bro using a fx 6100 now its quite fast the cpu usage never goes above 55% even playing bf3 and while running a setup it only uses 2% to 10% of cpu usage for that price that chip isnt crap.my fx 6100 beats the i3 2100 in many task my friend is using i3 i have compared my cpu to my friends cpu the only difference i can see is in skyrim and lfd2 about 1-3fps lol....the cpu usage of my friends i3 while playing bf3 is about 80% i can run many task while playing game in background.i m not saying that i3 is bad but isnt better then the fx 6100 the only i3 which can compete is the i3 3220 and above.the fx 6100 will be a good choice for that price.the bulldozer chip isnt a crap i think you are not making any software video encoding and all that stuff because the thing u are concern about is the single threaded performance,games and engeering and more work needs better multi threaded performance.i m doing such works like making software,devoloping,video encoding and all that etc etc..

you are a kid?btw i m also a kid but i m concern about my future thats why i m not playing games all the time.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
December 17, 2012 9:54:36 AM

yes that cpu worth it.its a good cpu for the price.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
December 17, 2012 2:02:51 PM

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks

CPU: AMD FX-6300 3.5GHz 6-Core Processor ($129.99 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: ASRock 970 Extreme3 ATX AM3+ Motherboard ($69.99 @ Newegg)
Memory: Patriot Intel Extreme Master, Limited Ed 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1866 Memory ($37.99 @ Amazon)
Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($69.99 @ NCIX US)
Video Card: Sapphire Radeon HD 7870 GHz Edition 2GB Video Card ($194.99 @ Newegg)
Case: NZXT Source 220 ATX Mid Tower Case ($39.99 @ Amazon)
Power Supply: XFX 550W 80 PLUS Bronze Certified ATX12V / EPS12V Power Supply ($49.99 @ NCIX US)
Optical Drive: Lite-On IHAS324-98 DVD/CD Writer ($14.99 @ Newegg)
Total: $637.92
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2012-12-17 10:50 EST-0500)

This build is a lot better than any of the ones above.

And now for the discussion of Core i3 vs Bulldozer.
YES i can't argue that Intel's core i5/i7 processors outperform AMD's CPU's in gaming this doesn't always hold true for Core i3's.However with AMD's processors you're getting much more for your buck.
Look up some FX 6300 reviews.They blow the Core i3's away in everything but gaming.
And if you consider that every benchmark you see on the web is made on a clean PC with nothing but the game running at the time, you might figure out that if you're running something else in the background like a browser for example the dual core CPU just might not cut it.
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/699?vs=677
http://www.techspot.com/review/586-amd-fx-8350-fx-6300/
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-r...
Also, motherboards with AMD chipsets usually cost less than ones with the same features using Intel chipsets.
You'd just have to be blind to not even consider the FX 6300 (or... you might be overly concerned about your bill).
m
0
l
a c 146 à CPUs
December 17, 2012 4:16:32 PM

You have no idea what you are talking about you are a fanboy talking out your a**. It is a known fact that Bulldozer was and is absolute crap period. It got beaten in both heavy threaded and lightly threaded programs in fact it got stomped by the older Phenom II that it was suppose to replace.

sunnk said:
bro using a fx 6100 now its quite fast the cpu usage never goes above 55% even playing bf3 and while running a setup it only uses 2% to 10% of cpu usage for that price that chip isnt crap.


Who cares it never goes above 55% that doesn't mean jack. Neither does my old Compaq with a Pentium 4 that doesn't mean it is a good processor. If that is your argument that the Bulldozer isn't crap that is a joke.

sunnk said:
my fx 6100 beats the i3 2100 in many task my friend is using i3 i have compared my cpu to my friends cpu the only difference i can see is in skyrim and lfd2 about 1-3fps lol....the cpu usage of my friends i3 while playing bf3 is about 80% i can run many task while playing game in background.


No it really doesn't. Again this is more fantasy fanboy crap. Take a look at benchmarks. In single threaded programs like games, which is what we are talking about here, the I3 steadily beats the Bulldozer in pretty much every game.

sunnk said:
i m not saying that i3 is bad but isnt better then the fx 6100 the only i3 which can compete is the i3 3220 and above.the fx 6100 will be a good choice for that price.the bulldozer chip isnt a crap i think you are not making any software video encoding and all that stuff because the thing u are concern about is the single threaded performance,games and engeering and more work needs better multi threaded performance.i m doing such works like making software,devoloping,video encoding and all that etc etc..


You can keep telling yourself that and try to convinve yourself that your Bulldozer isn't crap but that doesn't make it true. The Bulldozer goes up there with some of the worst processors put onto the market. It goes up there with the Pentium 4, Pentium D and Itanium. Again go look at some gaming benchmarks that is all you need to look at to be convinced that Bulldozer is garbage.
m
0
l
a c 146 à CPUs
December 17, 2012 4:45:13 PM

CD drive: Lite-on CD drive- 20.00

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

CPU: I3 2330- 120.00

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

HDD: Seagate Barracuda- 65.00

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

RAM: 8 Gigs DDR3 1333

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Motherboard: MSI Z77A-G41- 90.00

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

PSU: Seasonic M2 520 Watt- 80.00

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Video card: Radeon 7850- 175.00

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Case: Cougar Mid tower ATX- 40.00

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Total: 631.92

Yes I know it is 30 dollars over your 600 dollar budget but you can change anything you want if it's a problem.







m
0
l
a b à CPUs
December 17, 2012 5:28:23 PM

rds1220 said:
CD drive: Lite-on CD drive- 20.00

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

CPU: I3 2330- 120.00

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

HDD: Seagate Barracuda- 65.00

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

RAM: 8 Gigs DDR3 1333

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Motherboard: MSI Z77A-G41- 90.00

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

PSU: Seasonic M2 520 Watt- 80.00

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Video card: Radeon 7850- 175.00

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Case: Cougar Mid tower ATX- 40.00

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Total: 631.92

Yes I know it is 30 dollars over your 600 dollar budget but you can change anything you want if it's a problem.


I don't wanna seem like a hater but there are a lot of things that can be improved in this build

It should have been something like this

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks

CPU: Intel Core i3-3220 3.3GHz Dual-Core Processor ($109.99 @ NCIX US)
Motherboard: Biostar TZ77XE3 ATX LGA1155 Motherboard ($99.99 @ Amazon)
Memory: Patriot Intel Extreme Master, Limited Ed 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1866 Memory ($37.99 @ Amazon)
Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($69.99 @ NCIX US)
Video Card: Sapphire Radeon HD 7870 GHz Edition 2GB Video Card ($194.99 @ Newegg)
Case: NZXT Source 220 ATX Mid Tower Case ($39.99 @ Amazon)
Power Supply: XFX 550W 80 PLUS Bronze Certified ATX12V / EPS12V Power Supply ($49.99 @ NCIX US)
Optical Drive: Lite-On IHAS324-98 DVD/CD Writer ($14.99 @ Newegg)
Total: $647.92
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2012-12-17 14:13 EST-0500)

which is much better.

I haven't really got time to list all the things i've improved but ill just say its better overall.
m
0
l
a c 146 à CPUs
December 17, 2012 5:40:18 PM

I disagree. Biostar are cheap third rate motherboards and would not both with them. I've seen far more problems with them than good. Lastly WD Cavier Blue are IMO junk. Installed one and in less than 6 months it failed. Replaced it with another WD Blue and guess what, it failed again in less than 6 months. I also had a Cavier black in my old HP and that also didn't last a year. I have had far better products from Seagate. Yes I have had Seagate drives fail on me too but far less than Western Digital.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
December 17, 2012 5:51:30 PM

I've got both a Seagate drive in my PC and a WD one at the time of writing.
I can tell you right now that the WD is a LOT faster, much less noisy and never gave me any problems at all.While the Seagate one was very i mean really problematic.

Biostar is not a third rate vendor.They make very good products, they are just not as experianced as some other vendors.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/z77-express-ivy-bri...
I know a lot of people with Caviar Blue's in their PC's (although most of them are 320GB ones) and i've never heard anyone saying "Western Digital makes crap".
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
December 18, 2012 6:19:32 AM

I agree that biostar isn't the best manufacturer but I would say WD far outpaces seagate.

A lot of people have had issues with noise on their drives. WD have a good warranty system and I have had no issues with any blue's or blacks I have put in many people systems.
m
0
l
!