Search
Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

AMD 6100/8120 Bottleneck Effect?

Last response: in CPUs
Share

I am thinking of purchasing a PC with these specs:

AMD 6100/8120 FX CPU
nVidia GTX 660 TI
Gigabyte 78LMT motherboard
2*4GB (8GB) 1600Mhz Ram

I have been told that a possible "bottleneck" effect could occur as the graphics card is of extreme high performance, whereas the CPU may not live up to its demanding performance.

Thoughts and speculation on the matter please?

Thanks,

New User
Sameer Rehman

More about : amd 6100 8120 bottleneck effect

Register or log in to remove
CPUs Master

If this is a pre-built PC, then don't worry. Either of those two processors will keep up with the GTX 660ti in all but the most CPU intensive game. And even then, only the FX-6100 would be a minor bottleneck on paper, not enough to worry about.

If you are buying parts for your own assembly of the PC, go with the above mentioned FX-6300. Here is how Tom's ranks the processors for gaming: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-o...
  • clutchc has edited this thread
  • clutchc has edited this thread

I have to say that chart is a bit flawed, I mean seriously the fax 8 core is better for gaming then the i3s, it trades blows with the i5-3570k especially in new multithreaded games. Plus the AMD FX 4300 is a terrible value when you can get the 6300 for $10 more
Related ressources
Ask the community

kirilmatt said:
I have to say that chart is a bit flawed, I mean seriously the fax 8 core is better for gaming then the i3s, it trades blows with the i5-3570k especially in new multithreaded games. Plus the AMD FX 4300 is a terrible value when you can get the 6300 for $10 more


He is talking about the fx 8100. They are very bad processors for gaming and get beaten by their predecessor which is the phenom.
CPUs Master

kirilmatt said:
I have to say that chart is a bit flawed, I mean seriously the fax 8 core is better for gaming then the i3s, it trades blows with the i5-3570k especially in new multithreaded games. Plus the AMD FX 4300 is a terrible value when you can get the 6300 for $10 more


No, not better. They are in the same tier.

kirilmatt said:
I am only talking about the chart there, the bulldozer processors were bad for gaming, pile driver weren't though. Fine the i3 simply isn't as good as the fax 8350, 8350/20 should compete with the i5s and they do a quite good job


The i5s beat the fx 8350 in almost every game that stresses a cpu since games currently use 4 cores.

david cassar said:
kirilmatt said:
I am only talking about the chart there, the bulldozer processors were bad for gaming, pile driver weren't though. Fine the i3 simply isn't as good as the fax 8350, 8350/20 should compete with the i5s and they do a quite good job


The i5s beat the fx 8350 in almost every game that stresses a cpu since games currently use 4 cores.

Lots of new games do utilize 6-8 cores( for example crysis and battlefield). In these games the fx is on par or ahead of the i5, also console ports will soon be optimized for 8 cores, it will be much more future proof

kirilmatt said:
david cassar said:
kirilmatt said:
I am only talking about the chart there, the bulldozer processors were bad for gaming, pile driver weren't though. Fine the i3 simply isn't as good as the fax 8350, 8350/20 should compete with the i5s and they do a quite good job


The i5s beat the fx 8350 in almost every game that stresses a cpu since games currently use 4 cores.

Lots of new games do utilize 6-8 cores( for example crysis and battlefield). In these games the fx is on par or ahead of the i5, also console ports will soon be optimized for 8 cores, it will be much more future proof


Even in crysis or bf3 multiplayer the 8350 still isn't ahead of the i5. On par maybe.

david cassar said:
kirilmatt said:
david cassar said:
kirilmatt said:
I am only talking about the chart there, the bulldozer processors were bad for gaming, pile driver weren't though. Fine the i3 simply isn't as good as the fax 8350, 8350/20 should compete with the i5s and they do a quite good job


The i5s beat the fx 8350 in almost every game that stresses a cpu since games currently use 4 cores.

Lots of new games do utilize 6-8 cores( for example crysis and battlefield). In these games the fx is on par or ahead of the i5, also console ports will soon be optimized for 8 cores, it will be much more future proof


Even in crysis or bf3 multiplayer the 8350 still isn't ahead of the i5. On par maybe.


Alright let's stop turning this into Intel vs AMD, the FX 6300 and 8350/20 are very strong gaming CPUs and are very future proof, the Intel i5s are also very strong gaming CPUs

kirilmatt said:
david cassar said:
kirilmatt said:
david cassar said:
kirilmatt said:
I am only talking about the chart there, the bulldozer processors were bad for gaming, pile driver weren't though. Fine the i3 simply isn't as good as the fax 8350, 8350/20 should compete with the i5s and they do a quite good job


The i5s beat the fx 8350 in almost every game that stresses a cpu since games currently use 4 cores.

Lots of new games do utilize 6-8 cores( for example crysis and battlefield). In these games the fx is on par or ahead of the i5, also console ports will soon be optimized for 8 cores, it will be much more future proof


Even in crysis or bf3 multiplayer the 8350 still isn't ahead of the i5. On par maybe.


Alright let's stop turning this into Intel vs AMD, the FX 6300 and 8350/20 are very strong gaming CPUs and are very future proof, the Intel i5s are also very strong gaming CPUs


yes
Register or log in to remove
Ask the community
Read discussions in other CPUs categories
!