Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Should I avoid the Bulldozer FX-6100?

Last response: in Systems
Share
November 9, 2012 3:48:44 PM

Hi I am interested in buying a new computer for use on gaming and uni work.

I found this rig http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/GINGER6-FX23-8TX-AMD-BULLDOZE... which looks nice. I really don't want to spend much more than this.

I wanted you guys opinion on the FX-6100? I heard people have had problems with it for gaming, some research seemed to show most could fix it with a motherboard bios update. But I am still curious if this has been fixed properly as of now?

I quite like the idea of hex cores, maybe its just a gimmick though.

I want to stick with 1tb hdd and 8gb of ram and a wireless adapter.

Please don't suggest I build my own, I know I would get better value for money but I would rather spend a bit more and buy one already build and the 1 year (3 year sort of) warranty can help me sleep at night :kaola: 

Any thoughts/ideas?

Sorry if this is the wrong section or anything, I'm new here

Thanks in advance

More about : avoid bulldozer 6100

November 9, 2012 4:01:38 PM

Multiple cores (over 2) don't really help most games these days. People have been saying for years that this will change, but it seems to haven't panned out really well in most cases. There are a few specific cases where it's great, but in general you want the fastest per core gaming CPU in yoru gaming machine, so most people just use an i5-2500k/3750k since they are cheaper, over clock well, and hyper threading doesn't really help games that much so the jump to the i7 isn't worth it when you can sink the extra 100 bucks in to a better video card instead.

It would probably depend on the university work... studying parallel processing or doing work in raytracing? Sure it will be great. Using it to write papers in open office... but also play games on it, then get an i5 instead.
November 9, 2012 5:38:38 PM

Traciatim said:
Multiple cores (over 2) don't really help most games these days. People have been saying for years that this will change, but it seems to haven't panned out really well in most cases. There are a few specific cases where it's great, but in general you want the fastest per core gaming CPU in yoru gaming machine, so most people just use an i5-2500k/3750k since they are cheaper, over clock well, and hyper threading doesn't really help games that much so the jump to the i7 isn't worth it when you can sink the extra 100 bucks in to a better video card instead.

It would probably depend on the university work... studying parallel processing or doing work in raytracing? Sure it will be great. Using it to write papers in open office... but also play games on it, then get an i5 instead.


While I agree with most of what your saying, an i5 2500k or 3570k is NOT cheaper(most of the time).

Also Operating system NOT included. Just an FYI.
Related resources
November 9, 2012 5:54:28 PM

I do not have a FX-6100 but I have two rigs one with a FX-8120 and one with a FX-8350. Both of my FX rigs work great for games and anything else I run. The only problems I did have was with Steam games that used Steam's CEG DRM but that was fixed with a bios update way back in January.

I play BF3 Skyrim The Witcher 2 and many more. I have over 200 games in Steam and another 100 or so in Origin plus a few boxed games that all play great.

I liked my FX-8120 so well that I rebuilt my i5/Nvidia rig and put in a FX-8350 with a AMD 7950 GPU. Now that rig can play any of my games with out the stutter I was having with the i5.
November 9, 2012 6:08:31 PM

bryonhowley said:
I do not have a FX-6100 but I have two rigs one with a FX-8120 and one with a FX-8350. Both of my FX rigs work great for games and anything else I run. The only problems I did have was with Steam games that used Steam's CEG DRM but that was fixed with a bios update way back in January.

I play BF3 Skyrim The Witcher 2 and many more. I have over 200 games in Steam and another 100 or so in Origin plus a few boxed games that all play great.

I liked my FX-8120 so well that I rebuilt my i5/Nvidia rig and put in a FX-8350 with a AMD 7950 GPU. Now that rig can play any of my games with out the stutter I was having with the i5.



The stutter was probably stopped by the upgraded gpu. You can pair nvida with an amd cpu or the amd gpu with an intel cpu. The i5 is better for most things then a bulldozer/piledriver. but it is probably out of his budget.
November 9, 2012 6:20:26 PM

Some fairly old articles on Tom's that looked at number of cores seemed to indicate that three cores still provided a good boost over two cores in most things. Remember that Windows itself, your anti-virus, firewall, backup, ventrillo/teamspeak, etc. also run tasks, so more cores gives them a place to run too.
Other more recent reviews of game performance have typically been including core count, and again there are improvements with more than two cores. Going from two to three is a bigger deal than three to four.
Looking at AMD vs. Intel in these tests, AMD consistently trails, especially Faildozer. I would not buy a FX-6100 for games. Tom's tried one in a SBM build a few cycles back, and there's really no way to sugar-coat the fact that it sucked. On a budget, I'd choose a hyperthreaded i3; with more to spend I'd get an i5, or possibly iff supported by benchmarks, I'd look at Vishera.
November 9, 2012 6:27:09 PM

Onus said:
Some fairly old articles on Tom's that looked at number of cores seemed to indicate that three cores still provided a good boost over two cores in most things. Remember that Windows itself, your anti-virus, firewall, backup, ventrillo/teamspeak, etc. also run tasks, so more cores gives them a place to run too.
Other more recent reviews of game performance have typically been including core count, and again there are improvements with more than two cores. Going from two to three is a bigger deal than three to four.
Looking at AMD vs. Intel in these tests, AMD consistently trails, especially Faildozer. I would not buy a FX-6100 for games. Tom's tried one in a SBM build a few cycles back, and there's really no way to sugar-coat the fact that it sucked. On a budget, I'd choose a hyperthreaded i3; with more to spend I'd get an i5, or possibly iff supported by benchmarks, I'd look at Vishera.


Vishera's got a 15% boost from bulldozer not enough to put it over the edge but enough to make it competitive in the budget range between an i3 and an i5. Now he wants a prebuilt machine and a bulldozer is a fine cpu. There are better and he should look into an i3 but at the end of the day both would play games well.
November 9, 2012 6:40:15 PM

Another important point to make here:
Typically, Vishera (and even Faildozer) can be overclocked to match (or even exceed) the performance of an i3 (but not i5). The OP specifically wants a pre-built for warranty purposes however, and pre-builts tend to have locked BIOSes that prevent overclocking. At stock, a FX-6100 will be a poor choice, even compared to a locked dual-core Pentium.
November 9, 2012 6:45:01 PM

I do not own a 6100, but I used and older amd hexacore until recently and found it to be a very good work-horse. Judging from the consumer response on NewEgg those who have bought the FX 6100 seem very pleased.
My opinion, for what its worth, is if you like the price and think the company is solid then go for the FX 6100. It should perform very well in most applications. This is especially true if you are looking for a computer for more than gaming, in productivity oriented tasks those extra cores really speed tasks up.
November 9, 2012 6:48:25 PM

Onus said:
Another important point to make here:
Typically, Vishera (and even Faildozer) can be overclocked to match (or even exceed) the performance of an i3 (but not i5). The OP specifically wants a pre-built for warranty purposes however, and pre-builts tend to have locked BIOSes that prevent overclocking. At stock, a FX-6100 will be a poor choice, even compared to a locked dual-core Pentium.


For that company the i3s all come with 6670 and an i3 with a 6670 is worse then a bulldozer with a 7770. imo
November 9, 2012 6:50:08 PM

I disagree. still say more cores are better just me. But prebuilt, do what you want, not a prebuilt fan. I've worked in PC repairs, many of the consumer grade PC's don't seem well built. Some are, some aren't. I know I saw at least one prebuilt with a dead board at 4 months old.

If you want to game, the thing to remember is you will later have to upgrade your power supply most likely to upgrade your video card. Factor in those things, and your cost savings is gone. Personally I've got an older custom machine, it's in a CM storm scout case, AM2 board, Athlon II quad overclocked to 3.3ghz, which I could tell a huge difference when I went from dual to quad, as I was getting bottlenecked in games. I've worked on i3 systems before, they may not be bad, but I feel like going from my quad to a dual core with hyperthreading would be a downgrade a dual core is still a dual core.

Just my opinions. But keep in mind, a lot of the prebuilt systems out there, you know if they are selling them for the prices marked on the shelves, they can't be giving you hardware that's high end.
November 9, 2012 7:08:32 PM

ohiou_grad_06 said:
..I know I saw at least one prebuilt with a dead board at 4 months old.
.
.
.
Just my opinions. But keep in mind, a lot of the prebuilt systems out there, you know if they are selling them for the prices marked on the shelves, they can't be giving you hardware that's high end.


+MANY. Two of the leading places these discount builders cheap-out on is using PSU-shaped objects (e.g. Diablotek, Logisys, ColorsIT), and motherboards with weak VRMs and cheap capacitors that will fail early, especially if you try to overclock them.
You can avoid this problem by getting a Dell or other big-box computer, but the issues you'll run into there include performance-sapping bloatware and upgrade-resistant components, such as PSUs that, while decent, are only powerful enough for the build as shipped, not with any upgrades.
November 9, 2012 7:16:49 PM

jackspeed said:
For that company the i3s all come with 6670 and an i3 with a 6670 is worse then a bulldozer with a 7770. imo

Certainly true, especially since the HD6670 would surely be a DDR3 version rather than GDDR5, but I was not aware the OP was limited to only that company, just to prebuilts in general.
November 9, 2012 7:19:44 PM

Onus said:
Certainly true, especially since the HD6670 would surely be a DDR3 version rather than GDDR5, but I was not aware the OP was limited to only that company, just to prebuilts in general.


He probably isn't limited to that company but I do not know where in that area he could order a prebuilt other then the place he listed.
November 9, 2012 8:12:07 PM

Traciatim said:

It would probably depend on the university work... studying parallel processing or doing work in raytracing? Sure it will be great. Using it to write papers in open office... but also play games on it, then get an i5 instead.

Well I'm doing a degree in Math and Computer Science so its not just word processing. Given that its my first year so currently I usually just use programs such as Eclipse/Matlab (which atm run quite slow on my dual core, especially together!). However I will probably try and keep using this rig for the whole degree.


Also Operating system NOT included. Just an FYI. said:

Also Operating system NOT included. Just an FYI.

Yeah thats fine I was aware, I can easily get hold of an OS

Quote:
If you want to game, the thing to remember is you will later have to upgrade your power supply most likely to upgrade your video card. Factor in those things, and your cost savings is gone
Very true but I will probably not upgrade for a few years, any newer demanding games I will be happy to reduce quality for.


The only problems I did have was with Steam games that used Steam's CEG DRM but that was fixed with a bios update way back in January. said:

The only problems I did have was with Steam games that used Steam's CEG DRM but that was fixed with a bios update way back in January.

Yeah I noticed the threads with people complaining were old, thanks for clearing that up.


I've worked in PC repairs, many of the consumer grade PC's don't seem well built. Some are, some aren't said:

I've worked in PC repairs, many of the consumer grade PC's don't seem well built. Some are, some aren't

The company has very good feedback, but I guess its always going to be a risk!


He probably isn't limited to that company but I do not know where in that area he could order a prebuilt other then the place he listed said:

He probably isn't limited to that company but I do not know where in that area he could order a prebuilt other then the place he listed

I like eBay as there are a lot of companies that do prebuilts making it quite competitive for price. I particularly liked that company for the extra warranty

Thanks for all your input. I think I will go for this computer, the graphics card isn't ground breaking but its a huge upgrade on my ATI 4330! Also I plan to use the computer in the long term so the reasonably powerful hex cores suit me. Someone mentioned the bios might be locked, but I would be happy with the stock processor speeds. :bounce: 

Awesome forum, thanks!!

[/quotemsg]
November 12, 2012 2:37:06 PM

jackspeed said:
While I agree with most of what your saying, an i5 2500k or 3570k is NOT cheaper(most of the time).

Also Operating system NOT included. Just an FYI.


I meant cheaper than an i7, since an i7 is more purposed for things like compile times, raytracing, and other highly threaded application, where in gaming the performance is nearly the same as an i5 in most cases.

AMD CPU's should be mostly disregarded if you are building a gaming rig these days.
November 12, 2012 2:48:46 PM

henryhenryhenry said:
Well I'm doing a degree in Math and Computer Science so its not just word processing. Given that its my first year so currently I usually just use programs such as Eclipse/Matlab (which atm run quite slow on my dual core, especially together!). However I will probably try and keep using this rig for the whole degree.


If you look at this interesting link . . . http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-power-consumptio...

The i5 basically destroys any AMD processor in the chart. Also if you read the hardware guide on MATLAB's page http://www.mathworks.com/products/matlab/choosing_hardw... it specifically mentions hyperthreading as not very useful . . . also pointing to the i5-xxxx as the processor of choice.

Add in to this that gaming the i5-xxxxK processors will perform very well then I think you have your choice picked out, especially if you want to do some overclocking as well.

!