Solved

Which CPU is better for gaming?

I have a BIOSTAR A880GZ motherboard, and am deciding on what CPU I should use. This is a cheap gaming build. The GPU I am looking at buying is the GeForce GTX 650. I have settled on two CPU's.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103996&nm_mc=AFC-C8Junction&cm_mmc=AFC-C8Junction-_-na-_-na-_-na&AID=10446076&PID=3938566&SID=

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103727&nm_mc=AFC-C8Junction&cm_mmc=AFC-C8Junction-_-na-_-na-_-na&AID=10446076&PID=3938566&SID=

I have heard Horror stories about the 4100, but I have heard that the 965 is great for overclocking. I am going with the Stock fan and plan not to overclock. I don't want to waste money on the 965 with all of its potential. The 4100 is a default .2 GHz higher so I would have a slightly faster CPU off the bat.

Also, I will not be playing BF3, Crysis 2, Skyrim, Ect. The most CPU intensive game I will be running is DayZ, a mod for Arma 2. I play free games from Steam, WoW, Tf2, Hl2DM, Gmod, and Minecraft mostly. I just want something that can play these games for about 2-3 years at 20+ fps. Not too difficult, right? Thanks for your help.
6 answers Last reply Best Answer
More about which gaming
  1. for the price, the 965. at it's worst, it'll perform on equal terms with the 4100 if not slightly less. in most cases, it's slightly better than the 4100.

    http://techreport.com/review/23246/inside-the-second-gaming-performance-with-today-cpus/3

    http://techreport.com/review/23246/inside-the-second-gaming-performance-with-today-cpus/5

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-fx-pentium-apu-benchmark,3120-3.html

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-fx-pentium-apu-benchmark,3120-5.html

    a 0.2ghz difference isn't going to mean a lot performance-wise. note how a 3.2ghz 955 fares against a 3.6ghz 4100 on TH's test, and a 3.7ghz 980 vs a 4.2ghz 4170 in TR's test.

    and then there's the massive power consumption.
  2. Hazle said:
    for the price, the 965. at it's worst, it'll perform on equal terms with the 4100 if not slightly less. in most cases, it's slightly better than the 4100.

    http://techreport.com/review/23246/inside-the-second-gaming-performance-with-today-cpus/3

    http://techreport.com/review/23246/inside-the-second-gaming-performance-with-today-cpus/5

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-fx-pentium-apu-benchmark,3120-3.html

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-fx-pentium-apu-benchmark,3120-5.html

    a 0.2ghz difference isn't going to mean a lot performance-wise. note how a 3.2ghz 955 fares against a 3.6ghz 4100 on TH's test, and a 3.7ghz 980 vs a 4.2ghz 4170 in TR's test.

    and then there's the massive power consumption.


    Thanks for the quick reply! Your answer was a bit difficult to read, but what you're saying is the 965 will preform as good, or slightly better than the 4100?
  3. What he didn’t say is that the older Phenom will not need a BIOs update, which the Zambezi chip will definitely need. Yes the Phenom will outperform the new Bulldozer. The best AMD chip performance wise is the Phenom II X6.
  4. Best answer
    Yup. Bulldozer is bad for gaming while piledriver brings them back to Stars. With with the 965 if you are going AMD.
  5. 4745454b said:
    Yup. Bulldozer is bad for gaming while piledriver brings them back to Stars. With with the 965 if you are going AMD.


    Alright then. I keep hearing the same thing all over the internet, so 965 it is! Thanks for the help guys.
  6. Best answer selected by saltiren.
Ask a new question

Read More

New Build Gaming CPUs Systems Product