Sign-in / Sign-up
Your question

AMD Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition vs i3 3220

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • AMD
  • Graphics Cards
  • Phenom
Last response: in CPUs

which core is better for future gaming with nvidia gtx 650 1GB??

Total: 1 vote

  • AMD Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition
  • 100 %
  • INTEL i3 -3220
  • 0 %
July 13, 2013 9:21:53 AM

hi, which core is better for future gaming with gtx 650 1gb....
games like GTA IV, V , battlefield...above....
Which core gets more FPS..?
Anybody know the windows score for AMD Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition...?

More about : amd phenom 965 black edition 3220

a c 768 à CPUs
a c 552 À AMD
a c 960 U Graphics card
July 13, 2013 11:50:00 AM

The 965 would be a better bet because most dual core processors cant keep up with most newer games. The 965 can run up to around a 650TI Boost Superclocked.
July 13, 2013 11:48:52 PM

but 965 is old core....right? and i heard i3 wil get more fps...?
dont knw which core i wnt to choose...!!! Is there AMD overheating problem??????
Related resources
a c 768 à CPUs
a c 552 À AMD
a c 960 U Graphics card
July 14, 2013 12:02:48 AM

Its an older processor, but it still has quad cores which pushes it beyond the i3. If you can get an i5 thats the best bet. Amd stock coolers are bad, but not overheating bad.
a b à CPUs
July 14, 2013 12:26:16 AM

Speaking from experience the 965 is the better choice and can easily go over 4ghz or 3.8 on stock cooler
July 14, 2013 12:34:10 AM

Gam3r01 said:
Its an older processor, but it still has quad cores which pushes it beyond the i3. If you can get an i5 thats the best bet. Amd stock coolers are bad, but not overheating bad.

sorry , i cant go for i5.....
i3 or 965..
with gtx 650

a b à CPUs
July 14, 2013 12:38:42 AM

lijith321 said:
Gam3r01 said:
Its an older processor, but it still has quad cores which pushes it beyond the i3. If you can get an i5 thats the best bet. Amd stock coolers are bad, but not overheating bad.

sorry , i cant go for i5.....
i3 or 965..
with gtx 650




get a 965 or FX8350 or FX6350
a b à CPUs
July 14, 2013 12:41:46 AM

lijith321 said:
Gam3r01 said:
Its an older processor, but it still has quad cores which pushes it beyond the i3. If you can get an i5 thats the best bet. Amd stock coolers are bad, but not overheating bad.

sorry , i cant go for i5.....
i3 or 965..
with gtx 650



Also what mobo do you have?
July 14, 2013 1:08:28 AM

catshannon said:
lijith321 said:
Gam3r01 said:
Its an older processor, but it still has quad cores which pushes it beyond the i3. If you can get an i5 thats the best bet. Amd stock coolers are bad, but not overheating bad.

sorry , i cant go for i5.....
i3 or 965..
with gtx 650



Also what mobo do you have?

currently am using intel pentium dual core e5200, intel dg31pr..
anyway i wnt 2 change my mobo according to new core... AMD or intel i series...
my processor budget is arround 6500 INR....

a b à CPUs
July 14, 2013 1:11:31 AM

lijith321 said:
catshannon said:
lijith321 said:
Gam3r01 said:
Its an older processor, but it still has quad cores which pushes it beyond the i3. If you can get an i5 thats the best bet. Amd stock coolers are bad, but not overheating bad.

sorry , i cant go for i5.....
i3 or 965..
with gtx 650



Also what mobo do you have?

currently am using intel pentium dual core e5200, intel dg31pr..
anyway i wnt 2 change my mobo according to new core... AMD or intel i series...
my processor budget is arround 6500 INR....



965 is a sure bet or find a cheap FX 63xx chip
July 14, 2013 1:27:24 AM

catshannon said:
lijith321 said:
catshannon said:
lijith321 said:
Gam3r01 said:
Its an older processor, but it still has quad cores which pushes it beyond the i3. If you can get an i5 thats the best bet. Amd stock coolers are bad, but not overheating bad.

sorry , i cant go for i5.....
i3 or 965..
with gtx 650



Also what mobo do you have?

currently am using intel pentium dual core e5200, intel dg31pr..
anyway i wnt 2 change my mobo according to new core... AMD or intel i series...
my processor budget is arround 6500 INR....



965 is a sure bet or find a cheap FX 63xx chip

any better fx 6xx chips for 6500INR???

a b à CPUs
July 14, 2013 1:40:47 AM

lijith321 said:
catshannon said:
lijith321 said:
catshannon said:
lijith321 said:
Gam3r01 said:
Its an older processor, but it still has quad cores which pushes it beyond the i3. If you can get an i5 thats the best bet. Amd stock coolers are bad, but not overheating bad.

sorry , i cant go for i5.....
i3 or 965..
with gtx 650



Also what mobo do you have?

currently am using intel pentium dual core e5200, intel dg31pr..
anyway i wnt 2 change my mobo according to new core... AMD or intel i series...
my processor budget is arround 6500 INR....



965 is a sure bet or find a cheap FX 63xx chip

any better fx 6xx chips for 6500INR???



you will have to look but dont get a 6100 or 6150 the 965 is better but if you can find a cheap 6350 or 6300 get it
July 14, 2013 4:50:30 AM

I think the only reasons to consider the AMD Phenom II X4 965 BE is it is quad core CPU.....!!!??right?
July 14, 2013 4:52:07 AM


am not going for fx....!!! i dnt hav tht mch budget...because i also want to buy new ,mobo,ram....
a b à CPUs
July 14, 2013 7:29:46 AM

hafijur said:
Get the i3 3220 as it is 22nm ivy bridge and supports the latest instructions and has its own igpu. I know gta 4 and battlefield games should run fine. i3 holds it own against the 965 while having much bigger memory bandwidth:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/102?vs=677



The 965 is much better with games
a b à CPUs
July 14, 2013 9:13:20 AM

Neither... FX 6300 is your CPU. Less expensive than an i3, but better than both the 3220 and 965 BE. I wouldn't use a Phenom II x4 or i3 much longer anyways.
a b à CPUs
July 14, 2013 9:23:25 AM

hafijur said:
catshannon said:
hafijur said:
Get the i3 3220 as it is 22nm ivy bridge and supports the latest instructions and has its own igpu. I know gta 4 and battlefield games should run fine. i3 holds it own against the 965 while having much bigger memory bandwidth:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/102?vs=677



The 965 is much better with games


Thats where the i3 excels against the 965, games. These 2 cpu are about the same in multithreaded but tthe i3 memory bandwidth and ipc means games run better on it. Lets not forget taking 100w electricity less.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i3-21...
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i3-iv...


Old benches also note the lack of the 965 being on there 4 cores and a nice over-clock makes the 965 pull away from ANY cpu in its price range no matter what application it is for
a c 768 à CPUs
a c 552 À AMD
a c 960 U Graphics card
July 14, 2013 11:22:20 AM

catshannon said:
hafijur said:
catshannon said:
hafijur said:
Get the i3 3220 as it is 22nm ivy bridge and supports the latest instructions and has its own igpu. I know gta 4 and battlefield games should run fine. i3 holds it own against the 965 while having much bigger memory bandwidth:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/102?vs=677



The 965 is much better with games


Thats where the i3 excels against the 965, games. These 2 cpu are about the same in multithreaded but tthe i3 memory bandwidth and ipc means games run better on it. Lets not forget taking 100w electricity less.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i3-21...
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i3-iv...


Old benches also note the lack of the 965 being on there 4 cores and a nice over-clock makes the 965 pull away from ANY cpu in its price range no matter what application it is for


Exactly, the quad core processors that were in the range of performance as a 965 OC to 4.2 GHz were much more. On a budget the 965 is one of the best performance per dollar.
a b à CPUs
July 14, 2013 11:54:42 AM

Gam3r01 said:
catshannon said:
hafijur said:
catshannon said:
hafijur said:
Get the i3 3220 as it is 22nm ivy bridge and supports the latest instructions and has its own igpu. I know gta 4 and battlefield games should run fine. i3 holds it own against the 965 while having much bigger memory bandwidth:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/102?vs=677



The 965 is much better with games


Thats where the i3 excels against the 965, games. These 2 cpu are about the same in multithreaded but tthe i3 memory bandwidth and ipc means games run better on it. Lets not forget taking 100w electricity less.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i3-21...
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i3-iv...


Old benches also note the lack of the 965 being on there 4 cores and a nice over-clock makes the 965 pull away from ANY cpu in its price range no matter what application it is for


Exactly, the quad core processors that were in the range of performance as a 965 OC to 4.2 GHz were much more. On a budget the 965 is one of the best performance per dollar.


Loved that chip got it to 4.4ghz stable with a h100 so beast may be my fave cpu ever but i would go for a 6350 nowdays but the 965 is half the price nearly
a c 768 à CPUs
a c 552 À AMD
a c 960 U Graphics card
July 14, 2013 3:06:27 PM

catshannon said:
Gam3r01 said:
catshannon said:
hafijur said:
catshannon said:
hafijur said:
Get the i3 3220 as it is 22nm ivy bridge and supports the latest instructions and has its own igpu. I know gta 4 and battlefield games should run fine. i3 holds it own against the 965 while having much bigger memory bandwidth:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/102?vs=677



The 965 is much better with games


Thats where the i3 excels against the 965, games. These 2 cpu are about the same in multithreaded but tthe i3 memory bandwidth and ipc means games run better on it. Lets not forget taking 100w electricity less.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i3-21...
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i3-iv...


Old benches also note the lack of the 965 being on there 4 cores and a nice over-clock makes the 965 pull away from ANY cpu in its price range no matter what application it is for


Exactly, the quad core processors that were in the range of performance as a 965 OC to 4.2 GHz were much more. On a budget the 965 is one of the best performance per dollar.


Loved that chip got it to 4.4ghz stable with a h100 so beast may be my fave cpu ever but i would go for a 6350 nowdays but the 965 is half the price nearly


Yeah Im waiting for my 212 EVO to finally OC mine. After that its a 650ti Boost Superclocked next.
a b à CPUs
July 15, 2013 9:18:38 AM

Gam3r01 said:
catshannon said:
Gam3r01 said:
catshannon said:
hafijur said:
catshannon said:
hafijur said:
Get the i3 3220 as it is 22nm ivy bridge and supports the latest instructions and has its own igpu. I know gta 4 and battlefield games should run fine. i3 holds it own against the 965 while having much bigger memory bandwidth:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/102?vs=677



The 965 is much better with games


Thats where the i3 excels against the 965, games. These 2 cpu are about the same in multithreaded but tthe i3 memory bandwidth and ipc means games run better on it. Lets not forget taking 100w electricity less.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i3-21...
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i3-iv...


Old benches also note the lack of the 965 being on there 4 cores and a nice over-clock makes the 965 pull away from ANY cpu in its price range no matter what application it is for


Exactly, the quad core processors that were in the range of performance as a 965 OC to 4.2 GHz were much more. On a budget the 965 is one of the best performance per dollar.


Loved that chip got it to 4.4ghz stable with a h100 so beast may be my fave cpu ever but i would go for a 6350 nowdays but the 965 is half the price nearly


Yeah Im waiting for my 212 EVO to finally OC mine. After that its a 650ti Boost Superclocked next.


OverclockersUK are selling H100s for 40£ atm not h100i but the difference is negligible
a c 637 à CPUs
a c 202 À AMD
a c 411 U Graphics card
July 15, 2013 9:54:59 AM

At stock speeds between the PII X4 965 BE and the Core i3-3220 both have more or less similar performance in games that does not make use of more than 2 cores. Below are several CPU benchmarks with whatever high end graphics card in the various reviews.

While the quad core PII X4 965 (3.4GHz) is not list, the 6 core PII X6 1100T (3.3GHz) should be a good substitute since the difference in clockspeed is only 100MHz. None of the games benefits from 4 cores vs 6 cores since the quad core PII X4 980 (3.7GHz) outperforms the PII X6 1100T.

Crysis 3 has the largest difference in performance since it can take advantage of more than two cores, thus the Phenom II would be the better choice. Tomb Raider is another game that benefits from a quad core CPU, but the difference is not quite as large as with Crysis 3.

I have not listed any Battlefield 3 benchmarks, but in single player campaign mode there should be very little difference between the Phenom II and Core i3 CPUs since benchmarks have proven that only 2 core are used. However, benchmarks have proven that in multi-player mode, Battlefield 3 does in fact get higher performance with a quad core CPU. Therefore, the Phenom II would win over the Core i3. I would assume that will be the case for Battlefield 4 as well.

Overall, the quad core Phenom II and the dual core Core i3 CPUs will perform similarly in games using only 2 cores when both are at stockspeed. However, in games that can benefit from using more than 2 core, the Phenom II pulls out ahead. Add the fact the that the Phenom II X4 965 BE is overclockable, that means the X4 965 BE is overall the better of the two CPUs.




http://www.techspot.com/review/670-metro-last-light-per...



http://www.techspot.com/review/655-bioshock-infinite-pe...



http://www.techspot.com/review/648-simcity-performance/...



http://www.techspot.com/review/645-tomb-raider-performa...



http://www.techspot.com/review/642-crysis-3-performance...



http://www.techspot.com/review/615-far-cry-3-performanc...
July 15, 2013 10:25:01 AM

hafijur said:
Overall, the quad core Phenom II and the dual core Core i3 CPUs will perform similarly in games using only 2 cores when both are at stockspeed. However, in games that can benefit from using more than 2 core, the Phenom II pulls out ahead. Add the fact the that the Phenom II X4 965 BE is overclockable, that means the X4 965 BE is overall the better of the two CPUs.
.........................................
This isn't true as you can see from your graphs the i3 3220 destroys the phenom 2 x2 cpu at a few games for example Metro LN.


But i think future games requires 4 cores....right?? now the doubt is
1.Is there any temperature problem(heat)
2.willl this brand core last?? (dont know about AMD, used only Intel)...
3.I have coolermaster thunder 500w PSU...Is that enough for Phenom + gtx 650???


a b à CPUs
July 15, 2013 11:29:12 AM

hafijur said:
Overall, the quad core Phenom II and the dual core Core i3 CPUs will perform similarly in games using only 2 cores when both are at stockspeed. However, in games that can benefit from using more than 2 core, the Phenom II pulls out ahead. Add the fact the that the Phenom II X4 965 BE is overclockable, that means the X4 965 BE is overall the better of the two CPUs.
.........................................
This isn't true as you can see from your graphs the i3 3220 destroys the phenom 2 x2 cpu at a few games for example Metro LN.

The i3 even edges out the 965 on crysis 3 here.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/crysis-3-performanc...


Phenom II x2 not Phenom II x4. One has two cores, one has four. There is a difference.
a b à CPUs
July 15, 2013 12:08:47 PM

hafijur said:
I was pointing out to jaguar that its not true when the phenom 2x2 get destroyed by the i3's so if performing similar to a core i3 with 2 cores in a phenom 2 like metro last night phenom 2 x2 28fps vs 57fps for i3 which is over double the fps not similar.

Simple terms you need 4 cores of a phenom 2 compete.


This point is only applicable in games that utilise only 2 cores
a b à CPUs
a b U Graphics card
July 15, 2013 1:50:26 PM

Buying a Dual Core CPU, at this point in time, is pretty ridiculous imo. Gaming performance aside, which is pretty nuanced between a Phenom II X4 and a Core i3, your system performance will differ greatly between a Dual coreand a Quad core CPU. I'm not sure if you use your PC as I do, with a stream of Browser tabs open displaying Flash content, but let me tell you that a Dual core grinds to a halt under such circumstances. Heck an older Q9550 of mine has issues with several FireFox YouTube tabs open at once (issues as in I detect lag and thus feel compelled to put my fist through the screen).

Out of all of the CPUs recommended so far the FX-6300 takes the cake in my opinion. Second to that would be the 965BE. I'd stay away from dual core CPUs such as the i3 3220 if you use your computer for anything other than the equivalent of a gaming console.
a b à CPUs
a b U Graphics card
July 15, 2013 2:41:21 PM

Quote:
You will be suprised how fast these i3's are. A dual core core 2 duo might grind to a halt but from sandy bridge on the core i3 or mobile core i5 dual cores are amazing performance, make light work of flash. It alway makes me laugh when people judge a cpu by the cores. The i3 multitasks better then anything amd have even the fx8350 on the review shown.


I don't believe that for a minute. I'm on a Compaq 6200 Pro (Slim Form Factor model) which is powered be an Intel® Core™ i3-2120 (3.30 GHz, 3 MB cache, 2 cores) as seen here: http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/ca/en/sm/WF06a/12454-124...

This is my PC at work and it is horrible for Multi-Tasking. As we speak I've got 16 tabs open in Google Chrome, two in Firefox and around 12 or so in IE. These are work/web applications.

The system is bogged down. The Flash content alone (on many different tabs) pushes the CPU usage to over 60%. It is normal for the Flash content my web applications use to use up CPU resources. The difference is that I don't get this slowdown from AMD FX CPUs (or my 3930K).

I also work from home. I've worked on my 3930K as well as my FX-8350 and FX-6300s. It's not the same experience at all. I question those results from bit-tech but cannot find any other such tests having been conducted elsewhere.

Screenshot to show I'm not bsing:
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
a b U Graphics card
July 15, 2013 3:36:56 PM

hafijur said:
Im not trying to wum but I use my p7350 2ghz c2d have over 20 tabs open and my cpu usage is 4-5%. I know for a fact even flashed based websites the core 2 duo won't have much trouble unless theres like 8-10.

I think my 3317u with the 640m or hd 4000 can do 1000 of these at 60fps.
http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/performance/fishbowl/

Anyway these i3s will do better then a phenom 2 at multitasking or quick response. You have to load the 965BE phenom 2 to 100% to get a minor gain over an i3 3220.


You can see from here the i3 3220 does well against the 965 I think 965 won 13-10 but the margins are so close its basically equal:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/102?vs=677


hafijur said:
Elmoisevil check the ram thats left. Thats most likely the problem. I use xp MCE 2002 service pack 3 on my 5930g and my cpu usage doesn't go above 10% with 20 tabs of different web pages open and I have 3gb ram and have 1.3gb free ram.


Approved by the E8400 rig I am using right now. http://i.imgur.com/Nx40QB5.png
a b à CPUs
a b U Graphics card
July 15, 2013 3:42:49 PM

2GB of RAM used... still have plenty left over (4GB Total but a portion is set aside for the onboard graphics which I don't use on account of using a Radeon HD 6450). It's not the RAM it's the CPU usage... in total it's almost always at 100%. I tab between tabs in order to access the various applications and it takes time (lag/a delay).

This issue doesn't manifest itself on the Core i7 3930K or the FX machines I run at home. It really is the lack of cores.
a b à CPUs
July 15, 2013 3:46:11 PM

XP bogs down easier than Windows 7, so a comparison between an i3 on XP and PII 965 BE on Windows 7 isn't fair. The two will probably be about the same in most things. The i3 has lower power consumption, the Phenom II has better multithreaded performance. Don't bother with either, get an FX 6300.
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
a b U Graphics card
July 15, 2013 3:47:00 PM

montosaurous said:
XP bogs down easier than Windows 7, so a comparison between an i3 on XP and PII 965 BE on Windows 7 isn't fair. The two will probably be about the same in most things. The i3 has lower power consumption, the Phenom II has better multithreaded performance. Don't bother with either, get an FX 6300 or FX6350.

+1
a b à CPUs
July 15, 2013 3:58:54 PM

Eh FX 6350 isn't a good buy. It's $20 more for 400 MHz. Unless you want a higher binned chip for OC reasons, the FX 6300 is a better option.
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
a b U Graphics card
July 15, 2013 4:02:34 PM

montosaurous said:
Eh FX 6350 isn't a good buy. It's $20 more for 400 MHz. Unless you want a higher binned chip for OC reasons, the FX 6300 is a better option.


Keyword: OR
The FX6350 is like FX 8320 is to FX8350, people generally just get the 8350 over the 8320 simply for OC reasons.
a b à CPUs
July 15, 2013 4:32:53 PM

It's kinda of stupid to get an FX 8350 over an 8320 now since it's $40 more expensive on newegg. A little bit more OC just isn't worth it IMO.
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
a b U Graphics card
July 15, 2013 4:36:10 PM

hafijur said:
ElMoIsEviL said:
2GB of RAM used... still have plenty left over (4GB Total but a portion is set aside for the onboard graphics which I don't use on account of using a Radeon HD 6450). It's not the RAM it's the CPU usage... in total it's almost always at 100%. I tab between tabs in order to access the various applications and it takes time (lag/a delay).

This issue doesn't manifest itself on the Core i7 3930K or the FX machines I run at home. It really is the lack of cores.


This could be if you have lots of advert banners on these web pages or flash or some plug in is using the whole cpu sometimes that happens. Anyway its most likely the ram. Leave more space on the virtual memory as in use the hdd more if you go over and it won't run slow. The i3 should make light use of web based applications.


montosaurous said:
It's kinda of stupid to get an FX 8350 over an 8320 now since it's $40 more expensive on newegg. A little bit more OC just isn't worth it IMO.


It is more of a "I have the top of the line" factor, it seems that 8350s seem to overclock better, but the 8320 still works wonders for the most part.
a b à CPUs
July 15, 2013 8:21:59 PM

A few hundred megahertz isn't going to have a huge impact on performance. It has more of an effect on Intel chips than it does on AMD chips really. I still don't think it's worth the extra $40.
July 18, 2013 5:07:28 AM

Huh, got a problem....!!! AMD phenom is not available here(old), but FX 6300 (Buldozer series) are available.....!!!
I think FX 6300 is better than i3 !!!!!!!!??? right??
a b à CPUs
July 18, 2013 6:34:28 AM

lijith321 said:
Huh, got a problem....!!! AMD phenom is not available here(old), but FX 6300 (Buldozer series) are available.....!!!
I think FX 6300 is better than i3 !!!!!!!!??? right??


Yes the 6300 is a good chip and will do much better on games like battlefield 3 were the i3 will struggle with large maps with 64 players
a c 1117 à CPUs
a c 253 À AMD
a c 159 U Graphics card
July 18, 2013 6:57:08 AM

lijith321 said:
Huh, got a problem....!!! AMD phenom is not available here(old), but FX 6300 (Buldozer series) are available.....!!!
I think FX 6300 is better than i3 !!!!!!!!??? right??


FX6300 is actually a piledriver based chip and yes it would be an even better chip than the Phenom II. Clocks higher, and has better multicore support. An i3 cannot overclock and has inferior multicore support. Single core would be faster with an i3, but games are going the multicore route.
July 18, 2013 7:23:07 AM

logainofhades said:
lijith321 said:
Huh, got a problem....!!! AMD phenom is not available here(old), but FX 6300 (Buldozer series) are available.....!!!
I think FX 6300 is better than i3 !!!!!!!!??? right??


FX6300 is actually a piledriver based chip and yes it would be an even better chip than the Phenom II. Clocks higher, and has better multicore support. An i3 cannot overclock and has inferior multicore support. Single core would be faster with an i3, but games are going the multicore route.

thnx