Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

UPDATE: AMD Drops Price of Bulldozer Based FX-4130 CPU

By - Source: WCCF Tech | B 27 comments

A new price point for a Zambezi based part on the Bulldozer architecture.

UPDATE: Upon further investigation, we contacted AMD, and it turns out that a typo in an ordering part number led the media to believe that the FX-4130 is a Piledriver-based CPU that was going to come out this week. This is not correct. Any source indicating that this is a Vishera part based on the Piledriver architecture is mistaken.

The FX-4130 came out in August 2012, and still is a Zambezi based part on the Bulldozer architecture. The real news was that the FX-4130 has dropped in price. The MSRP is now updated to $101, the old price of the FX-4100. The FX-4130 now gives users a step up in performance, but not in price over the older FX-4100.

Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback

Discuss
Display all 27 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 11 Hide
    Cataclysm_ZA , January 31, 2013 12:37 PM
    Niels, I'm pretty sure this is based on Bulldozer, not Piledriver. Think about it - 125W TDP for a quad-core in the Vishera family? The FX-4300 gets 95W and has higher boost speeds.

    Edit: You guys reported on the FX-4130 last year.
  • 10 Hide
    bustapr , January 31, 2013 11:05 AM
    lol I was expecting a $120 cpu. $101 msrp is pretty good for this cpu. but the naming scheme is too confusing in this case.

    fx4100 = bulldozer
    fx4130 = piledriver
    fx4170 = bulldozer

    is the name a typo in the article?
  • 10 Hide
    virtualban , January 31, 2013 10:45 AM
    wishing all the good to AMD, except to their decisions of dropping out of the desktop cpu race...
    Steamroller for 2013, and some 50-75% IPC per core increase... one can dream, no?
Other Comments
  • 10 Hide
    virtualban , January 31, 2013 10:45 AM
    wishing all the good to AMD, except to their decisions of dropping out of the desktop cpu race...
    Steamroller for 2013, and some 50-75% IPC per core increase... one can dream, no?
  • 10 Hide
    bustapr , January 31, 2013 11:05 AM
    lol I was expecting a $120 cpu. $101 msrp is pretty good for this cpu. but the naming scheme is too confusing in this case.

    fx4100 = bulldozer
    fx4130 = piledriver
    fx4170 = bulldozer

    is the name a typo in the article?
  • 1 Hide
    wanderer11 , January 31, 2013 11:10 AM
    bustaprlol I was expecting a $120 cpu. $101 msrp is pretty good for this cpu. but the naming scheme is too confusing in this case. fx4100 = bulldozerfx4130 = piledriverfx4170 = bulldozeris the name a typo in the article?

    It seems that piledriver has 3s in the name and bulldozer doesn't: 8350, 8320, 6300, 4130, etc.
  • 1 Hide
    alidan , January 31, 2013 11:17 AM
    virtualbanwishing all the good to AMD, except to their decisions of dropping out of the desktop cpu race...Steamroller for 2013, and some 50-75% IPC per core increase... one can dream, no?

    the cpu race is apparently over. look at how much the gpu can support the cpu in many tasks that use to be the benchmark of a good cpu. on the consumer end, lets say if we had full hardware acceleration, would we need a powerful cpu or would we need a better gpu? because the way i see it, the cpus are good enough for consumer use, we dont need that constant upgrade anymore, and anything like rendering a video or such, that can be offloaded to the gpu to do it faster than the cpu ever could.
  • 5 Hide
    silverblue , January 31, 2013 11:21 AM
    Quote:
    FMX


    FMA3 and FMA4.

    Quote:
    some instruction sets not included with similarly priced Intel CPUs

    Not included with Intel CPUs, full stop, at least not until Haswell and then, only FMA3.
  • 3 Hide
    zooted , January 31, 2013 11:31 AM
    The egg has the 4130 listed as a Zambezi chip. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113291
  • 1 Hide
    frozentundra123456 , January 31, 2013 11:35 AM
    I dont see any confusion with the naming. x3xx is piledriver, x1xx is bulldozer.

    The price is right though at 100.00. The only problem is that 125w is a lot of power for a chip that basically competes with a dual core i3 at I believe 66 watts. What I dont really understand is how this can have the same TDP as the 8 core 8350 which is even clocked higher.

    .I also dont think it is 22% faster than the i3 except in selective highly multithreaded workloads. If it was 22% faster overall, I doubt they would be pricing it so much lower than the i3. But overall not a bad buy if the power consumption doesnt bother you.
  • 6 Hide
    enewmen , January 31, 2013 11:40 AM
    I'm confident the PCs and CPUs are alive and well.
    I think we will start seeing huge gains again because of the next-gen consoles (using AMD APUs).
    The consoles will FINALLY force the publishers (and general managers) to give developers sufficient resources to write in 64bits, multi-core, and heterogeneous computing.
    Then FINALLY everyone will be using software that's true 64bit, using multi-core, and heterogeneous computing. The 32bit, single core, DX9 world must give way.
    (my 2 cents worth)
  • 4 Hide
    NuclearShadow , January 31, 2013 12:03 PM
    A lower price and outperforms its competitor's model. That is quite nice to see. Certainly now a favorable CPU for a budget build.
  • 0 Hide
    womble , January 31, 2013 12:15 PM
    Mercy, I hope the cooler from the 8350 is different than the 8150 then...'cos if they are saying that is quiet!
  • 4 Hide
    sarcasm , January 31, 2013 12:26 PM
    frozentundra123456I dont see any confusion with the naming. x3xx is piledriver, x1xx is bulldozer.


    Except that in this case it's 4130 or by your example xx3x. If it was 4310 then sure it would have clearer.
  • 11 Hide
    Cataclysm_ZA , January 31, 2013 12:37 PM
    Niels, I'm pretty sure this is based on Bulldozer, not Piledriver. Think about it - 125W TDP for a quad-core in the Vishera family? The FX-4300 gets 95W and has higher boost speeds.

    Edit: You guys reported on the FX-4130 last year.
  • 0 Hide
    maxinexus , January 31, 2013 12:48 PM
    Isn't this an old news?
  • 1 Hide
    InvalidError , January 31, 2013 12:49 PM
    alidanon the consumer end, lets say if we had full hardware acceleration, would we need a powerful cpu or would we need a better gpu?

    Even the most powerful GPU setup on Earth still suck at intrinsically serial tasks and writing single/lightly threaded stuff is much easier/faster/cheaper than writing proper multi-threaded code so desire for higher single-thread performance is going to be around for the foreseeable future, albeit as a secondary objective.
  • 2 Hide
    Onus , January 31, 2013 12:52 PM
    This CPU looks interesting, perhaps something to "mess with," but not really a significant performance upgrade over a Phenom II X4 970BE. I'm hoping that Steamroller will be more worthwhile.
  • 2 Hide
    ddpruitt , January 31, 2013 1:11 PM
    Waiting for Steamroller. Until single threaded performance is at least 15% better than my 1090T I'm not planning on any upgrades.

    On the other hand I may have to upgrade my lappy if they go with Steamroller + GCN APUs
  • 2 Hide
    alidan , January 31, 2013 1:29 PM
    InvalidErrorEven the most powerful GPU setup on Earth still suck at intrinsically serial tasks and writing single/lightly threaded stuff is much easier/faster/cheaper than writing proper multi-threaded code so desire for higher single-thread performance is going to be around for the foreseeable future, albeit as a secondary objective.

    i know that the gpu cant do everything, but thats my point, if what could be offloaded to it was, how much would that free up the cpu, how much more could we get out of it, and to that extent, how much would we still need even better cpu? i know its no where near what it was in the p4 and earlier days. hell if my computer isn't lying to me, my phenom II 955 black and amd radeon 5770 1gb can handle playback of 4k video.

    what pushed me from a p2 to a p4 was partially a dvd player, and mostly mkv support (mp4 h.246, whatever) and what pushed me to a quad core was 720p video being unplayable half the time on my p4 and my motherboard died. but now i don't have that media push... image editors i use don't preform like a bag of... you can finish that thought. even video games that are developed for the pc can pull reasonable frame rates and are capped by my video card more than my cpu.

    we hit an area where we no longer always could use or need a better cpu, and what use to drive cpu sales, rendering, can be offloaded to the gpu and get spit back out done faster almost any cpu could do it.

    i see a stonger reliance on gpus, especially when opencl is widely adopted.
  • 1 Hide
    lilcinw , January 31, 2013 1:44 PM
    Is this Vishera? The naming doesn't line up and newegg has it listed as Zambezi. Not to mention that Wolfgang wrote about this last August before Vishera was released.

    I am confused.
  • -4 Hide
    azraa , January 31, 2013 2:21 PM
    Damn it people, already!
    TDP =/= Power Consumption

    Its just an indicator of how much power it COULD and it is designed to tolerate.

    Other than that, I dont know why AMD keeps releasing 6-core CPUs
    I loved their 4core APUs, and the bulldozer 4 core did quite good compared with the 6cores.
    IMHO there is no need for 6 cores, make it either 4 or 8.
    And therefore, the cpu from the review gets all my love, I know for a fact that their 4-cores work wonders for the price, and unlocked, jeez
  • 1 Hide
    Cataclysm_ZA , January 31, 2013 2:36 PM
    Quote:
    Damn it people, already!
    TDP =/= Power Consumption

    Its just an indicator of how much power it COULD and it is designed to tolerate.


    And you're bringing this up because...?

    Quote:
    Other than that, I dont know why AMD keeps releasing 6-core CPUs
    IMHO there is no need for 6 cores, make it either 4 or 8.


    I'd say there's a good need. Where I'm from, the FX-6100 and FX-6300 are great value for money and I regularly recommend them over similarly-priced Intel chips. I don't know how things are over in the US, but in South Africa the closest competition for the FX-6100 is the Core i3-3225. The FX-6300 has no competition - the Core i5-3450 is at least $25 more expensive.

    Also, AMD has to sell those chips and make use of all those wafers it ordered! I'm actually glad they dropped the triple-core families, made everything much more complicated for consumers and that extra core didn't always benefit you.
Display more comments