better for what? fm1 is good value if you want a cheap quad core with integrated graphics and dont plan on using a dedicated gfx card. AM3 is better if you want to use a cheap, but fast quad core (phenom II) and want to run a dedicated video card.
 

farrengottu

Distinguished
Aug 28, 2011
912
0
19,160
am3 is for phenom IIs specifically but backwards compatible with all previous AMx processors. no graphics on these.
fm1 is for the llano processors the A8 A6 and A4 series. these have built in graphics for mid-range gaming and power saving while doing it.

it all depends on what you want to do with the computer.
 

kevin3220

Distinguished
Oct 21, 2011
11
0
18,510





I want good,powerful and chep pc.
 
i like llano apus for their strong igp+entry level quad core cpu. they also have native usb 3.0, sata iii support, hybrid crossfire with radeon hd 6670. imo they're good for an entry level pc. llano's igp depends with ram i.e. the faster ram you combine with the igp the better it will perform. right now the sweet spot is ddr3 1600.
some fm1 motherboards:
ASRock A75M-HVS FM1 AMD A75 (Hudson D3) HDMI SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 Micro ATX AMD Motherboard with UEFI BIOS $69.99
GIGABYTE GA-A75M-S2V FM1 AMD A75 (Hudson D3) SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 Micro ATX AMD Motherboard $82.99
and amd a8 3850 quad core

otoh, you get more cpu and mobo choice, better crossfire capabilitiesvary cpu+mobo prices with am3. am3 has been succeeded by am3+ which supports bulldozer fx cpus.
 
FM1 is a dead end and the reason is because that there are rumors along with some official slides that suggest that it won't be supported in the next gen apu. AM3 is the best in the long run even if you learn that BD sucks and stick with a solid p2 x4/x6.