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.
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.
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.
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.
If you want to go even lower, an AMD Athlon II X3 450 Rana 3.2GHz will save yah some money, has a good chance to unlock to a quad, and pops up with a $10 discount from time-to-time.
The onboard ATI Radeon HD 4250 graphics on motherboards like the GB GA-880GMA-USB3 AM3+ AMD 880G HDMI SATA 6Gb/s is still quite good for general use - throw in a video card if you want to be a gaming monster.
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.