AMD FX 4100 good cpu?

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mynameiskobe

Distinguished
Dec 24, 2011
83
0
18,630
For my first build I'm really considering the AMD FX 4100. I like the 3.60 quad core for only 119.99 (tigerdirect)
My main use is going to be gaming.
 
Sort by date Sort by votes

not exavtly they got an idea now and as long as they don't fail the next cpu they might be good, they were willing to sell a 8 core cpu for the price of a i5 2500k so thats good but they learned to make the arcitectures more efficiant next time the new fx prossesers set amd back quite a bit but they can do good, if it weren't for them making gup's then they would be bankrupt by now amd really should start thinking about a good cpu because if they keep this up there dead... i bought a FX-8120 sadly for gaming but it works fine so i don't care at leaste poeple bought the cpu, they need to test the cpu first next time they really failed.

amd is pretty far from success right now and ther cpu lines are really killing then alive if they don't make a goo cpu soon i think amd is not gonna be ble to make cpu's any more if each core was like an sandy bridge type core with the advantages of sandy bridge amd would be epic.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I can see Skyrim giving the i3-2100 a hard time but the other including BF3, no..
at higher resolutions it would be the HD 6850 needing help..
my set-ups in house:
2500K + SLi (Twin Frozr II's)
2100 + GTX 550 Ti
965BE + GTX 560 SOC

I think I know what the chip can and can't do and compare it to others.
Click to expand...


Skyrim runs just fine on an i3.

" This game clearly relies on CPU power, and you need a Sandy Bridge-based Core i3 at 3 GHz or a Phenom II at 3.5 GHz to provide a minimum 30 FPS. Bear in mind that we're using the ultra detail setting here, and processing requirements drop significantly as you start stepping back. So, you can make due with a less potent chip when you dial in detail options appropriately. "

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/skyrim-performance-benchmark,3074-9.html
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

i saw bf3 maxed with a i3 and 5770.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


What are you talking about...do you even know or do you just like to listen to yourself talk. The I3 while being the lowest of the Icore class processors can handle most games just fine. It will not bottleneck the graphics card like you're saying.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I thought it did and would.
I personally do not play the game.

validates my point that 'melikepie' has no clue..
Click to expand...

That's probably because he visits this forum for advice. It's got all new comers confused. If the advice was straight forward as it should be, GPU should be the first recommendation followed by available processors to couple it to. If you can afford the top CPU & GPU then there's no question, but because the majority of forum members and visitors can't do that, compromises need to be made, and that's where these forums fall down badly with their overzealous Intel bias. More balance is badly needed.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
...you guys should also think about the commitment to gaming made by the two chip makers. AMD supports direct X/open CL through their whole product range, including tablet PC's, so that all users of their hardware can enjoy a good/satisfactory gaming/video playback experiences.

Intel's commitment on the other hand is sketchy at best, ie .......got the fastest CPU's, and now go and buy a third party GPU to make it work. Cheap way out if you ask me. Meanwhile average Joe Blow who's bought his Uber-Super i5 chip, because, he's heard how good they are, gets a BDOS as soon as he/she sticks in Dorothy's Adventure in Oz because it requires some, what should be by now" a standard 3D instruction set.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
and another fanboi speaks...
Click to expand...
#1 How is he a fanboy?

#2
sorry
anort3
malmental
mynameiskobe
RDS1220
I Did Not Know You Get So Sad For Saying An i3 Won't Work Facts
Fact #1 i5 's Beat i3's on gaming
Fact #2 An i3 can't poform well in gaming especially when it's quad core, quad thread optimized
Fact #3 An i5 Will Be Well Worth It Compared To Getting An i3
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
if you cant afford or dont want to pay for top tier cpus then amd do have some decent offerings at reasonable prices. the i3 will choke on some none gaming apps where the multi core fx will shine. its not all about gaming after all...
if you accept that you will get the performance you pay for and the limits that come with it. then theres no real reason not to buy amd. but if your usage falls in to single or dual threaded apps then it will under perform compared to other intel cpus in the same price range...
if you buy an fx 8 you can be sure it will perform just as well as the last i7 9 series which arnt exactly bad cpu's. things like photoshop will benefit from the extra threads so its not a complete waste as some would have you believe.
as it stands you aint gonna get the best cpu if you go for amd but you will get a work horse that can grind 27/7/365 for less over all initial outlay...
big deal if it doesn't beat intel in a synthetic bench. as long as it gives 60 fps in games it shouldn't matter...

amd have always been a gen behind, they hoped that BD would bring them level with intel but failed. which turns out to be more of a disaster for the end user than amd... intel wont have to push as hard and prices will stagnate... so when all the intel fanboys have finished cheering you can guarantee they will start crying coz they cant get the performance they want for a reasonable price...

when it comes down to it inel may come out the winner, but whether they turn out to be a good winner is another matter... the evidence ? the 2011 socket seems to be over priced ... i could go on but im bored of writing this as you are of reading it...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

i would buy a lga 2011 motherboard and an i7 extreme cpu... thats when i am a million air
ur right
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
no, you explain it and research it and then stop recommending getting the FX-Bulldozer or saying how great it is or will be.
I can understand backing your unit (you run AMD), I feel strongly about nVidia.
but your suffering from tunnel vision.
Click to expand...
have you used a fx yet?

stop complaining a FX-4100 and i7 Extreme Edition CPU's work just as good on gaming in that case graphics matter an FX-4100 and a i3 BOTH DO GREAT ON GAMING!! if u disagree your a fanboy... if the case is video edition or rendering them a (FX-8120 or FX-8150) and a i5 both do great (the fx probely will do better because multicore) and thats that.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
no, you explain it and research it and then stop recommending getting the FX-Bulldozer or saying how great it is or will be.
I can understand backing your unit (you run AMD), I feel strongly about nVidia.
but your suffering from tunnel vision.
Click to expand...

You need to get your myopia fixed. We all know that game experience formula is GPU + CPU V dollars spent. Constantly recommending Uber CPU's just confuses the issue. The 4100 is a budget CPU where as the i5 is upper mainstream. You pay a premium for that extra performance you might squeeze out of it, if it's wanted people pay for it it's so simple. You are just throwing bricks simply because you can pick them up and for no other reason. I never said it (the FX 4100) was a great chip, but it is more than satisfactory to provide a great gaming experience for anyone who buys one.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
no, you explain it and research it and then stop recommending getting the FX-Bulldozer or saying how great it is or will be.
I can understand backing your unit (you run AMD), I feel strongly about nVidia.
but your suffering from tunnel vision.
Click to expand...
Yeah Saw Your FX Thing, Benchmarking Does NNot Matter If Your Game Runs Great Then Ok!!!!!!! But... Sadly He's Not Suffering From Tunnel Vision Were Suffering From Intel's Prices
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
that I can agree to a certain point.
the i3-2100 is like the same price if not $10 more than the FX-4100.
at that price range, I'll go with the i3-2100.
and if having to stay with AMD then 965BE over the FX-4100.
my opinion.
Click to expand...
Well ok that's settled but either way the FX-8120 fits my needs here is why
it's highly overclockable
i might need rendering programs because i do lots of random stuff like that
i like to leave many programs doing something while im doing somthing else
i use a minecraft server program, minecraft it self would work better on an i5 because woth lots of boms i max out the thread a lot but the server commoly uses all 8 threads
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
This is so funny. When ever folks ask me about computers, and I start differentiating between CPU/GPU and then Intel comes up the first response invariably is..."I don't play games."

And here we are putting Intel and games in the same sentence. Intel charges the prices they do because they have high volume mainstream sales. The hot air from these forums and others just makes free publicity they can use to frighten users off without even looking at the oppositions product, because if "reputed experts" think that AMD is crap (and that's a blanket crap), which is what I object to.

Intel's pricing has very little if anything at all to do with where AMD stand as a parts supplier. If anything it's keeping a bit of a check on things, CPU's used you be a much higher proportion of a system cost than it is today. Given what the i5 is, it's a steal at it's current retail price.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
but it's not....
that's the point.
Click to expand...


I use AMD cpu's, play 3D games and I disagree with your synopsis. Hell, I haven't even bothered to overclock and even elected to down size my GPU's ie 3870 to 6850. I forgot I shouldn't shorten things, someones going to have a baby over that, I mean in it's relative position of the day.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
well that bro I fully understand and support you on that.
if it was just gaming then that's where the argument was, let's call it mis-communication.
the server type environment, FX-Bulldozer is OK with me..
Click to expand...
Yes and hopefully amd in the future will make another am3+ cpu to make things better because i think amd might make it because if they fail to many times they are gonna go bankrupt and the only thing keeping them alive is there graphics, intel has to much money and sales to fail.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
FX-4100 then stepping revision and FX-4170.
(FX-8150 then FX-8190 and so on.)
then Piledriver and the end of the AM3+ socket.
there will be no AM4..

the 'universal' socket going forward will be FM2.
Click to expand...
HOow good do you think the piledriver will be?
If there is no am4 then what is the Steamroller And Excavater use?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
That's agreed, I would not trade either of my Pii's for a current FX CPU either. FX is not an upgrade for these CPU's at the moment. But coming from lower in the food chain to an FX, does not qualify for being labelled an anti-Christ.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom