AMD FX 4100 vs Phenom II x4 965?

[xspectrum]

I've come across 2 AMD processors that I'm considering using in my computer: the "AMD FX 4100" and the "Phenom II x4 965". The FX 4100 is about 20 bucks cheaper than the Phenom, which struck me as odd because the FX 4100 runs at 3.6 Ghz with quad core, while the Phenom has 3.4 Ghz with quad core. So, is there any real drawback to the FX 4100. I'm going to be using the computer for editing videos (mainly in After Effects), photos, as well as using it for everyday tasks (ie surfing the web, doing homework, etc).

Which processor will serve me better for my needs (please note that I'm not a very intense video/photo editor, I only do that a few hours a week)?

 

[gtx_560tiuser]

hmmmm i would go for the fx 4100

 

[xspectrum]

hmmmm i would go for the fx 4100

Thanks for the reply. Have you worked with the FX 4100?

 

[gtx_560tiuser]

well lets just say you are getting the bets bang for the buck http://community.futuremark.com/hardware/cpu/AMD_FX-4100
no i only have a amd athlon II x2 250 🙁 but im going to get the fx 4100 when i get the money

 

[hayguise]

phenom

 

[Outlander_04]

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1766/

Strengths and weaknesses . Either is fine , but make sure you use an AM3+ motherboard with ether a 970 or 990 series chip set and RAM that runs at 1.5 volt so you can upgrade later if you want

I would choose the FX 4100 , but thats just me

 

[gtx_560tiuser]

if look at the 3d mark 11 scores for the fx4100 it is almost as good as the PII BE 1090t for half the price the winer is easy in this comparision.... -_-

 

[jacknhut]

I've come across 2 AMD processors that I'm considering using in my computer: the "AMD FX 4100" and the "Phenom II x4 965". The FX 4100 is about 20 bucks cheaper than the Phenom, which struck me as odd because the FX 4100 runs at 3.6 Ghz with quad core, while the Phenom has 3.4 Ghz with quad core. So, is there any real drawback to the FX 4100. I'm going to be using the computer for editing videos (mainly in After Effects), photos, as well as using it for everyday tasks (ie surfing the web, doing homework, etc).

Which processor will serve me better for my needs (please note that I'm not a very intense video/photo editor, I only do that a few hours a week)?

Go for the Phenom II X4 965. The FX 4100 is not a true Quad core because in reality it only has 2 physical cores but as counted as 4 modules. The 4 modules share resources and unlike the true 4 physical cores of the Phenom II X4 965. Single thread performance of the FX 4100 is very weak, weaker even than the Phenom II X4 and its multithread performance is equal to the Phenom II X4 (despite the fact that it is a 2 cores 4 modules processors).

 

[mourice12]

Yea the FX are flops. The phenom 965 is boss

 

[cbrunnem]

its the lesser of two evils so pick your poison

 

[mourice12]

lol, the phenoms are better. but they run hot

 

[Outlander_04]

Yea the FX are flops. The phenom 965 is boss

are they?

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1766/14/

explain how a cpu that costs half as much and produces the same fps as a 2600k is a flop

 

[mourice12]

it scored 13 points less. GPU plays more on FPS than a CPU

 

[Outlander_04]

it scored 13 points less. GPU plays more on FPS than a CPU

on a low resolution monitor it produced 13 fps less , but at 1080p it was 2 fps behind a 2600k , which means it was equal to better than a 2500k .
So if you are building a computer to game at 1080p [ like most people are ] then smart people save $100 they would have spent on intel quad and spend that on a better graphics card .

dollar for dollar you are going to get a better gaming experience than if you built a system using the intel

How does that make the AMD Fx a flop?

 

[gtx_560tiuser]

amd fx 8150 is a flop not the fx 4100 guys get your facts right the fx 4100 is a good cpu....PERIOD.

 

[Outlander_04]

amd fx 8150 is a flop not the fx 4100 guys get your facts right the fx 4100 is a good cpu....PERIOD.

The FX 8150 is not good value , but it too has strengths and weaknesses .
The main weakness is that outside servers almost no one needs 8 cores with current OSes and applications . You'd almost always be better off with 4 individually stronger cores as the 2500k

The FX4100 looks like the budget build champion to me .

2500k with a 6950 , or GTX 560 ti will not game as well as an FX 4100 with a 6970 or GTX 570 .
And the FX based computer will usually cost less despite stepping up the graphics card

Its only if you have heavy cpu intensive tasks that the intel becomes value for money .

 

[mourice12]

i agree. Like video editing

 

[jacknhut]

The FX 8150 is not good value , but it too has strengths and weaknesses .
The main weakness is that outside servers almost no one needs 8 cores with current OSes and applications . You'd almost always be better off with 4 individually stronger cores as the 2500k

The FX4100 looks like the budget build champion to me .

2500k with a 6950 , or GTX 560 ti will not game as well as an FX 4100 with a 6970 or GTX 570 .
And the FX based computer will usually cost less despite stepping up the graphics card

Its only if you have heavy cpu intensive tasks that the intel becomes value for money .

The question here is not 2500k with 6950 or GTX 560 Ti vs FX 4100 with 6970 or GTX 570. The question here is Phenom II X4 965 with 6970 or GTX 570 or FX 4100 with 6970 or GTX 570. Comparing the 2 options, the Phenom II X4 965 wins hands down for both gaming and video editing due to its true 4 cores instead of 2 cores 4 modules of the FX 4100.

 

[de5_Roy]

Go for the Phenom II X4 965. The FX 4100 is not a true Quad core because in reality it only has 2 physical cores but as counted as 4 modules. The 4 modules share resources and unlike the true 4 physical cores of the Phenom II X4 965. Single thread performance of the FX 4100 is very weak, weaker even than the Phenom II X4 and its multithread performance is equal to the Phenom II X4 (despite the fact that it is a 2 cores 4 modules processors).

um.. i think you have the modules and cores backwards.
fx4100 is not a true quad core. it is a true 2 module 4 core cpu. itis actually an fx 8150 with 50% stuff cut off.
the definition of core is diverse. amd advertises the fx 4100 as a quad core cpu, not a dual module, quad core cpu. again, the 4 cores share resources.
the ph ii x4 is a true quad core in the traditional sense.
@xSpectrum: what is your budget for cpu? since both your chosen cpus will perform similarly in video editing, you could get a hex-core thuban. since amd is rumored to eol the ph ii, you might have no other choice but go with the fx 4100. if you can, get a core i5 2500k/2600 with a gtx 570/radeon6970 if you do video editing regularly ( the gtx is for using with adobe's software). for cpu-intensive tasks, intel will outperform the fx. but if you add gfx cards into the mix, e.g. high res. gaming, the fx and core i5 will perform similarly whenever the gfx load is successfully transfered to the gfx card. the core i5 will have slight lead over the fx.
between fx 4100 and the ph ii x4 965, get the cheaper one. also get a good cooler and psu to keep the power hungry cpu running cool. you might need to oc the fx to 4+ ghz to see some performance improvement.
@Outlander_04: imo none of the zambezi cpus are of good value right now. not to mention they're very power hungry for a 32 nm cpu. i checked a few newegg and microcenter prices where fx 4100 is priced higher than a core i3 2100 ( dual core with ht). it is, however, cheaper than a core i5 or may be the 965. in the end, the value of zambezi depends on what you're comparing it against.

 

[jacknhut]

um.. i think you have the modules and cores backwards.
fx4100 is not a true quad core. it is a true 2 module 4 core cpu. itis actually an fx 8150 with 50% stuff cut off.
the definition of core is diverse. amd advertises the fx 4100 as a quad core cpu, not a dual module, quad core cpu. again, the 4 cores share resources.
the ph ii x4 is a true quad core in the traditional sense.

Oops My bad sorry Its the other way around, the FX 4100 is a 2 modules, 4 cores CPU. But the rest of what I said is still correct, its still weaker than Phenom II X4 965 since the Phenom II X4 965 is a true quadcore where the FX 4100 is not a true quad cores. You can treat it like a 3 cores CPU if you must. I wouldnt buy that processor over the Phenom II X4 965 since gaming wise the Phenom II X4 965 is way superior to the FX 4100. The FX 6100 is more of an equivalent to the Phenom II X4 965 for multithread applications but still lack behind the Phenom II X4 965 in single thread performance.

 

[gtx_560tiuser]

did you hear amd is going to stop producing amd phenoms IIs...

 

[gtx_560tiuser]

Oops My bad sorry Its the other way around, the FX 4100 is a 2 modules, 4 cores CPU. But the rest of what I said is still correct, its still weaker than Phenom II X4 965 since the Phenom II X4 965 is a true quadcore where the FX 4100 is not a true quad cores. You can treat it like a 3 cores CPU if you must. I wouldnt buy that processor over the Phenom II X4 965 since gaming wise the Phenom II X4 965 is way superior to the FX 4100. The FX 6100 is more of an equivalent to the Phenom II X4 965 for multithread applications but still lack behind the Phenom II X4 965 in single thread performance.

not really....http://community.futuremark.com/hardware/cpu/AMD_FX-4100

 

[jacknhut]

not really....http://community.futuremark.com/hardware/cpu/AMD_FX-4100

I beg to differ. Multiple reviews clearly showed the complete opposite. FX 4100 lacks far behind Phenom II X4 in both multithread an single thread benchmarks. Numbers don't lie.
http://www.guru3d.com/article/amd-fx-8150--8120-6100-and-4100-performance-review/1
http://nl.hardware.info/reviews/2382/amd-fx-8150--8120--6100--4100-bulldozer-review

 

[gtx_560tiuser]

hmmm i think the benchmark on 3dmark11 webite is innacurate then or usign diffrent ram timings and speed...

 

[gtx_560tiuser]

this is a tough choice between the the 2 cpus cus the fx has some improvments over the PII BE 965 but the PII BE 965 also more perfomace in some areas over the fx 4100.... the fx 4100 is cheaper with almost just good peformace as if not better performace then the PII BE 965...