i3-2100 vs. Phenom II X4 965 oc'd
- Thread starter mikep54
- Start date
Solution
It depends if you dont mind the pc dying after 3 years and using twice the electricity and wearing out a power supply, or if you want to give it away after 6 years having got your moneys worth. If its the latter, buy the intel and upgrade to a quad in a couple of years as there will be plenty about.
rdc85
Honorable
- Apr 29, 2012
- 2,943
- 0
- 13,460
LoL, This is nonsense ....
PSU wears out because of usage, even different in 100w will not give a noticeable different in PSU lifetime, except u use crappy PSU that bound to fail anyway....
edit:
for Intel 1155 had more better lifetime than Amd am3+ ...... 😀
(another baseless info)
back on topic, I would get the phenom...
so, back on topic then. I would get the intel riging. Just be aware that the sandy bridge gear is better long term than the ivy bridge (imho). As I dont quite belive intel about temps and longevity of ivy.
But its up to you..if you want to clock an amd rig and cross your fingers longterm go for it.
But its up to you..if you want to clock an amd rig and cross your fingers longterm go for it.
jessterman21
Splendid
- Dec 14, 2010
- 2,928
- 2
- 21,465
DarkSable
Judicious
- Sep 27, 2012
- 8,890
- 1
- 34,965
When he was saying that 'a psu wears out because of usage,' he was paraphrasing what you were saying, correctly stating that it is utter BS. What you stated about an AMD chip dying faster, using twice the power, or wearing out the power supply is completely unfounded, and representative of a mindless fanboy.
Kid, really, just... don't. You're wrong about sandy bridge lasting longer than ivy bridge, and you're wrong about saying that AMD should be avoided.
I have an i5-3570k. I would recommend it to anyone looking for the best gaming chip out there. But for this question, a locked, dual core processor loses hands down to an overclockable quad core.
Kid? Fan boy? I am a 50 yr old electrician. The first pc I built was a 1300 mhz advanced M.D. Duron rig. How old are you? What qualifications or Training do you have in the field of basic particle physics?
Do you understand the equations? Can you grasp the fact that a power supply with a load of 300 watts will reach its failure point FASTER than one loaded with 200?And if that supply is only rated at 400 watts it will be even faster than that due to efficacy loss and component heat ratings?
Irrespective of brand and cost? Before you call me 'mindless' and denounce my opinion as 'bulshit' , you might want to study the subject of electronics at some level.
You come across as somebody with a very short experience of
the design and marketing of tech goods. What qualifications do you have to validate your statements Sir?
Fanboy? that term wasnt even invented when I started taking an interest.
You sound about 26 years old.
Do you understand the equations? Can you grasp the fact that a power supply with a load of 300 watts will reach its failure point FASTER than one loaded with 200?And if that supply is only rated at 400 watts it will be even faster than that due to efficacy loss and component heat ratings?
Irrespective of brand and cost? Before you call me 'mindless' and denounce my opinion as 'bulshit' , you might want to study the subject of electronics at some level.
You come across as somebody with a very short experience of
the design and marketing of tech goods. What qualifications do you have to validate your statements Sir?
Fanboy? that term wasnt even invented when I started taking an interest.
You sound about 26 years old.
DarkSable
Judicious
- Sep 27, 2012
- 8,890
- 1
- 34,965
All due respect, sir, but I'm not 26. I'm twenty three. I don't have trained experience in the field of electronics, but I do have dual majors in english and philosophy, a minor in math, and a masters' of teaching with certification for gifted ed. My father worked with computers the majority of his life, and I grew up practically plugged into one.
I apologize for the other accusations, but you are a fanboy - read your post again. You make baseless statements that are clearly quite biased, with no form of external support. Even now your argument is completely tangential to the point you're attempting to prove.
1) Depending on the power supply, it is quite likely that it will run with much BETTER efficiency at 300w than at 200w - as you should know with a background in electrical engineering, components designed for high performance use typically perform worse when subjected to low loads.
2) You make the presumption that AMD is essentially worthless, and will use twice / 100w more than a comparable intel chip. This is simply not true.
I apologize for the other accusations, but you are a fanboy - read your post again. You make baseless statements that are clearly quite biased, with no form of external support. Even now your argument is completely tangential to the point you're attempting to prove.
1) Depending on the power supply, it is quite likely that it will run with much BETTER efficiency at 300w than at 200w - as you should know with a background in electrical engineering, components designed for high performance use typically perform worse when subjected to low loads.
2) You make the presumption that AMD is essentially worthless, and will use twice / 100w more than a comparable intel chip. This is simply not true.
Gelatinous Abomination
Honorable
- Apr 30, 2013
- 11
- 0
- 10,510
The i3-2100 is slightly faster for gaming than the Phenom II X4 965. However, the Phenom II X4 965 is better at multitasking. I also had to face this choice. Right now I have the Phenom II X4 965 BE at 4GHZ, A GTX 660 TI and 4GB of 1600MHZ RAM. I can run any game maxed at 1360x768 with no problem at all.
I tell you the first rig I built was an A.M.D.,(this was around your 11th birthday) but you ignore this and still call me a fanboy. F.Y.I, the 2nd rig I built was also an a.m.d., Athlon. the 3000+. I still have the A7 400meg fsb asus board, but chips are rare at sensible prices, as are agp gpus.
You say I post with no evidence of external support?
This is a forum, I gave my opinion based on my experience in the field_ At no point in the terms of use on Tom's does it say 'YOUR PERSONAL OPINION MUST BE BACKED UP BY EXTERNAL EVIDENCE'.you didnt bother, and your sig says intel, so wtf you talkin about?I wasnt rude to anybody, and didnt call anybody names.
You did that and still are, despite your obviously extensive education, knowing its not exactly encouraged.
Your education base has nothing whatsoever to do with this subject. Even the Math, you are off. Do you know why? do you know about PF correction, or transformer design parramaters? I was using 200 vs 300 watts as an example(do you KNOW what a watt is?)re psu mtbf but this rig is for GAMING remember?
Its gonna have a 100 + watt GPU in it. 270 watts plus
(around the 300 watt ideal you seek) But, despite being breast fed on computers I have to take you to school in pc building and manners. You might be able to lay out a paper
as if you were sitting an exam, but you lead with your back foot in quicksand. Your not worthy of my time.
Get out of my class, KID.
You say I post with no evidence of external support?
This is a forum, I gave my opinion based on my experience in the field_ At no point in the terms of use on Tom's does it say 'YOUR PERSONAL OPINION MUST BE BACKED UP BY EXTERNAL EVIDENCE'.you didnt bother, and your sig says intel, so wtf you talkin about?I wasnt rude to anybody, and didnt call anybody names.
You did that and still are, despite your obviously extensive education, knowing its not exactly encouraged.
Your education base has nothing whatsoever to do with this subject. Even the Math, you are off. Do you know why? do you know about PF correction, or transformer design parramaters? I was using 200 vs 300 watts as an example(do you KNOW what a watt is?)re psu mtbf but this rig is for GAMING remember?
Its gonna have a 100 + watt GPU in it. 270 watts plus
(around the 300 watt ideal you seek) But, despite being breast fed on computers I have to take you to school in pc building and manners. You might be able to lay out a paper
as if you were sitting an exam, but you lead with your back foot in quicksand. Your not worthy of my time.
Get out of my class, KID.
DarkSable
Judicious
- Sep 27, 2012
- 8,890
- 1
- 34,965
And again, you're trying to win an argument by attempting to attack character, not by bothering to show that your point was correct.
Yes, a gaming computer is going to draw more wattage... that doesn't matter. My point was that power supplies run more efficiently as the wattage increases, so saying that drawing more wattage is going to burn out the power supply faster is absolutely ludicrous.
The reason I called you out for not giving any backup to your claim is because you're making quite obviously outrageous, false claims - this is the same reason you are a fanboy, despite having built AMD rigs in the past - you're slandering and spreading misinformation.
Yes, I have an intel rig. That doesn't mean I have to claim that AMD is horrible and will ruin a computer.
As for the rest of it... History doesn't really matter that much, and we apparently started building computers at the same time anyways. I think I still have an old agp Matrox graphics card laying around, if you'd like me to ship it to you. The only name I called you is that of a fanboy; which I still hold true. I did not call you any other name, unless you took offense to my use of 'kid.' I did not mean it to be disrespectful, I was trying to emphasize a point that I was arguing against a person who was, for all intents and purposes, talking as though they were such, by repeating false rumors with no backing.
That being said, claiming that you're educating me in building a computer by defending false claims with unrelated evidence, or claiming that you're educating me in manners... I've been nothing but respectful once you asked for it, and have been met with nothing but hostility and condensation.
mikeep84, I apologize for derailing your thread with all this. Suffice it to say that an AMD chip will not cause your power supply to die faster, nor will it die faster itself. I'd recommend it in this scenario due to it having two extra cores in a case where it matters, but the choice is ultimately up to you.
Yes, a gaming computer is going to draw more wattage... that doesn't matter. My point was that power supplies run more efficiently as the wattage increases, so saying that drawing more wattage is going to burn out the power supply faster is absolutely ludicrous.
The reason I called you out for not giving any backup to your claim is because you're making quite obviously outrageous, false claims - this is the same reason you are a fanboy, despite having built AMD rigs in the past - you're slandering and spreading misinformation.
Yes, I have an intel rig. That doesn't mean I have to claim that AMD is horrible and will ruin a computer.
As for the rest of it... History doesn't really matter that much, and we apparently started building computers at the same time anyways. I think I still have an old agp Matrox graphics card laying around, if you'd like me to ship it to you. The only name I called you is that of a fanboy; which I still hold true. I did not call you any other name, unless you took offense to my use of 'kid.' I did not mean it to be disrespectful, I was trying to emphasize a point that I was arguing against a person who was, for all intents and purposes, talking as though they were such, by repeating false rumors with no backing.
That being said, claiming that you're educating me in building a computer by defending false claims with unrelated evidence, or claiming that you're educating me in manners... I've been nothing but respectful once you asked for it, and have been met with nothing but hostility and condensation.
mikeep84, I apologize for derailing your thread with all this. Suffice it to say that an AMD chip will not cause your power supply to die faster, nor will it die faster itself. I'd recommend it in this scenario due to it having two extra cores in a case where it matters, but the choice is ultimately up to you.
STILL you bang on with this assumption psu's are more efficient as the watts increase add infin! Have you ever read the specs for 80+
standard? NO.
I JUST DID point out my point was correct, They are most efficient in the mid range. Drawing more power from a supply will were it out faster is ludicrous? I dont have to attack your CHARACTER now, CHUMMY JIM, you have just pulled down your trousers in assembly. You have proved that dad bort some parts, and assembled your pc with you as a project, and you really dont know sfa about physics.
Next to you, I am Albert Einstein( passionately curious)
Can you DO a power factor correction calculation using a Phasor diagram and a ruler? I can.
Nobody has to attack your character to change the subject, as you already lost that argument and need no help whatsoever
in playing the idiot. See me after class.. C-
standard? NO.
I JUST DID point out my point was correct, They are most efficient in the mid range. Drawing more power from a supply will were it out faster is ludicrous? I dont have to attack your CHARACTER now, CHUMMY JIM, you have just pulled down your trousers in assembly. You have proved that dad bort some parts, and assembled your pc with you as a project, and you really dont know sfa about physics.
Next to you, I am Albert Einstein( passionately curious)
Can you DO a power factor correction calculation using a Phasor diagram and a ruler? I can.
Nobody has to attack your character to change the subject, as you already lost that argument and need no help whatsoever
in playing the idiot. See me after class.. C-
DarkSable
Judicious
- Sep 27, 2012
- 8,890
- 1
- 34,965
I "bang on" that you were absolutely and positively wrong when you said that an AMD chip would wear a power supply out faster... I don't know if you can remember that far back, but that's the point you were originally trying to make.
AMD's chips don't use twice as much power as intel's, nor will they wear a power supply out faster - a difference of even 50w isn't going to make the slightest difference to a 600w power supply.
I also never said that the PSU will be more efficient as watts increase ad infinitum. (I'd tell you to brush up on your latin, but your english could use it more.) What I said is that adding more wattage from a CPU, presuming that the power draw is far below what the supply can handle, as you set up, isn't going to make the slightest bit of difference. You said that AMD's chips will wear a power supply out faster, and that is absolutely WRONG.
Now. You clearly have no interest in debating, only in arguing. So I'm ending with this:
1) The points you originally made are wrong. An AMD chip is in no way harmful to a computer, nor will it use 100w more than an i3.
2) You have not "won" nor "proven" anything - you've simply made yourself look a fool by presuming that the way to 'win' an argument is attack the other person until they shut up. That is incorrect,
AMD's chips don't use twice as much power as intel's, nor will they wear a power supply out faster - a difference of even 50w isn't going to make the slightest difference to a 600w power supply.
I also never said that the PSU will be more efficient as watts increase ad infinitum. (I'd tell you to brush up on your latin, but your english could use it more.) What I said is that adding more wattage from a CPU, presuming that the power draw is far below what the supply can handle, as you set up, isn't going to make the slightest bit of difference. You said that AMD's chips will wear a power supply out faster, and that is absolutely WRONG.
Now. You clearly have no interest in debating, only in arguing. So I'm ending with this:
1) The points you originally made are wrong. An AMD chip is in no way harmful to a computer, nor will it use 100w more than an i3.
2) You have not "won" nor "proven" anything - you've simply made yourself look a fool by presuming that the way to 'win' an argument is attack the other person until they shut up. That is incorrect,
rdc85
Honorable
- Apr 29, 2012
- 2,943
- 0
- 13,460
Actually i had a degree in computer science, especially on hardware..
It's seems silly to try have open discussion with person who don't wanna hear..
but i will like to clarify my statement, the actual power saved with going with intel will depends on the usage itself (I don't think this rig will run 24hr full power) so the actual watt different will be much smaller than what in the paper....
this different will easily offset by using better quality PSU, it always better if u can keep the usage around 30-80% of PSU capacity.
If the PSU is not a good one where the wattage itself is in question, Yeah u are right 100 watt different will blow the PSU 😀....
For ivy/sandy bridge i5, we don't know how much this chip will still available, we also don't know if the steamroller will had same/better/lower performance from the intel sandy/ivy. Or even if the op will upgrade or scrap and build a new one centered on haswell/broadwell, or some allien attack will destroy us all (joking..)...
It's seems silly to try have open discussion with person who don't wanna hear..
but i will like to clarify my statement, the actual power saved with going with intel will depends on the usage itself (I don't think this rig will run 24hr full power) so the actual watt different will be much smaller than what in the paper....
this different will easily offset by using better quality PSU, it always better if u can keep the usage around 30-80% of PSU capacity.
If the PSU is not a good one where the wattage itself is in question, Yeah u are right 100 watt different will blow the PSU 😀....
For ivy/sandy bridge i5, we don't know how much this chip will still available, we also don't know if the steamroller will had same/better/lower performance from the intel sandy/ivy. Or even if the op will upgrade or scrap and build a new one centered on haswell/broadwell, or some allien attack will destroy us all (joking..)...
Manufacturers ratings.
Intel i3 2100 60 watts.
Amd p11 x4 965 125 watts (recently reduced from 140)
Source;cpuboss.com;
peak system power
intel i32100 106 watts.
amd p11 x4 965 176 watts.
annual commercial energy cost
Intel i32100 $93.47
amd pii x4 965 $152.42
Annual home energy cost
Intel $37.88
amd $54.06
So Whadya know? As I stated
The AMD chip in the Red corner, uses > TWICE as much electricity as the Intel chip, in the blue corner.
Obviously, under your current thinking, as it uses twice the power it will last twice as long.
Why dont we even things up a bit? How about we install a 60 watt Light bulb inside our intel pc case.We could run all those extra watts through the motherboard as well, to keep all the power controllers etc busy. Then the fans and psu will have to work harder, and all the components in the box will stay nice and warm. That should make the whole system last ten years or more. .
Original poster, the i3 2130 is the latest incarnation of 2100. its faster. Ivy bridge vs is better still, but priceyer. The intel system hs a a great upgrade path. From an engineering pov its a no brainer, But its your money and your choice. My personal experience of advanced micro devices over the years at work is that after a few years they just vanish.
Intel i3 2100 60 watts.
Amd p11 x4 965 125 watts (recently reduced from 140)
Source;cpuboss.com;
peak system power
intel i32100 106 watts.
amd p11 x4 965 176 watts.
annual commercial energy cost
Intel i32100 $93.47
amd pii x4 965 $152.42
Annual home energy cost
Intel $37.88
amd $54.06
So Whadya know? As I stated
The AMD chip in the Red corner, uses > TWICE as much electricity as the Intel chip, in the blue corner.
Obviously, under your current thinking, as it uses twice the power it will last twice as long.
Why dont we even things up a bit? How about we install a 60 watt Light bulb inside our intel pc case.We could run all those extra watts through the motherboard as well, to keep all the power controllers etc busy. Then the fans and psu will have to work harder, and all the components in the box will stay nice and warm. That should make the whole system last ten years or more. .
Original poster, the i3 2130 is the latest incarnation of 2100. its faster. Ivy bridge vs is better still, but priceyer. The intel system hs a a great upgrade path. From an engineering pov its a no brainer, But its your money and your choice. My personal experience of advanced micro devices over the years at work is that after a few years they just vanish.
- Apr 27, 2009
- 38,733
- 4,064
- 143,290
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0
My TX750 is 5yrs old and has powered chips that used much more power than a Phenom II and is still running strong. (Overclocked Kentsfield Xeon) Even had a PhII 940 for awhile. My system uses even more power now than it did back then given the GPU's I am using. I only had a single HD3870 back then. You statement is nothing more than fanboyish drivel.
You are also comparing an older quad core chip, PhII, to a more modern dual core. .. How about comparing it to a similarly aged quad core. i7 920, for instance, uses roughly 20w less @ load. I know people that have had their i7 920's since launch and not one had power supply issues. With your line of thinking, we should all just run Atoms or E350's....
DarkSable
Judicious
- Sep 27, 2012
- 8,890
- 1
- 34,965
Logain, first of all, that youtube link is amazing. Second of all, thanks for the backup.
Chriss... you claim to have been working in the fields of math and physics for 40 years, but think that 176 is more than twice 106?
You're also again arguing a point that doesn't matter, desperatly doing the best you can to misconstrue my words to try to "win."
Whether you don't know how to make a point, or whether you're trolling, it doesn't matter.
Chriss... you claim to have been working in the fields of math and physics for 40 years, but think that 176 is more than twice 106?
You're also again arguing a point that doesn't matter, desperatly doing the best you can to misconstrue my words to try to "win."
Whether you don't know how to make a point, or whether you're trolling, it doesn't matter.
I am very happy your corsair 750 watt pro standard 120 DOLLAR psu has lasted 5 years. I expect to get that out of my cx600. and a few more. The post subject is 2100 v 965. i mentioned the 2130, as 2100 out of production, I suspect.
Please try to keep posts on topic.
Now if you dont mind, I have some serious engineering reading to catch up on.
Yours,.
The fan boy driveller.
Please try to keep posts on topic.
Now if you dont mind, I have some serious engineering reading to catch up on.
Yours,.
The fan boy driveller.
- Apr 27, 2009
- 38,733
- 4,064
- 143,290
Back on topic, I would go with a decent AM3+ board and go with the Phenom II and cooler. That gives you an upgrade to Steamroller at the very least. 1155 that the 2100 uses is being replaced with 1150 when Haswell comes out next month. Also the 2100 can't be overclocked and the overclocked PhII will do better in multitasking and in games that support more cores.
Back on topic. .
I would go with a decent z77 board and i3, and upgrade the processor to a 3770k in a year or so.That will keep you in front of anything amd can produce for games untill about 2017,
and the system will still actually post when you get there.
I would go with a decent z77 board and i3, and upgrade the processor to a 3770k in a year or so.That will keep you in front of anything amd can produce for games untill about 2017,
and the system will still actually post when you get there.
- Apr 27, 2009
- 38,733
- 4,064
- 143,290
Actually the AMD has a better upgrade path since 1155 is a dead end and there probably won't be many new 3770k's in a year but plenty of Steamroller based chips. An AMD setup would run just as long as an Intel one. Just let it go already....
TRENDING THREADS
-
News RTX 5090 cable overheats to 150 degrees Celsius — Uneven current distribution likely the culprit- Started by Admin
- Replies: 71
-
-
News Trump administration declares 'most powerful' AI chips will be built in America
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 13
-
-
News Third Ryzen 7 9800X3D burnout case appears, kills the CPU, and damages the motherboard socket
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 9
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram