1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

AMD FX, FM1 or X6 ???

Discussion in 'General Hardware' started by Krazy Owl, Jan 12, 2012.

  1. TheLaughingMan

    TheLaughingMan

    Joined:
    May 7, 2009
    Messages:
    4,998 (2.43/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,291
    Location:
    Marietta, GA USA
    AM3+ does not have the best IMC. Memory frequency means nothing when the throughput doesn't match the speeds. Intel Sandy Bridge has the best IMC right now.

    He wants a system now. The old, "Wait and see" answer will always and I mean always apply so he might as well just drop the hobby.

    While overclocking varies on a per chip basis, you are wrong here. Serveral review sites such as Hardware Heaven have gotten stable systems with the A8-3870K at 3.8 GHz. Some stopped around 3.6 GHz. The A8-3850 is only about $10 cheaper than the 3870K. The extra $10 allows you to overclock the GPU beyond the 600 MHz lock found on the other APUs, which was the point of going with it. With a robust cooler, you could get 5% to 20% more performance out of the GPU with a simple OC.

    CPU will be just fine on processor strength as it is a Phenom II Stars core. Settings for games varies. It really all depends on what you are classifying as a new game. Trine 2 was just released and an APU will play that game maxed out.

    With an APU system the cable for your display in CrossfireX goes into the motherboard to work. While HDMI via CrossfireX is possible, you may want to be sure the mobo has the HDMI port for it. Just saying.

    The wisdom of my favorite professor in college and the answer to every question ever, "It depends."
     
    eidairaman1 says thanks.
  2. Krazy Owl

    Krazy Owl New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2012
    Messages:
    900 (0.84/day)
    Thanks Received:
    77
    Location:
    Montreal
    Could I play BF2 multiplayer maxed out and at 1080P on HDMI 42" with 3870K APU without sluggish video? Normally I would prefer the AM3+ setup almost same price as apu but the fact isthat APU have far better onboard video than normal AM3 mobo.
     
  3. Dent1

    Joined:
    May 18, 2010
    Messages:
    3,220 (1.92/day)
    Thanks Received:
    951
    You had to crossfire to get borderline "OK" frame rates at medium. That isnt saying much considering the game is 2 years old. The OP runs a 42" screen @ 1080p, think how badly that set up is going to flop on newer titles like BF3, Arma III etc.

    Like I said earlier, on a APU the original BF2, yes. Bad Company 2, No. Battlefield 3 definitely not. You'd need a dedicated video card for most games post 2009-ish for your resolution (talking specifically about multiplayer games with human-CPUs with big maps. Single player campaigns should be fine)

    If you want raw performance AM3+ is your best option. Phenom II X6 typically OCs to about 3.9-4.2 GHz, Bulldozer OCs to about 4.2-4.8Ghz. It'll last longer (fewer upgrades needed) as newer titles are becoming multithreaded compatible. The general multitasking performance would be untouched (compared to APU). However you'd still need a dedicated video card if you want any sort of real gaming experience regardless of CPU.
     
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2012
  4. Krazy Owl

    Krazy Owl New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2012
    Messages:
    900 (0.84/day)
    Thanks Received:
    77
    Location:
    Montreal
    Then APU all the way :) I'v never really used multi tasking other than burning a dvd at same time chatting and watching a movie and it was not even pushing limit of my old Phenom 550 BE. Thank you guys I will order soon and try now to find a king of little cube lan box with only one 5.25" external slot for my dvd burner that it. USB ports in front of course and would even like an handle on top of the case to bring it around. Any ideas?
     
  5. fullinfusion

    fullinfusion 1.21 Gigawatts

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2008
    Messages:
    8,468 (3.34/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,206
    X6 and steer clear of those FX cpu's... better bang for the buck.
     
    Dent1 says thanks.
  6. Dent1

    Joined:
    May 18, 2010
    Messages:
    3,220 (1.92/day)
    Thanks Received:
    951
    It really didn't matter what advice we gave you would of went for the APU either way. 1080p, 42 inch screen with onboard video. You will remember this choice when you fire up BF3 or a more intensive in a year or two and reflect on your decision.

    As for the case try http://www.Newegg.ca

    FXs are still nice, but agreed Thuban X6 is better value.
     
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2012
  7. TheLaughingMan

    TheLaughingMan

    Joined:
    May 7, 2009
    Messages:
    4,998 (2.43/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,291
    Location:
    Marietta, GA USA
    I got "Ok" frame rate on a stock A6-3650 (HD 6530D). An A8-3850 or A8-3870K are 300 and 400 MHz faster on the CPU, and both have an HD 6550D which has 80 more rendering cores, 1 extra SIMPS, and 4 extra texture units. In general, the A8's GPU is 15% to 30% faster (we will say 22% for an average). If I could get high 30's at stock on an A6, an A8 should get to the mid 40's on BFBC2. And I did those test playing online multiplayer on White Pass with CrazyEyesReaper, Cadaveca, and some other TPU members.

    What I am trying to say is, you should really stop guessing and making speculations about what an APU can do, then telling me cause I have owned them and used them on a daily basis for months. I know, first hand exactly what they can do. With some tweaking an A8 APU can play BFBC2 on medium with a little eye candy just fine with no stutter. With a card to Crossfire, it should be able to run high at 60 FPS with few drops.

    Anyway, there is enough information here so I am done.
     
    Horrux and Dent1 say thanks.
  8. Dent1

    Joined:
    May 18, 2010
    Messages:
    3,220 (1.92/day)
    Thanks Received:
    951
    I'm not doubting the APUs ability, I'm just doubting it fits the OPs needs overall.

    Fair enough you managed to get decent frame rate with BFBC2 but the OP is running a much higher resolution than us. Plus his requirements is for BF3 too.

    Got a friend had a Q6600 @ 3.4GHz CF 4850 and he only got about 20FPS, he later upgraded to a 6850 and now gets 40FPS average at medium on BF3 (1680x1050). Another friend had a Core 2 Duo E5200 @ 2.5GHz and a 4830 and BF3 was completely unplayable even at low/low/low (144x900). A guy from university also had a Q6600 @ stock and 6950 (1680x1050), and his frame rate was terrible at low settings due to CPU bottlenecking.

    All my friends had much beefier GPUs and ran lower resolutions and BF3s frame rate was still poor.

    I'm not so much concerned about the APU, although its not my preference, I'm more concerned about trying to push BF3 with an onboard solution. Because I can say with 100% certainty it wont play BF3 well on less than a 6790/6850 tier card at 1080p.
     
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2012
  9. Horrux

    Horrux

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2011
    Messages:
    735 (0.57/day)
    Thanks Received:
    124
    The OP has also stated budget limitations.

    Please, if you have a better idea, post what will be better than the proposed solution for the same money. Right now all you're doing is saying it won't work. Which may or may not be the case, unless you have benchmarked exactly that setup in exactly that situation, which you have not.
     
    TheLaughingMan and Krazy Owl say thanks.
  10. Krazy Owl

    Krazy Owl New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2012
    Messages:
    900 (0.84/day)
    Thanks Received:
    77
    Location:
    Montreal
    My requirement could be for BF3 but for now ill stick with BF2 to get back on practice :p Will the FM1 cpu could manage the power of BF3? If yes then ill probably go for it and when money will be more available ill come back here to get an idea on a good videocard for bf3 since the cpu is powerful eough. Deal?? :p
     
  11. Dent1

    Joined:
    May 18, 2010
    Messages:
    3,220 (1.92/day)
    Thanks Received:
    951
    Yes the CPU is powerful enough. The GPU is the issue.
     
  12. eidairaman1

    eidairaman1

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2007
    Messages:
    13,647 (5.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,859
    ok from what ive gathered on FM1 the PCI Express 16 slots half bandwidth when 2 video cards are used so that means you only have 8X bandwidth between 2 slots.

    FM1 may be what is needed/wanted but if you want full bandwidth go for a 960T, 1090T, 1100T Processor unless if you dont want to overclock or dont need to.

    FX is a hard sell unless if you want to experiment with it for your own use. Bear in mind those processors are costing more than the Phenom II lineup
     
  13. Horrux

    Horrux

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2011
    Messages:
    735 (0.57/day)
    Thanks Received:
    124
    Even high end graphics cards don't fill the PCI-e x16 these days, or very barely... So... I think double x8 will work plenty well. It is not a problem.
     
  14. eidairaman1

    eidairaman1

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2007
    Messages:
    13,647 (5.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,859
    course they dont because be cant measure exactly how much bandwidth utilization they have. and they are staying ahead of the bandwidth bottleneck so they dont have to rush develop new PCI E standards (preemptively expanding the highway)
     
  15. Suhidu

    Suhidu

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    163 (0.12/day)
    Thanks Received:
    75
    Location:
    Florida, USA
    The discussion was about "Dual Graphics" (what was "Hybrid Crossfire") between the APU and a single 6xxx series card. I don't think anyone mentioned using two add-in cards in CrossFireX...
    You're right though, I don't think I've seen any dual X16(electrical) FM1 boards. Then again, look what little difference it can make.

    As far as the gains he'd get by going AM3/Phenom, he'd also be losing gaming functionality at that price-point. It's a win/lose scenario, but you do bring up good points to consider.
     
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2012
  16. Krazy Owl

    Krazy Owl New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2012
    Messages:
    900 (0.84/day)
    Thanks Received:
    77
    Location:
    Montreal
    I think that if I get an Asus mobo fm1 then the APU vid will be automatically shutted down if i buy a pci-e card and use that only. Based on previous AM3 ive got before when not using hybrid crossfire.

    In my newb opinion on vid card i think you better invest in a single 16X more powerfull card later on than to drop in a cheaper one and roll hybrid at 8X on both cards.

    So if i resume based on hat you told me all...phenom is better for multitasking, FX are even better than am3 but they both gonna have less powerful onboard video. FM1 is not the most powerful at multithreading but for normal task ill get a better onboard video quality and fps. So overall the FM1 is good enough for me considering my older games would run fine on 6550 serie.

    Am I right ? :p
     
  17. Dent1

    Joined:
    May 18, 2010
    Messages:
    3,220 (1.92/day)
    Thanks Received:
    951


    It will make little difference, the PCI-E @ 8x will not bottlneck performance on a practical level. It's shouldnt be a concern.

    I'm confused what you are asking. The FX 8xxx and Phenom II X6 are 6 and 8 core processors. Yes they'll be miles better at multitasking, encoding, trancoding, video editing, pretty much better in almost everything.


    Gaming isnt really CPU heavy (bar a few) and are generally coded to take advantage of only one, two, four cores, and hence why in most games (bar a few) the APU will keep up with the FX 8xxx and Phenom II X6 in today's games despite having less cores. However, as I pointed out earlier, the FX and Phenom II X6 will be capable at handling upcoming gaming titles better as developers will take advantage the extra cores and hence you'll be less likely to upgrade as soon.

    Onboard video isnt recommended regardless of what motherboard or platform you go with, if you are playing new games like BF3 you need dedicated. Get this onboard video stuff out of your head! Unless you are absolutely 100% sure older games is what you are playing.
     
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2012
  18. Batou1986

    Batou1986

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2005
    Messages:
    2,510 (0.75/day)
    Thanks Received:
    375
    Location:
    Baltimore MD
    "FX is a hard sell unless if you want to experiment with it for your own use. Bear in mind those processors are costing more than the Phenom II lineup"

    I keep seeing this yet its simply apples to oranges a black edition PII x4 cost more then the FX-4100 and the FX-4100 is faster on the charts lower power consumption and cooler.

    FX-4100 3.6 ghz BE $110
    PII X4 975 BE Deneb 3.6GHz $150
    PII X4 970 Deneb 3.5GHz $138

    If your considering F1 as an option i don't see how x6 and x8 cpu's factor in its like asking should i get the Ferrari or the Honda
     
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2012
  19. BeepBeep2

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2010
    Messages:
    236 (0.14/day)
    Thanks Received:
    42
    Location:
    Ohio, USA
    Holy jesus, of course it doesn't. SB's IMC blows it away. SB-E is a whole new monster.

    I'm talking in AMD-only. eidairaman1 said Llano had a better IMC between FM1, AM3 and AM3+, and that was incorrect. I even quoted it, in my post but you obviously neglected to read it...*shrug*
     
  20. Super XP

    Super XP

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    2,784 (0.78/day)
    Thanks Received:
    539
    Location:
    Ancient Greece, Acropolis
    Either wait for Trinity (FM2) or go for the cheapest FX CPU and a Mobo with IGP. Though you could always buy a 990FX mobo and a low to mid discrete graphics such as the HD 6750 or something.

    The upgrade path for this setup is upgrading to a Piledriver CPU and another HD 6750 for Crossfire.
     
  21. eidairaman1

    eidairaman1

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2007
    Messages:
    13,647 (5.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,859
    Kid listen- ive done research on this the Llano has better IMC than the Stars arch. Show respect to members here
     
  22. xenocide

    xenocide

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,154 (1.57/day)
    Thanks Received:
    466
    Location:
    Burlington, VT
    According to what? Everything I've read says the opposite.

    Sources:
    http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1766/13/
    http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-fx-8120-6100-4100_6.html#sect0
    http://www.anandtech.com/show/4955/the-bulldozer-review-amd-fx8150-tested/8

    Phenom II's higher IPC makes them better for gaming than FX CPU's when the number of cores are equal.
     
    eidairaman1 says thanks.
  23. Thefumigator

    Thefumigator

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    420 (0.18/day)
    Thanks Received:
    66
    Krazy Owl and eidairaman1 say thanks.
  24. LDNL

    LDNL

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    467 (0.33/day)
    Thanks Received:
    106
    Location:
    Finland
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2012
  25. Horrux

    Horrux

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2011
    Messages:
    735 (0.57/day)
    Thanks Received:
    124

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page