what CPU is beter PHIIx4 960T non Unlocked (4Cores) or FX-4170 at 4.2Ghz ????

[eidairaman1]

This ^ All true.

The appealing thing about the 960T is the fact it uses a Thuban core. The one thing that makes Thubans more appealing than Deneb is the fact the IMC can be overclocked and perform much better plus the CPU in general can overclock a little better. It's about the same performance that you would get out of any Bulldozer chip.. So switching to BD would be a sidegrade at best.

ya depending on the clock rate used.

check those benchmarks for relative performance numbers at stock...

FX lineup require certain levels of clocks just to beat out a Phenom II in gaming performance

FX4100 vs BE 975 (Both at 3.6GHz) rest assured the 975 BE Pulls ahead stock performance

I can only really see the FX lineup pulling ahead in everyday tasks that are not gaming intensive

 

[Dent1]

FX4100 vs BE 975 (Both at 3.6GHz) rest assured the 975 BE Pulls ahead stock performance

I can only really see the FX lineup pulling ahead in everyday tasks that are not gaming intensive

The 975 BE wouldn't be significantly fast enough clock for clock to make the gap "pulling ahead" worthy. At best it will be +5 FPS separation which would make any result determined inconclusive.

 

[eidairaman1]

The 975 BE wouldn't be significantly fast enough clock for clock to make the gap "pulling ahead" worthy. At best it will be +5 FPS separation which would make any result determined inconclusive.

a separation is still a separation but other factors come into play, such as if the other runs cooler which i heard 4100 is a 95W TDP chip vs the PHII being 125W, but In reality i still take a temp gun to the chip to see how hot it runs to get a average between the temp monitors on the board and the temp gun.

The above link i had posted earlier doesnt have the 4100 compared to the 975BE as only the 4170 is there.

only other option would be to compare the 980 temps to the 4170s temps

 

[repman244]

such as if the other runs cooler which i heard 4100 is a 95W TDP chip vs the PHII being 125W

The one thing you need to be careful when comparing the TDP is that the 4100 can in reality be a 94W chip and it's therefor labeled as 95W TDP chip, and the PHII can in reality be a 97W chip and you can't be labeled as 95W anymore...

However I still don't see a point in even comparing the 4100 with a quad core Phenom II chip. Core per core the Phenom II is faster and you need more BD cores to match it, that's why I said an FX 6xxx would be better but only in multithread, in singlethread it's still weak.

 

[eidairaman1]

The one thing you need to be careful when comparing the TDP is that the 4100 can in reality be a 94W chip and it's therefor labeled as 95W TDP chip, and the PHII can in reality be a 97W chip and you can't be labeled as 95W anymore...

However I still don't see a point in even comparing the 4100 with a quad core Phenom II chip. Core per core the Phenom II is faster and you need more BD cores to match it, that's why I said an FX 6xxx would be better but only in multithread, in singlethread it's still weak.

you have to compare pricing, performance, temperatures that are running via reviews to determine if this chip would be better.

IIRC the 980 is 10 dollars cheaper than the 4170 but beats it considerably in performance. only drawback is under stressing the 980 does run a lil higher in power draw

980 at 3.7GHz vs the 4170 at 4.2GHz, Gaming the 980 is better.

if You can find a 960T that overclocks further than the 980 Base clock yet doesnt suffer in powerdraw, Id say go for it. if Not the 970,975,980 are good buys along with even the X6 1090/1100T if you can find them

 

[Dent1]

a separation is still a separation but other factors come into play, such as if the other runs cooler which i heard 4100 is a 95W TDP chip vs the PHII being 125W

Taking into consideration of any performance seperation, for new builds I feel the FX 4100 is still a better option because as you pointed out you are getting lower TDP and it overclocks easier and higher for the same price.

Now, in the OP situation I don't feel this would benefit him. He shouldn't sidegrade.

Core per core the Phenom II is faster and you need more BD cores to match it, that's why I said an FX 6xxx would be better but only in multithread, in singlethread it's still weak.

If you was to plot a graph the Phenom II would be faster. It's single threaded performance close enough to suggest is already matching it's performance. Just because something is slower doesn't mean it isn't matching it on relative level.


Edit:

only thing that makes me wonder is about TDP since its measured in watts and compared to the review both chips run above 125 Watts under load, yet the FX 6 and lower are 95W parts and the Phenom 2 is 125 Watt part.


Basically TDP makes no sense to me at all.

Makes no sense to me either. I've seen TDP related threads spanning 10+ pages where people have asked a similar question, but never read a conclusive answer.

 

[eidairaman1]

only thing that makes me wonder is about TDP since its measured in watts and compared to the review both chips run above 125 Watts under load, yet the FX 6 and lower are 95W parts and the Phenom 2 is 125 Watt part.


Basically TDP makes no sense to me at all.

Taking into consideration of any performance seperation, for new builds I feel the FX 4100 is still a better option because as you pointed out you are getting lower TDP and it overclocks easier and higher for the same price.

Now, in the OP situation I don't feel this would benefit him. He shouldn't sidegrade.




If you was to plot a graph the Phenom II would be faster. It's single threaded performance close enough to suggest is already matching it's performance. Just because something is slower doesn't mean it isn't matching it on relative level.

 

[Corduroy_Jr]

I would not bother upgrading a 960t to any other quad core. The 960t is just as good or better than any FX quad. If you want to replace the 960t, the lowest I would recommend would be the 6 core 4.1ghz turbo boost FX6200. But then again, if your 960t can be unlocked to a 6 core, I wouldn't upgrade it with anything AMD makes right now as any performance gains you'd get would not be worth what it would cost.

Any quad-core upgrade of the 960t without going Intel would not worth it money wise IMHO.

amd hater are we?

 

[eidairaman1]

amd hater are we?

lets keep on track shall we. no need to fight here

 

[StanMen]

This ^ All true.

The appealing thing about the 960T is the fact it uses a Thuban core. The one thing that makes Thubans more appealing than Deneb is the fact the IMC can be overclocked and perform much better plus the CPU in general can overclock a little better. It's about the same performance that you would get out of any Bulldozer chip.. So switching to BD would be a sidegrade at best.

so you recomend an Bulldozer buddy ? he i like bulldozer but i think that FX-4170 is slower than my 960T and 6100 is a bit like i say not super not bad and my 960T perform at same in my opinion how many friends here told me is beter option stay now with 960T and wait for new AMD CPU

 

[Corduroy_Jr]

yes exactly we have stated this many times stick with what you have either until pile driver or take the plunge to ivb if need be, cause like someone said above jumping to fx 8120 or fx 8150 is more of a side grade

 

[erocker]

so you recomend an Bulldozer buddy ?

You must of misread my post. I do not recommend BD at all.

 

[StanMen]

yes exactly we have stated this many times stick with what you have either until pile driver or take the plunge to ivb if need be, cause like someone said above jumping to fx 8120 or fx 8150 is more of a side grade

hehe i think that FX8120 and FX 8150 is a bit to much caus i even don't use too much progs that take so so many CPU's Use! hehe so i will stay for now with this CPU and i like it so much but if in stor where i buy ma 960T BE see some other serie of AMD Phenom II x4 9XX BE may be i will get one or one of AMD Phenom II x6 1055T also a good and i think is beter than my in many ways! he dno guys

 

[StanMen]

You must of misread my post. I do not recommend BD at all.

hehe srry ma back buddy i understand he

 

[suraswami]

From your system specs, u mentioned the 960T can unlock the extra cores.

If I were you, I will unlock the 960T and OC all cores to 3.4 and be done with it.

I went from PII X2 555 unlocked to X4 @ 3.8 to PII X6 1045T OCed to 3.2. Saw no big drop in performance in BF3, but my load watts has gone down by about 100w and my HD media render time is reduced resonably. With the 100W extra I can easily add another 6870 for CF and get better gaming if needed.

 

[Super XP]

The only upgrade here is an FX 6xxx, but you will still probably have lower single thread performance.
The only thing that BD improves is the IMC, and performance in applications which benefit from new instructions.

http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/mac/reviews/AMD/Bulldozer/AMD_FX-8150-18a.jpg

Source: http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...5-amd-bulldozer-fx-8150-processor-review.html

AMD lacks the proper R&D resources to 100% perfect a CPU design before release. This new style of design (Bulldozer >> Piledriver) in time should perform and scale dump loads better than anything AMD has every released to date. It will just take time for them to utilize this style of design in the right way.

To the topic starter, stick to what you have and perhaps in around Christmas time, there may be new CPU releases and better choices.

You must of misread my post. I do not recommend BD at all.

That's just nonesense. It depends on your current setup. I went from a PII 940 @ 3.0GHz (3.60GHz OC) to a FX-8120 @ 3.1GHz (4.40GHz OC) at stock speeds and the Bulldozer wins. With my 4.40GHz OC, it's even faster. May not be the best thing out there, but for a $179 price tag, FX-8120 wins. But anyway take my advice above.

 

[erocker]

That's just nonesense. It depends on your current setup. I went from a PII 940 @ 3.0GHz (3.60GHz OC) to a FX-8120 @ 3.1GHz (4.40GHz OC) at stock speeds and the Bulldozer wins. With my 4.40GHz OC, it's even faster. May not be the best thing out there, but for a $179 price tag, FX-8120 wins. But anyway take my advice above.

No, that's just nonsense. I went from a 1100T to a FX-8150 and the 1100T wins. But whatever, at the time I was running CrossFire and in order to get the performance out of both cards I had to ditch AMD all together. It's sad and dissappointing for me. I would take the 960T over any BD chip any day.

 

[eidairaman1]

comparing performance numbers to the charts i have linked below the 980 and 8150 are on par pretty much despite the 8150 being considered an 8 core. if You get a 960T up to 3.7GHz You pretty much have a 8150 for a reduced price.

Comparing a 980 to a 4170- 980 has 700MHz less clock but beats it out in Gaming performance.

So I cant recommend a 4170 for gaming when the PHII Beats it in gaming and costs less.