AMD - Bulldozer Chitchat

[Biscuit]

FX-4170 and FX-6200 have been released, I assume this is the new BD versions?

Wonder how well they will perform. Might get a FX-4170 if its decent

This is fairly old news isnt it, these have been out for around a month?

[mikeo01]

Ooops my bad, have they. Ignore me

[mikeo01]

OK another thing for me to consider, I know the FX-6100 is something like 3 cores with modules (something like that), so, would I be better off disabling 3 cores and upping the clock for it?

My overclock doesn't like anything past 3.9 Ghz, so was wondering if I should disable cores and up the clock, or would that defeat the purpose of buying a FX-6100?

[mikeo01]

OK right need some ones help.
Should I:

Stick with FX-6100 (95w)
Go over to FX-4100 (95w) and overclock
Go over to FX-4170 (125w) and overclock

My board supports 140w, but is 4+1 power phase. The extra cores on the FX-6100 doesn't go well with my board. But I disabled 2 cores and managed 4.5 Ghz. So, is it worth going for the FX-4170 125w version and overclocking, or will I can I get the same speeds if I overclock a FX-4100?

Thanks!

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Here is a short review of the FX4170 and FX6200:

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/aid,87.../FX-4100/Test/

The FX4170 is not too bad. It can't quite catch a Core i3 2100 for gaming,but does not do too badly against the Phenom II X4 CPUs apart from DiRT3 which seems to cause issues for BD CPUs. Multi-threaded performance is a tad better than a Core i3 2100. OTH,it does have a 125W TDP though although idle power consumption is comparable to a Core i3 2100.

Aria already have them for around £99.99,so if the CPU drops to around £90,it would be reasonable value.

Edit!!

It seems to come with the same cooler as the 125W TDP Phenom II X4 CPUs:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxSa0DwY21c

[watercooled]

You're probably at the stable power limit of your board, so it shouldn't make much difference what CPU you use, apart from the possible differences in the silicon, but IMO not worth spending more money on as you could end up with a worse overclocker. If you're looking to spend money, a better motherboard should be a better option.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

OK right need some ones help.
Should I:

Stick with FX-6100 (95w)
Go over to FX-4100 (95w) and overclock
Go over to FX-4170 (125w) and overclock

My board supports 140w, but is 4+1 power phase. The extra cores on the FX-6100 doesn't go well with my board. But I disabled 2 cores and managed 4.5 Ghz. So, is it worth going for the FX-4170 125w version and overclocking, or will I can I get the same speeds if I overclock a FX-4100?

Thanks!

Stick with what you have.

[dfour]

IMHO you would be better spending your £100 on either a :

Asus M5A99X EVO AMD 990X AM3+ Motherboard £97:19

or a

Asus Sabertooth 990FX AMD 990FX AM3+ Motherboard £127:19

Then your more likely to get the overclock your after.

[Bagnaj97]

IMHO you would be better spending your £100 on either a :

Asus M5A99X EVO AMD 990X AM3+ Motherboard £97:19

or a

Asus Sabertooth 990FX AMD 990FX AM3+ Motherboard £127:19

Then your more likely to get the overclock your after.

Or, if you're not using dual graphics cards, the Gigabyte GA-970A-UD3 (8+1 VRM) or Asus M5A97 PRO/EVO (6+2 phase VRM) - both cost around £80

[mikeo01]

Thanks guys, I was thinking about the FX-4170, only because less cores = higher overclock for me.

But yeah I actually looked at the Gigabyte GA-970A-UD3, mainly due to the chipset and power phases.

Problem is I have had these for 2 months, so I doubt I would be able to give them in easily. I could always equal it out by getting rid of the FX-6100 and going for the FX-4170 if it drops, leaving me a bit of cash for the motherboard?

I only bought the FX-6100 to test it I do game, but I am more thinking about a nice high overclock, which I assume would be easier with 4 cores instead of 6?

Considering in that review the FX-4170 kills a stock FX-6100. I am more thinking I could spend money elsewhere like suggested, a new motherboard.

Basically what could the Gigabyte GA-870A-UD3 give me as far as overclocking is concerned? Would overclocking the FX-6100 be worth it, or would I get a much better overclock with the FX-4170 that would out perform it? From that review CAT posted (thanks ) the FX-4170 out performs the FX-6100, wouldn't that mean with an overclock on both, the FX-4170 would still beat it?

On my current board disabling two cores allows me to overclock to 4.5 Ghz, having all 6 cores limits to 3.9 Ghz, which as stated its a power limit

I will see if the FX-4170 comes down in price, because maybe I really do need a better board.

I have always liked ASUS, but out of the two which one really should I go for, definitely sticking with BD never going to run dual graphics

Thanks for every ones help! Much appreciated!!

[watercooled]

You need to understand that all of the Zambezi CPUs have the same die, just the 4 and 6 core models have the remaining cores disabled. So when you disable two cores, you're essentially turning it into a 4 core, and on some boards you can do the reverse by unlocking cores provided they're not faulty.

A FX-4170 would not guarantee a higher overclock, especially with that board. You will always get a higher overclock with fewer cores enabled, people going for records leave as few cores enabled as possible.

I can recommend the http://www.scan.co.uk/products/asus-...e-20-(x16)-atx recommended by dfour in terms of features/reliability as I have one, but I've not attempted an OC on it, besides I have a Thuban so it wouldn't be entirely relevant anyway.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

A couple of my mates use the motherboards Bagnaj97 suggested,so they are pretty decent if you only have a single card setup.

Both Amazon and Ebuyer seem to be the cheapest places to but both motherboards:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Asus-M5A97-P...3106576&sr=1-3

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Gigabyte-GA-...3106576&sr=1-7

http://www.ebuyer.com/270702-asus-m5...oard-m5a97-pro

http://www.ebuyer.com/271788-gigabyt...rd-ga-970a-ud3

However,with the Gigabyte 900 series motherboards you need to make sure you have the latest BIOS,otherwise in many cases FX seroes CPUs have throttling issues.

[mikeo01]

The only reason the FX-4100/FX-4170 is interesting me is due to its higher overclocks and decent multi-threading. But what is the real difference between FX-4100 and FX-4170?

Thanks CAT for the links, well I have always been a fan of the ASUS boards, so providing that I have updated the BIOS, how does the ASUS M5A97 PRO compare with the Gigabyte GA-970A-UD3? I will only ever use one GPU because dual monitors does not interest me (except for doing work).

So really what would you all think would go well with each other. Looking for a very good overclock with the best noticeable performance really, considering I use the computer for general every day stuff and gaming.

Thanks everybody

[DanceswithUnix]

If all you care about is a monster overclock, disable 4 cores and overclock the 2 remaining

Disabling 2 cores on a 6100 gives you a 4x00 cpu, so I don't see any point in buying one.

[watercooled]

The only reason the FX-4100/FX-4170 is interesting me is due to its higher overclocks and decent multi-threading. But what is the real difference between FX-4100 and FX-4170?

As I keep saying, you are NOT guaranteed a better overclock with a 4000 CPU, if you get one it's purely down to chance. The 4100 and 4170 are exactly the same CPU just with a different stock clock speed. The 4170 will be generally be higher binned than current 4100, but this binning may have only started recently and the CPU you have could be from an earlier batch (and could possibly pass as a higher bin today, you just don't know without testing it), and either way, a higher bin still doesn't guarantee a higher overclock.

Thanks CAT for the links, well I have always been a fan of the ASUS boards, so providing that I have updated the BIOS, how does the ASUS M5A97 PRO compare with the Gigabyte GA-970A-UD3? I will only ever use one GPU because dual monitors does not interest me (except for doing work).

You don't need multiple graphics cards to use multiple monitors, and multi-GPU used on tech forums usually refers to Crossfire/SLI where multiple cards work together to increase graphics performance.

[mikeo01]

Could do that but defeats purpose of six core doesn't it. But I suppose, no point downgrading I will always have the extra cores when I need to I suppose.

And I know what SLI/Crossfire is, what I meant was I wouldn't use dual GPUs for graphics performance (i.e gaming on 3 monitors). Because I will only be using one monitor I meant I wouldn't need to go to crossfire in order to game at one monitor, because a single GPU is fine

But yeah thanks guys, I will stick with my FX, because it makes sense to disable and re-enable when I need to.

For the motherboard, what would do nicely with this? M5A97 PRO or Gigabyte GA-970A-UD3 (overclocking).

Thanks for every ones advice really appreciate it!