clone wrote:I just picked 2 of the exact same mobo's for the respective processors. You can find cheaper P67s and Z68s than those
I'll take a look and see what I can find but I don't remember seeing any sub $100 p67 motherboards.
Welch wrote:Unfortunately if you pick and Asus motherboard, they are well known for pricing them similarly on both Intel and AMD. They are kind of screwing the AMD crowd a bit because the chipsets are generally cheaper to implement, or the cost rather, and i'm sure AMDs standards for mobo manufacturers isn't as rigorous as Intel (the Apple of CPUs). Asus can usually demand that premium from both crowds because they have a certain image in the enthusiast community, partially and rightfully so, and some of it is a bit more hype than necessary, I still buy Asus so lol.
Right now, I assume we're looking at everyday windows computing where gaming, rendering or encoding are the most taxing things a processor ever has to do. For Gaming, an i3 can run rings around bulldozer for the same money, and for rendering/encoding, an ancient Phenom II X6 can beat Bulldozer at a lower price point with lower clocks and a two-core disadvantage.
Welch wrote:That said Brew, is there an Asus AMD board with ECC for bulldozer? Considering BD's roots as a server chip, an FX-6100 may have a use for users putting BD to use as a home server, or perhaps compiling code, or maybe just Folding@Home for the Gerbils? I never really considered this during all of the talk people had about how bad BD was. If ECC is available, if not for a home server, how about a small-medium sized business' server? I'd imagine someone had to put out some benchmarks in this type of application with all of the "BD is a server chip" talk.
flip-mode wrote:Seriously, now. It's pretty tough to get a good grasp of the FX 6100 due to the dearth of quality reviews of the thing around the web. The reviews that can be found aren't the best, and they often pit the FX 6100 against CPUs that are out of it's price range. I don't see the point of comparing the FX 6100 to the i5 2500. The i5 2300 - which I've never even heard of before just now - is $180 and is much closer to the $150 price of the FX 6100. The i5 2400 is $190 and seems a much better value than the i5 2300. Then there's the Phenom II X6 1045T at the exact same $150 price as the FX 6100. All prices Newegg. But reviews of the FX 6100 that I've seen don't include any of those processors.
Being at work, I haven't been able to do much searching, but this is the best review I've found so far:
http://www.guru3d.com/article/amd-fx-81 ... e-review/1
I would quite like TR to put out a review of the lesser FX chips, with some balls to the wall overclocking and all. TR doesn't seem to think they're even worth reviewing.
bru_05 wrote:Yeah if you stick with newegg for prices then the 2500k isn't as good of a value. Microcenter has the i5 2400 for $149, I usually check there first then go to newegg. Nice to have a BM store for computer parts
They have an i3 2100 as well for $99. Check Anandtech's Bench and you can compare most any processor out. http://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU/2
*EDIT* - Except for BD, only have the 8150 ha fooey... Here is another review. http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/di ... html#sect0
flip-mode wrote:I'm fortunate enough to be close to a Micro Center as well. It's too bad you have to be a walk-in to get that price.
I saw the X-bit review and was nonplussed, but I never remember about AnandBench... I'll have to give it a quick look .... and it looks like Anandbench doesn't have the FX 6100 either! Did I miss it somehow?
bru_05 wrote:Luckily for me Microcenter is a 5 minute drive, so I always try to check there first. They will price match Newegg most of the time too.
flip-mode wrote:bru_05 wrote:Luckily for me Microcenter is a 5 minute drive, so I always try to check there first. They will price match Newegg most of the time too.
It's 10 miles for me and they absolutely refuse to match any online prices. It's interesting that the one by you will do that.
Yep, and making a $150 CPU decision without a proper review doesn't fly well for me. It's really surprising that none of the top tier review sites have looked at these at all. Are they that bad?bru_05 wrote:Anyway, there aren't a whole lot of reviews for the 6100... A good place to check might be the forums at Overclock.net in one of the BD club threads. Probably be able to find some benchies there.
flip-mode wrote:Yep, and making a $150 CPU decision without a proper review doesn't fly well for me. It's really surprising that none of the top tier review sites have looked at these at all. Are they that bad?bru_05 wrote:Anyway, there aren't a whole lot of reviews for the 6100... A good place to check might be the forums at Overclock.net in one of the BD club threads. Probably be able to find some benchies there.
I found a P67 for $95 but if you've found some for notably less I'll update my post, took a look at the Asrock on Newegg but it was also $95bru_o5 wrote:There are three currently listed on Newegg -- two from Asrock and one from Intel.
I hope you don't really believe that price doesn't play a role in every consumers purchasing decision.... that said I agree their is a lack of decent FX-6100 reviews.Flip-Mode wrote:Hey, now that we've moved beyond arbitrary and pointless litmus test system budgets
the problem with non K series cpu's is that the multiplier is locked, they do perform nicely at stock speeds though and when I was working within budgetary constraints the i5 2320 at 3ghz listing for $185 was interesting until the Microcenter offering i5 2500k for not much more blew it out of the water.
on a side note I haven't really been looking into overclocking lately and just read the "locked multiplier" concern from a review talking about how poor the non "K" series is for clocking.
Welch wrote:The 955 be and 965 be are actually really easy/good overclockers. The 965 BE is a 3.4 stock and hits 4.2 easily on air. Most people reported getting it to 4.4-4.5 with aftermarket cooling without and issue and upwards of 4.8 if it was out of a good bin.
clone wrote:I'll take a look and see what I can find but I don't remember seeing any sub $100 p67 motherboards, ok I'm just going to edit as I find data so their will be several to this post as I go.I just picked 2 of the exact same mobo's for the respective processors. You can find cheaper P67s and Z68s than those
also NOTE: prices will be in Cdn and that U.S. pricing will likely be 5% lower, because USB 3.0 support is so limited I'm passing on it's value, because Crossfire and SLI are so limited I'm passing on their value as well, for ppl who really need USB 3.0 and are planning on using 2 gfx cards combined in all their micro stuttering glory you'd likely not be interested in the data I'm presenting.
AMD FX 6100 platform (with overclocking)
http://www.ncix.com/products/?sku=67664 ... omoid=1201
http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php? ... omoid=1078
VS i5 2500k platform (with overclocking & NOTE: these numbers are pricematched so if the link shows a higher price it's because I found it cheaper elsewhere and would pricematch it)
http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php? ... cture=ASUS
http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php? ... omoid=1078
remember their is also a tax issue to be noted, it's not a lot but it is real and can't be avoided so with the $100 difference you have to add another $10+ to the price for i5 2500k platform depending on region.
first off WOW what a difference, I really hadn't expected to find sub $65 mobos for AMD FX, also FX is cheaper vs i5 2500k and both are impressively overclockable.
if it were me I'd go with the Asus mob for $62.00 just because I've no love for MSI but even at $212 for cpu and mobo FX6100 vs $305 for cpu and mobo i5 2500k that's almost an extra $100 that can pay for the extra 8gb's of ram & better video or even better video sticking with just 8gb's of ram or toss it at an SSD..... i5 2500k while impressive, I'm not sure is that impressive.
I love my SSD and I'd love better video and FX 6100 is a decent cpu especially for the price.
ta dah their is not only a viable reason to purchase FX 6100 but arguably a good value reason for buying vs i5 2500k for some.
Walkintarget wrote:Welch wrote:The 955 be and 965 be are actually really easy/good overclockers. The 965 BE is a 3.4 stock and hits 4.2 easily on air. Most people reported getting it to 4.4-4.5 with aftermarket cooling without and issue and upwards of 4.8 if it was out of a good bin.
I beg to differ on this one. I have an earlier C3 965 BE and it hits a hard wall at 3.8. I can up the voltage well past 1.45 and it can boot into Windows but not complete benchs. It is fine all day benching at 3.7, but I am sure that it could never, even on its best days, hit 4.2+. Comparing my OCs on my BE with others over on Anandtech, there does seem to be a wall on those chips at 3.8ghz. How on Earth you guys can get 4.2 from them is beyond me. I'm using an MSI 790-G45 with perpetually on sale DDR3 10666 RipJaws
Welch wrote:I'm assuming something else you had in your system was keeping you from hitting that point. Either that earlier revision was a better OC contender, or something else in your system wasn't liking your OC. I also know he was using Corsair dimms, not sure the speeds, ect. I'll have to ask him but he has since sold the rig, but will remember all of those specs.
flip-mode wrote:My experiences match yours. I think my 955 BE is a C2. It'll do 3.8 with 1.5 and it gets very very power hungry at those voltages - 100 additional watts over stock settings which kinda blows my mind (of course, that's at the wall so there's some PSU overhead, but I've got an 80+ gold unit).
to be sure that's why I chose a P67 mobo because the $50 AMD board did support overclocking.volduit wrote:I'd just like to point out that the lower-tier i5 processors (2300, 2400 etc) are not unlocked but you can still unlock the upper turbo multipliers (up to 4 speed bins) for overclocking (as long as you have a P67 or higher chipset). They're only ~$30 more than the FX-6100, and realistically, you're not going to be overclocking that 6100 on a $50 board for very long before everything blows up
it's a valid question and one that plagued me when I decided Bulldozer was junk and started looking for an alternative during the early reviews.Flip-Mode wrote:OK, serious question: why go 6100 at all when the 1045T can be had for the same price and will offer higher performance at the same clock?
clone wrote:that said I just fixed a friends computer and he offered to go to Micro Center for me and grab some parts so I think I'll be going i5 2500k with a p67 mobo... will have to look at the differences between p67 and 68.
That's a hefty reward! Sheesh, what'd you fix his mainframe?clone wrote:that said I just fixed a friends computer and he offered to go to Micro Center for me and grab some parts so I think I'll be going i5 2500k with a p67 mobo... will have to look at the differences between p67 and 68.
ronch wrote:This means you have to overclock an FX-6100 or an FX-6200 to 4.0GHz to reach (approximately) the aggregate performance of an i5-2500K. Each FX core @ 4.0GHz will score 1,130, which still falls way below an i5-2500K core's score of 1,686 ... but you have two more cores.
ronch wrote:...should you wish to leave the 2500K (at stock) behind for just $15 more...
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests