T4R
This topic is locked from further discussion.
cpus 965>4100 Now if it was the 4170, then it would be 4170>965[QUOTE="danjammer69"]
Wuhhh?
ClassicRockFTW
I wonder where the 4300 places in relation to the 4170 and 4100. It's clocked lower than the 4170, but has a 95W tdp. It's definitely better than the 4100, butI am not sure by how much.
[QUOTE="ClassicRockFTW"]cpus 965>4100 Now if it was the 4170, then it would be 4170>965[QUOTE="danjammer69"]
Wuhhh?
04dcarraher
Apparently that is false
965>4100 Now if it was the 4170, then it would be 4170>965[QUOTE="04dcarraher"][QUOTE="ClassicRockFTW"]cpus
ClassicRockFTW
Apparently that is false
how is it false?[QUOTE="jakes456"]
[QUOTE="kraken2109"]or Go home.mitu123
agreed.
I also agree. Way to miss-quote. Jake, is your life really that dull that you have to go round this site trolling? Maybe you need a hobby.Apparently the 965 is better than AMD FX 4170
Even though the 4170 has 4.2ghz and more cache. And (supposedly) better architecture. Im confused
965 isnt better the 4170 both at stock speeds, the 965 is faster then the 4100. now the newer 4300's are much better.Apparently the 965 is better than AMD FX 4170
Even though the 4170 has 4.2ghz and more cache. And (supposedly) better architecture. Im confused
ClassicRockFTW
[QUOTE="ClassicRockFTW"]965 isnt better the 4170 both at stock speeds, the 965 is faster then the 4100. now the newer 4300's are much better.Apparently the 965 is better than AMD FX 4170
Even though the 4170 has 4.2ghz and more cache. And (supposedly) better architecture. Im confused
04dcarraher
Which would be the better CPU tho?
965 isnt better the 4170 both at stock speeds, the 965 is faster then the 4100. now the newer 4300's are much better.[QUOTE="04dcarraher"][QUOTE="ClassicRockFTW"]
Apparently the 965 is better than AMD FX 4170
Even though the 4170 has 4.2ghz and more cache. And (supposedly) better architecture. Im confused
ClassicRockFTW
Which would be the better CPU tho?
For their prices I would look in the FX 6300 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113286[QUOTE="ClassicRockFTW"][QUOTE="04dcarraher"] 965 isnt better the 4170 both at stock speeds, the 965 is faster then the 4100. now the newer 4300's are much better. 04dcarraher
Which would be the better CPU tho?
For their prices I would look in the FX 6300 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113286Im trying to stay under 100 euros so thats out of the question
For their prices I would look in the FX 6300 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113286[QUOTE="04dcarraher"][QUOTE="ClassicRockFTW"]
Which would be the better CPU tho?
ClassicRockFTW
Im trying to stay under 100 euros so thats out of the question
Ok, then whats the price on the 4170 or 4300? if their above 100 euros then just get a Phenom 2 X4 955/965.[QUOTE="ClassicRockFTW"][QUOTE="04dcarraher"] For their prices I would look in the FX 6300 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E1681911328604dcarraher
Im trying to stay under 100 euros so thats out of the question
Ok, then whats the price on the 4170 or 4300? if their above 100 euros then just get a Phenom 2 X4 955/965.Phenom II X4 965 B.E is priced at around 70~85 while the 4170 is around 95 euros.
Im asking this because I've heard people say that the 965 is better than the 4170, however I find that hard to believe as the 4170 has superior architecture, bigger cache and has 4.2 ghz (phenom has 3.2 or so)
But I watched a few benchmarks and the 965 scored a little higher than the 4170 which is another cause of confusion
Ok, then whats the price on the 4170 or 4300? if their above 100 euros then just get a Phenom 2 X4 955/965.[QUOTE="04dcarraher"][QUOTE="ClassicRockFTW"]
Im trying to stay under 100 euros so thats out of the question
ClassicRockFTW
Phenom II X4 965 B.E is priced at around 70~85 while the 4170 is around 95 euros.
Im asking this because I've heard people say that the 965 is better than the 4170, however I find that hard to believe as the 4170 has superior architecture, bigger cache and has 4.2 ghz (phenom has 3.2 or so)
But I watched a few benchmarks and the 965 scored a little higher than the 4170 which is another cause of confusion
The phenom is clock for clock much faster than the FX series, so performance is much closer despite the large speed gap. The phenom is also a true quad core, the fx 4170 isn't really a true quad core processor.I would reccomend the phenom if you plan on overclocking at all. It is much easier to get a phenom to 4.0ghz than it is to get a 4170 to 5.0ghz, and the phenom will still probably perform similarly or better.
If not then just get whichever one is cheaper, the two are pretty close at stock. Just make sure to get an am3+ mobo so you have the capability to upgrade to steamroller or vishera 2.0 if you want to later down the line.
The only review with the FX-4300 and 6300
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/57615-amd-vishera-fx-6300-fx-4300-review-15.html
The only review with the FX-4300 and 6300
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/57615-amd-vishera-fx-6300-fx-4300-review-15.html
FireEmblem_Man
It's funny, when the p4 was slower than athlons clock for clock, you didn't see these comparisons all over the place.
[QUOTE="kraken2109"]
Single threaded:
Multi-Threaded:
Skyrim:
ClassicRockFTW
CAn you summarise that for me in words?
means almost nothing, aggregate vs aggregate is all that matters.
[QUOTE="ClassicRockFTW"]
[QUOTE="kraken2109"]
Single threaded:
Multi-Threaded:
Skyrim:
GummiRaccoon
CAn you summarise that for me in words?
means almost nothing, aggregate vs aggregate is all that matters.
Well this got deeper.
4170 v 965 be
??
[QUOTE="kraken2109"]
Single threaded:
Multi-Threaded:
Skyrim:
ClassicRockFTW
CAn you summarise that for me in words?
Phenom II X6 is best for multi-threaded apps like video editing. Phenom II X4 is still best for gaming (at least according to that site, I haven't looked in depth so it may not be accurate).[QUOTE="ClassicRockFTW"][QUOTE="kraken2109"]
Single threaded:
Multi-Threaded:
Skyrim:
kraken2109
CAn you summarise that for me in words?
Phenom II X6 is best for multi-threaded apps like video editing. Phenom II X4 is still best for gaming (at least according to that site, I haven't looked in depth so it may not be accurate).Those comparisons are bunk because they don't compare the CPUs at their default MHz nor do they show top overclock vs top overclock.
Phenom II X6 is best for multi-threaded apps like video editing. Phenom II X4 is still best for gaming (at least according to that site, I haven't looked in depth so it may not be accurate).[QUOTE="kraken2109"][QUOTE="ClassicRockFTW"]
CAn you summarise that for me in words?
GummiRaccoon
Those comparisons are bunk because they don't compare the CPUs at their default MHz nor do they show top overclock vs top overclock.
Good point, the new FX CPUs have high stock clocks.Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment