Phenom II Quads still competent for gaming?

Would buying a brand new build with a 955 BE be a bad idea in this day and age? I'm wondering as my old build had a 2500k, (it's gone, don't ask.) and saving to get one of those is a bit out of the question (I got to get it within the month). I'd be using it for heavy gaming, mild-moderate video editing and maybe 3D rendering later down the road.

wouldnt be that bad i mean my old 955 was kicking it jsut fine and probably still can i only replaced cause me got amazing deal

Yeah, a 955 can still plow through most games. They respond pretty well to a moderate overclock too. Still competent for sure.

i have a 965 and it runs everything just fine ive never had any problems with it holding back my games. Just my GPU at times. If you get a 955 You will be fine and able to run everything out right now and probably will be able to do so for quite some time especially as games are making better use of quads. They also overclock well.

Also I can get an AM3+ board and not have a dead-end system. Thank you everyone for the feedback.

Would buying a brand new build with a 955 BE be a bad idea in this day and age? I'm wondering as my old build had a 2500k, (it's gone, don't ask.) and saving to get one of those is a bit out of the question (I got to get it within the month). I'd be using it for heavy gaming, mild-moderate video editing and maybe 3D rendering later down the road.

Zevante101

[QUOTE="Zevante101"]

Would buying a brand new build with a 955 BE be a bad idea in this day and age? I'm wondering as my old build had a 2500k, (it's gone, don't ask.) and saving to get one of those is a bit out of the question (I got to get it within the month). I'd be using it for heavy gaming, mild-moderate video editing and maybe 3D rendering later down the road.

Diwashb

[QUOTE="Diwashb"][QUOTE="Zevante101"]

Would buying a brand new build with a 955 BE be a bad idea in this day and age? I'm wondering as my old build had a 2500k, (it's gone, don't ask.) and saving to get one of those is a bit out of the question (I got to get it within the month). I'd be using it for heavy gaming, mild-moderate video editing and maybe 3D rendering later down the road.

04dcarraher

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"][QUOTE="Diwashb"] get an i3-2100...... its better for gaming needs.....Diwashb

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"][QUOTE="Diwashb"] get an i3-2100...... its better for gaming needs.....Diwashb

I said video editing in the OP >.>

[QUOTE="Diwashb"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"] getting a dual core in this day and age is a waste of money. in almost every multithreaded based app or game the measly 955 beats the i3 2100.Zevante101

I said video editing in the OP >.>

[QUOTE="Diwashb"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"] getting a dual core in this day and age is a waste of money. in almost every multithreaded based app or game the measly 955 beats the i3 2100.Zevante101

I said video editing in the OP >.>

[QUOTE="Zevante101"]

[QUOTE="Diwashb"] Why do you think so..... Unless he does some kind of video editing or something in that lane, its a perfectly good processor. Here are some benchmarks. Except on a few tests the i3-2100 is better or on par with the phenom ii x4 955. Not knowing the fact that only a few games have been optimized for quad core and even then there is very little difference in gaming performance is a waste of all that rank you have right there.

Diwashb

I said video editing in the OP >.>

lulz the dude just gave up a core i5 SB read OP more carefully. also the 8150 is pretty potent at video editing and multi-core. in an IT world i would take the 8150 over a 2600k most days of the week. Virtual machines FTW!

[QUOTE="Zevante101"]

[QUOTE="Diwashb"] Why do you think so..... Unless he does some kind of video editing or something in that lane, its a perfectly good processor. Here are some benchmarks. Except on a few tests the i3-2100 is better or on par with the phenom ii x4 955. Not knowing the fact that only a few games have been optimized for quad core and even then there is very little difference in gaming performance is a waste of all that rank you have right there.

Diwashb

I said video editing in the OP >.>

[QUOTE="Diwashb"][QUOTE="Zevante101"]

I said video editing in the OP >.>

ionusX

lulz the dude just gave up a core i5 SB read OP more carefully. also the 8150 is pretty potent at video editing and multi-core. in an IT world i would take the 8150 over a 2600k most days of the week. Virtual machines FTW!

[QUOTE="ionusX"]

[QUOTE="Diwashb"] Hmm in that case I think you should definitely go with the quad core. But the phenom line stops with the x61100t i believe. With a gen 3 1155 mb or the new ivy bridge motherboards, getting an i3-2100 now will get you relatively similar performance...... And there is upgradability to the i5,i7 2nd gen or 3rd gen which would kill any amds out there. I belive the quad core i5 would outrun any phenom or even the new bulldozer line..... Any ways its your call. Choose wisely, live well. Cherios :DDiwashb

lulz the dude just gave up a core i5 SB read OP more carefully. also the 8150 is pretty potent at video editing and multi-core. in an IT world i would take the 8150 over a 2600k most days of the week. Virtual machines FTW!

and until intel has a consumer 8-core/core module cpu of their own they are def unable to run 2 quad-core VM's which is a heck of a nice thing to use if you ever have (i have once on an intel xeon server)

you can bench all you liek synthetics are synthetics they mean little else.

and before you make a silly remark about xeon well im afraid the cheap xeon 8 cores cost $1200 and dual xeon quads are 400-500

http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103960

which makes that awfully tasty

[QUOTE="Diwashb"]

[QUOTE="ionusX"]

lulz the dude just gave up a core i5 SB read OP more carefully. also the 8150 is pretty potent at video editing and multi-core. in an IT world i would take the 8150 over a 2600k most days of the week. Virtual machines FTW!

ionusX

and until intel has a consumer 8-core/core module cpu of their own they are def unable to run 2 quad-core VM's which is a heck of a nice thing to use if you ever have (i have once on an intel xeon server)

you can bench all you liek synthetics are synthetics they mean little else.

and before you make a silly remark about xeon well im afraid the cheap xeon 8 cores cost $1200 and dual xeon quads are 400-500

http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103960

which makes that awfully tasty

[QUOTE="Diwashb"]

[QUOTE="ionusX"]

lulz the dude just gave up a core i5 SB read OP more carefully. also the 8150 is pretty potent at video editing and multi-core. in an IT world i would take the 8150 over a 2600k most days of the week. Virtual machines FTW!

ionusX

and until intel has a consumer 8-core/core module cpu of their own they are def unable to run 2 quad-core VM's which is a heck of a nice thing to use if you ever have (i have once on an intel xeon server)

you can bench all you liek synthetics are synthetics they mean little else.

and before you make a silly remark about xeon well im afraid the cheap xeon 8 cores cost $1200 and dual xeon quads are 400-500

http:// www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103960

which makes that awfully tasty

As an owner of one, competent but you're better off spending your money on Intel, specifically a 2500k but even the i3-2100 and up are better for gaming and just as good for other apps.

Of course it's still competent. We'd all have intel chips if it weren't.

The 955 overclocks easily right out the box. Excellent value for the price, no doubt. Comparable to the 2500k? With good cooling and a ton of OC'ing perhaps..

As an owner of one, competent but you're better off spending your money on Intel, specifically a 2500k but even the i3-2100 and up are better for gaming and just as good for other apps.

ChubbyGuy40

Naw you need a 3930k at least.

[spoiler]

Not really.

A Phenom II Quad is fine.

[/spoiler]

simple answer, yes

no u had a bad experience and u mad as a result. be honest thats what happened. i have had 0 problems with every amd cpu i own unlike my faulty PoS c2q

ionusX

I am being honest. I'm still on my 965 and if I had the money I'd upgrade in a heartbeat,

[QUOTE="ionusX"]

[QUOTE="Diwashb"] He said heavy gaming and mild video editing.... Have you seen that? Please have a look at the Benchmarks. I hope you change your opinion.

Diwashb

and until intel has a consumer 8-core/core module cpu of their own they are def unable to run 2 quad-core VM's which is a heck of a nice thing to use if you ever have (i have once on an intel xeon server)

you can bench all you liek synthetics are synthetics they mean little else.

and before you make a silly remark about xeon well im afraid the cheap xeon 8 cores cost $1200 and dual xeon quads are 400-500

http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103960

which makes that awfully tasty

[QUOTE="ionusX"]

no u had a bad experience and u mad as a result. be honest thats what happened. i have had 0 problems with every amd cpu i own unlike my faulty PoS c2q

ChubbyGuy40

I am being honest. I'm still on my 965 and if I had the money I'd upgrade in a heartbeat,

You had a bad experience shown by that one thread the other day.... Your configuration is wrong because everyone else is getting better results then you.04dcarraher

Yeah I'm sure owning the same CPU for 3 years and acknowledging there are better CPUs than it now is a bad experience. Configuration is wrong? No, the 965 just isn't as good as it was but you guys won't accept that. And really how can a configuration go wrong? If something was wrong it wouldn't work.

Oh and in that thread, I was correct as proven by benchmarks.

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]You had a bad experience shown by that one thread the other day.... Your configuration is wrong because everyone else is getting better results then you.ChubbyGuy40

Yeah I'm sure owning the same CPU for 3 years and acknowledging there are better CPUs than it now is a bad experience. Configuration is wrong? No, the 965 just isn't as good as it was but you guys won't accept that. And really how can a configuration go wrong? If something was wrong it wouldn't work.

Oh and in that thread, I was correct as proven by benchmarks.

Alright, I'll get an OEM 955 and use a Hyper 212+ to overclock it. Thank you everyone for the quick responses.

Alright, I'll get an OEM 955 and use a Hyper 212+ to overclock it. Thank you everyone for the quick responses.

Zevante101

Please...... Your Phenom 2 and a GTX 570 kills your brother's(or friend's cant remember) i3 2100 and 6850 , and yet you say his beats yours.... there's something wrong on your end. You just cant accept the fact that a Phenom 2 X4 is a better buy then a i3 2100..... also your bench's prove that Phenom's are faster with multithreaded based apps and games.

04dcarraher

The 570 kills the 6850, but it's being held back by the 965. If you venture to other forums they'll say the same thing.

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

Please...... Your Phenom 2 and a GTX 570 kills your brother's(or friend's cant remember) i3 2100 and 6850 , and yet you say his beats yours.... there's something wrong on your end. You just cant accept the fact that a Phenom 2 X4 is a better buy then a i3 2100..... also your bench's prove that Phenom's are faster with multithreaded based apps and games.

ChubbyGuy40

The 570 kills the 6850, but it's being held back by the 965. If you venture to other forums they'll say the same thing.

Please..... Phenom 2 X4 above 3 ghz barely holds back a 7970 above 1600x1200.

04dcarraher

If you play single-player games only (which he stresses multiple times in the review if you actually read it,) and all the Intel CPUs except one had a lead until it reached 1600p.

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

Please...... Your Phenom 2 and a GTX 570 kills your brother's(or friend's cant remember) i3 2100 and 6850 , and yet you say his beats yours.... there's something wrong on your end. You just cant accept the fact that a Phenom 2 X4 is a better buy then a i3 2100..... also your bench's prove that Phenom's are faster with multithreaded based apps and games.

ChubbyGuy40

The 570 kills the 6850, but it's being held back by the 965. If you venture to other forums they'll say the same thing.

Once you put the res to actual resolutions that people play at, the difference between CPUs all but disappears. I have a friend with a 2700k and a 5870 and a friend with a athlon II x4 640 and a 670, guess whose computer gets better performance.

[QUOTE="ChubbyGuy40"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

Please...... Your Phenom 2 and a GTX 570 kills your brother's(or friend's cant remember) i3 2100 and 6850 , and yet you say his beats yours.... there's something wrong on your end. You just cant accept the fact that a Phenom 2 X4 is a better buy then a i3 2100..... also your bench's prove that Phenom's are faster with multithreaded based apps and games.

GummiRaccoon

The 570 kills the 6850, but it's being held back by the 965. If you venture to other forums they'll say the same thing.

Once you put the res to actual resolutions that people play at, the difference between CPUs all but disappears. I have a friend with a 2700k and a 5870 and a friend with a athlon II x4 640 and a 670, guess whose computer gets better performance.

"Radeon HD 7970 CPU scaling performance review "

Conclusion..... "the long story short is simple, any modern age quad-core processor will do just fine with the Radeon HD 7970. You will start seeing CPU limitation mostly in the lower resolutions up-to 1600x1200, but considering that everybody is playing at 1920x1080/1200 these days the reality remains that you really do not need a 1000 USD processor."

Basically even with SP if there was any real cpu bottlenecking with the gpu you will see it. So your Phenom 2 X4 + 570 with BF3 should be getting better performance then an i3 2100+6850. And if you are not then the problem is you and or your configuration... no if's and's or butts.

Let me guess? the Intel based system?..... No? aw.....

"Radeon HD 7970 CPU scaling performance review "

Conclusion..... "the long story short is simple, any modern age quad-core processor will do just fine with the Radeon HD 7970. You will start seeing CPU limitation mostly in the lower resolutions up-to 1600x1200, but considering that everybody is playing at 1920x1080/1200 these days the reality remains that you really do not need a 1000 USD processor."

Basically even with SP if there was any real cpu bottlenecking with the gpu you will see it. So your Phenom 2 X4 + 570 with BF3 should be getting better performance then an i3 2100+6850. And if you are not then the problem is you and or your configuration... no if's and's or butts.

04dcarraher

Fire up something like Starcraft 2 or BF3, something online that'll actually tax the CPU. Even Skyrim will show it. Sad part is that he won't even be able to get the full performance of a 670 because his CPU bottlenecks it.

You missed the part where he clearly states that a faster processor will make a difference for multiplayer. Not only that but it also helps with the minimum frame rate, something they don't show/measure.

And no, nothing is wrong with the configuration. There is no magical force at work either. If there was something "wrong" with the configuration, it literally wouldn't work. I just reformatted this week, and Battlefield 3 still requires medium settings for a constant 30FPS+ performance. I can play on Ultra/high just fine in SP at 720p and even with 3D and still get 30FPS, but it's not the same story in MP.

Give it up BF3 runs flawless with 64mp , and so does Skyrim(it actually uses quads now) , Starcraft 2 is one game where it only uses two cores and intels faster architecture helps the fps with alots of units because that game is cpu prone . Its funny because all the people that have Phenom 2's X4 's above 3 ghz have no issue running games besides you....

Give it up BF3 runs flawless with 64mp , and so does Skyrim(it actually uses quads now) , Starcraft 2 is one game where it only uses two cores and intels faster architecture helps the fps with alots of units because that game is cpu prone . Its funny because all the people that have Phenom 2's X4 's above 3 ghz have no issue running games besides you....

04dcarraher

I won't give up anything, but you can cut the blind AMD defending. Modes like 64 conquest are what cause BF3 to stress CPUs, and that's why it doesn't reflect in single-player benchmarks.

Funny, venture outside this forum and you'll see plenty of that. It's not just me.

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

Give it up BF3 runs flawless with 64mp , and so does Skyrim(it actually uses quads now) , Starcraft 2 is one game where it only uses two cores and intels faster architecture helps the fps with alots of units because that game is cpu prone . Its funny because all the people that have Phenom 2's X4 's above 3 ghz have no issue running games besides you....

ChubbyGuy40

I won't give up anything, but you can cut the blind AMD defending. Modes like 64 conquest are what cause BF3 to stress CPUs, and that's why it doesn't reflect in single-player benchmarks.

Funny, venture outside this forum and you'll see plenty of that. It's not just me.

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

Give it up BF3 runs flawless with 64mp , and so does Skyrim(it actually uses quads now) , Starcraft 2 is one game where it only uses two cores and intels faster architecture helps the fps with alots of units because that game is cpu prone . Its funny because all the people that have Phenom 2's X4 's above 3 ghz have no issue running games besides you....

ChubbyGuy40

I won't give up anything, but you can cut the blind AMD defending. Modes like 64 conquest are what cause BF3 to stress CPUs, and that's why it doesn't reflect in single-player benchmarks.

Funny, venture outside this forum and you'll see plenty of that. It's not just me.

user error

If you play at 1080p you will be GPU bottlenecked in 95% of games even with a 955 and a GTX 680.

In multithreaded apps like 7-zip a 955 beats a 2100 and an 8150 beats a 2500k.

My next build will probably be intel but acting like a 955 isn't enough is just plain wrong.

Surprising amount of Intel fans on this forum.katana_duo

[QUOTE="katana_duo"]Surprising amount of Intel fans on this forum.mitu123