OK Im buying it!

Okedokey

Okedokey

Well-Known Member
Yeah its a good processor. Don't be too disappointed, however even the i3 2100 beats the 965BE (better than a 955BE) in games which require CPU grunt, and for that matter, most (if not all) other applications that are not heavily multithreaded (most aren't).

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/102?vs=289#

Anyway, just answering your question. You will be able to play all of the modern games, some at medium settings but most at high. You will however be limited in the future with that CPU especially since its a dead socket. .

Either way, enjoy mate you will have a lot of fun with that computer so good luck!
 
Last edited:
jonnyp11

jonnyp11

New Member
but remember that for games like bf3 that are threaded the x4 will beat the i3 2100 so for what he wants it is great, and also that most games threaded for 2 cores prob won't be very demanding games anyways, some will of course, but most won't.
 
Okedokey

Okedokey

Well-Known Member
Dont forget, 2 cores with superior clock for clock performance will beat 4 mediocre cores every time. The i3 2100 beats the 980BE in multi tasking and gaming http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2011/07/01/intel-core-i3-2100-review/5 and gaming - oh and it has an upgrade path all the way up through the 2600K to ivy bridge.

The i3-2100 was again faster than the 980 BE, however, which managed a paltry 1,072. Overall, the i3-2100 scored 1,465 – enough to better anything from AMD
Click to expand...
Bittech

But its all academic as the OP has already made his/her decision and purchased.
 
Last edited:
J

JackMcHale

New Member
i dont mean any offense but bigfella seems like an amd/ati hater to be honest. so im not sure here, but i know from general knowledge that a quad core 3.2ghz processor. IS fast. and running with 4gb of 1600 RAM, with a sapphire 2gb 6950 for a GPU, i doubt im going to struggle playing games...............
 
StrangleHold

StrangleHold

Moderator
Staff member
The i3 2100 is a non turbo processor, which means its a dead locked processor. About all 955/965 will hit 3.8ghz. easy. And the few frames difference at stock clocks could only be seen through a benchmark.
 
Okedokey

Okedokey

Well-Known Member
jonnyp11 said:
true, he's only an intel fanboy, and since intel has no true gfx cards then he has no problem buying amd gfx cards
Click to expand...

And true fanboys reject the evidence. Have you not considered I couldve purchased from nvidia had I been such a amd hater? :eek: :confused: When AMD provide an equivalently powerful CPU line up ill be singing the praises and cost|benefit of them.

Strangle, yes its true you can overclock the amd chip and achieve higher results, however the i3 is faster than even the 980BE at 4.3GHz in most games and isn't far behind in highly multithreaded applications. But we're not talking about the 980BE are we, the 955 is lower end CPU so the difference is even greater.

StrangleHold said:
The i3 2100 is a non turbo processor, which means its a dead locked processor.
Click to expand...

This is not entirely correct.

Although the turbo functionality and the multiplier locking are completely unrelated, Ill agree that it cannot use turbo. However it is not locked at 3.0GHz. Intel is providing unlocking abilities for these CPUs, and given how well SB overclocks and the upgrade path available to the 1155 socket, the 955BE was a poor decision given the the i3 2100 is $6 more.

However, the i3-2100 is still a match for AMD’s quad-core CPUs – the Phenom II X4 980 Black Edition, which we'll be reviewing soon, could only manage 1,771, despite being clocked at 3.7GHz and sporting two additional cores. Intel clearly has a significant lead over AMD in terms of clock-for-clock performance.
Click to expand...
Bittech

Anyway Im sick of flogging a dead horse here, plus the OP is happy with what he has so the thread is over as far as im concerned. In light of the evidence however its quite obvious who the fanboys are, and a touch ironic.
 
Last edited:
J

JackMcHale

New Member
bigfella. you are the fanboy.
nobody else took that much time to do a reply. your obviously dedicated to defending intel.

Thanks everyone 'else' for the help on my build. will post a new thread with the build pictures and the completed result.

thanks again.
 
jonnyp11

jonnyp11

New Member
well bigfella is right that in many cases the intel cpus are faster, but on this system most others here will agree that an amd processor offers better value in most cases.
 
J

JackMcHale

New Member
yeah ive been told by quite a few people on here to go with AMD. and also in real life i have friends that build pcs aswell, just for gaming, and they say AMD all the way aswell.. I trust the opinions of 10 people over just 1.
and i trust that most people will agree with that lol.

thanks again.
case will be here today. will post build pics as i go along and let you guys know if i need any help!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top