Will she blow?

I

isro

New Member
Hello guys,

I want to build this computer -


CPU - AMD FX 6100, 3.300MHz, 14MB, socket AM3+, Box

Motherboard - ShaggyByte

Ram - Any as long as it matches the MHz of the motherboard and it is DDR3. But 0. How many GB of ram should I buy? I was thinking 3-4 since I will be running Windows 7, 32bits.

PSU - Inter-Tech Energon 550W

Already have

GPU - HD 6850


So....
1. This is what I really do not understand:

How come a 6 core AMD FX 6100, 3.300MHz, 14MB, socket AM3+, Box is about 30% cheaper than a 4 core Intel® CoreTM i5-2500 SandyBridge, 3300MHz, 6MB, socket 1155, Box.

If I were to look at the prices, a 6 core AMD FX 6100, 3.300MHz, 14MB, socket AM3+, Box = 2 core Intel® CoreTM i3 2125 SandyBridge, 3300MHz, 3MB, socket 1155, Box

How is this possible?!?

I want to buy the AMD, but ... I really cant get my head around this price difference and how a 6 core AMD with 14 mb cache and 3300 could be the same price as a 2ual core Intel, 3300, 3MB cache. If that Intel is faster I should go hang myself because the world is beyond my understanding.



2. Do the above parts `match` up nicely and harmoniously?


Thank you ever so much!
 
Last edited:
From what i've read. The FX series has issues, and the i5 2500k processor is pretty much voted as a great processor for overclocking and seemingly problem free. Intel processors are usually more expensive than AMD, and Intel seems to be leading the market with better processors generally. My friend just bought an FX series processor. sofar so good. I have an i7 980x... no issues what so ever...Moar cores don't always mean faster speeds! it really depends on what you're going to b e doing. What do you plan on doing with your new computer? Gaming? Editing? browsing?

Also if you are BUYING a new windows. go with 64bit incase you feel like you need more than 4gb at any point. For daily web browsing 4 is plenty. if you are going to be doing any type of editing or game play. you might want to bump it up to 8gb.
 
Last edited:
Thank you very much for your reply!


Yes, I know more cores do not always mean more speed per say... But... 6 cores vs 2 cores, same clock speed, 14 MB cache vs 3 MB cache.... and still Intel is comparable? How the birds can that be?! For the same price wouldnt it be a bit crazy/hardcore/bada$$ to go for the i3 dual core and not an AMD with the same clock, 3 times more cores and 4 times more cache?!

And the closest intel I would consider, the 30% more expensive one, quad core... I would rather not pay that 30% and stick to the AMD, because it should be more than I need as it is. Is Intel really light-years away in performance and really worth that 30%? If yes, then adsafasldlfsafsagfasd!!!

The thing is that these components dont seem even close as architecture so why are they close in performance?!

I am interested in multi tasking, some gaming too.


Sorry if my Engrish is a little impossibruuu. It is not my native language, just my fap language.
 
Last edited:
cache doesn't do that much when it takes longer to access, which is one of bulldozers many design flaws if i remember correctly. It's like a new truck that costs 40k with a v8 and all, vs. a mustang or something along those lines, the mustang costs less, but can't haul as much (cach), but it uses less gas (electricity), and will go wayyyy faster, even though it has less cylinders or whatever and less horses. on paper the truck would look faster, but in life the mustang is way faster.

I would get 8gb's ram, games are starting to use a little over 4gb's, and it's so cheap it doesn't make much of a difference.

That psu is a crap brand, stick to the trusted antec, xfx, corsair, silverstone, seasonic, nzxt, and pc power and cooling. but 550w would be about right, that or 600.

also, may want to see if there is a microcenter near you, killer combo deals, but they don't ship them, unless you have a friend who might help ya out.
 
I'm sure the FX series will serve you well but I believe most people would still suggest the Phenom processors. I'd wait until someone with more knowledge than me replies to your thread :) reading reviews of the fx 6100. it seems like a pretty good processor. I'm sure it will perform through anything you will need to use it for.
 
unless you go to microcenter and get one of the deals, i'd go for a i5-2400 or something, still costs more than the 6100, and doesn't overclock, but at stock it still beats it.
 
you have made a huge mistake. Thermaltake is a very low end PSU. You should have gotten one from Antec, Corsair, NZXT, OCZ, PC power and cooling, Seasonic, Silverstone, or XFX. they are the good brands. I would either cancel the thermaltake one or return it and get one from one of these brands.
 
I am not an expert on architectures but here is what I have gathered from the other members here.

The module design that AMD has in the FX series resembles a single core with a multi threaded component added more than it does 2 fully independent cores per module. So I generally look at it like it is a tri core with hyperthreading rather than 6 cores.

Also since it is a brand new architecture, it is not as fast as Intel's architecture. In some cases it has shown to be slower than the pervious generation of AMD Processors.

Hopefully that explains it a bit better.

EDIT: I would go for the 2500K. But if you really do not want to go Intel, get 990FX board and a 1090/1100T. Those are true hex cores.
 
Last edited:
That is true, Salvage. An overclocked i5 will be pretty much the best gaming CPU for the price without going overboard over a few fps.

That being said, I would still recommend an FX over a 6-core phenom. They will outperform them just by sheer clock speed while overclocking, getting it above 4.5ghz easy. If the OP plans on no overclocking, the phenom would be the way to go.

And the module design is similar to hyperthreading, but not exactly. Kind of like intel's speedstep vs AMD's cool n quiet. And windows does not know what to do with the modules, which is part of the performance problem. Also a slow cache is the reason why it performs so badly in single threaded apps. I am really hoping they fix these problems with the new Vishera chips in the fall.
 
Last edited:
wolfeking said:
you have made a huge mistake. Thermaltake is a very low end PSU. You should have gotten one from Antec, Corsair, NZXT, OCZ, PC power and cooling, Seasonic, Silverstone, or XFX. they are the good brands. I would either cancel the thermaltake one or return it and get one from one of these brands.
Click to expand...

No, Thermaltake isn't very low end PSU. What you say is not true. Some Thermaltake PSU are high end and can be used as gaming with three video card. I can using GTX 560 on my Thermaltake 500 Watt, that is 36 AMP.

Thermaltake SMART 630W is 45 AMP. OP can use GTX 570.
 
claptonman said:
That being said, I would still recommend an FX over a 6-core phenom. They will outperform them just by sheer clock speed while overclocking, getting it above 4.5ghz easy. If the OP plans on no overclocking, the phenom would be the way to go.
Click to expand...

Good point. The only problem that I am seeing is that in games that actually require a quad core, would the 6100 be lacking. If he is overclocking there is a good chance that the FX would be in the 4.5 range and the 1090/1100 would get to 4GHz maybe 4.1. Not really sure what would be better.

claptonman said:
And the module design is similar to hyperthreading, but not exactly. Kind of like intel's speedstep vs AMD's cool n quiet. And windows does not know what to do with the modules, which is part of the performance problem. Also a slow cache is the reason why it performs so badly in single threaded apps. I am really hoping they fix these problems with the new Vishera chips in the fall.
Click to expand...

Right. I didn't really know how to say it better than that. I was just trying to make the point that it does not function as two separate cores.

I am hoping to see the new chips work the way that they are intended as well. It would be nice to see some more competition in the high end market.
 
if they get the caching figured out, they should be good. And windows 8 previews still get better performance out of the FX's than win7 patched.
 
Jamebonds1 said:
No, Thermaltake isn't very low end PSU. What you say is not true. Some Thermaltake PSU are high end and can be used as gaming with three video card. I can using GTX 560 on my Thermaltake 500 Watt, that is 36 AMP.

Thermaltake SMART 630W is 45 AMP. OP can use GTX 570.
Click to expand...

Just because you CAN use it with 3 video cards don't mean it is quality. I caould put 3 560s on a 1200 watt CoolerMaster PSU. That does not mean that it is high quality.
 
claptonman said:
That is true, Salvage. An overclocked i5 will be pretty much the best gaming CPU for the price without going overboard over a few fps.

That being said, I would still recommend an FX over a 6-core phenom. They will outperform them just by sheer clock speed while overclocking, getting it above 4.5ghz easy. If the OP plans on no overclocking, the phenom would be the way to go.

And the module design is similar to hyperthreading, but not exactly. Kind of like intel's speedstep vs AMD's cool n quiet. And windows does not know what to do with the modules, which is part of the performance problem. Also a slow cache is the reason why it performs so badly in single threaded apps. I am really hoping they fix these problems with the new Vishera chips in the fall.
Click to expand...

And thanks for posting that, looked up the Vishera chip. Aparently, quad-channel ram, possibly native dual socket boards (has a feature used to improve inter-die communications from the socket G34). Will be nice to see, and trinity should give a glimpse if it's out first.
 
wolfeking said:
Just because you CAN use it with 3 video cards don't mean it is quality. I caould put 3 560s on a 1200 watt CoolerMaster PSU. That does not mean that it is high quality.
Click to expand...

And you called 1200 Watt CoolerMaster a low end?

That is not my PSU that can support up to 3 video card btw. I can only have dual 9600 GT or one GTX 560.
 
coolermaster is mid range. That is as simple as it gets. They don't use the highest quality parts. The lowest I would go with 3 560s would be a corsair/seasonic/silverstone 900 watt or so. That is probably over kill, but it will be a high quality unit that can handle everything for years and they do use the highest quality parts.
 
wolfeking said:
coolermaster is mid range. That is as simple as it gets. They don't use the highest quality parts. The lowest I would go with 3 560s would be a corsair/seasonic/silverstone 900 watt or so. That is probably over kill, but it will be a high quality unit that can handle everything for years and they do use the highest quality parts.
Click to expand...

Okay. You get point. It depend on how much watt and amp PSU have for good quality. Unless you want japan capacitors that lasting longest. Thermaltake and corsair has it.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top