• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

AMD FX 4100

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

Bardock

Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2012
Location
Athens,Greece
So, i'll be getting this CPU and I was planning to stick it onto an Asus M5A99.. I did a bit of research and I found out that it can also work on a A97. So my question is, which one is better to buy (taking into consideration an HD 7770 will be used).

Thx in advance
 
http://www.overclockers.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7404903&postcount=5

ssjwizard recommended FX boards or heavy overclock.

The top 4 or 5 boards listed are able to take a good cpu with awesome cooling up to a very good overclock.

The lesser boards are good for like 90/94% of what a good cpu with awesome cooling can do.

1. M5A97 R2.0 was not good enough to keep my buddies FX-4170 overclocked to 4.5Ghz because the VRM circuit is not stout enough.

2. The newer REV 3.0 boards by GigaBut listed at that link are proving to be a giant pain in the butt for users with FX processor. They took a pretty good REV 1.1 and replaced the cheaper $100 Gigabut boards with REV 3.0 and they are driving FX processor users nuts so far. Rumor was 6 weeks ago that Gigabut said they would release a bios to fix the FX throttling issue but no full time user has said they had a bios fix yet.
RGone...
 
the guy i'm building this rig for is not really interested in overclocking (yet), he just wanted a good CPU to start with. So, any ideas?
 
The M5A99fx pro would work fine for a 4100 but I would get the 4300 just a better performing CPU. I had my 8350 at 4.5 in the pro but had some cooling issues that I think wouldn't be so prominent with a quadcore.
 
not really interested in overclocking (yet) = It is that very thing that must be tripping up so many cheaper board buyers that are using FX processors and 'then' decide they do want to overclock and find they just don't have a decent platform to push an FX processor.

Intel probably makes the better gaming cpu as things stand today. The Intel cpu is just a little stronger in pure gaming. So everyone hears that if you overclock the AMD it tends to catch up with the Intel in gaming situations and then the trouble starts for the cheaper board buyer.

Cheap boards generallyl have no heatsinks on the Mosfets for the VRM circuit. The VRM circuit is not robust enough electrically. The problem came when the motherboard was bought and the outcome was decided for FX processor use in an overclocked condition before they ever began to overclock.

I have worked closely with motherboards for a long time now and I have never seen it so silly as it is today for pushing an AMD processor, specifically the FX series. The calibre of motherboard determines the outcome of the project before the system is even cranked up for the first time and in my opinion far too many are trapped by under-powered equipment at the outset.

That is the only thing I intended to make as clear as possible before the first money was spent and the outcome decided when the motherboard was purchased.


What Johan is suggesting is from his personal experience and I trust his judgement rather fully. He has spent his time in the FX processor bull-ring.
RGone...
 
The M5A99fx pro would work fine for a 4100 but I would get the 4300 just a better performing CPU. I had my 8350 at 4.5 in the pro but had some cooling issues that I think wouldn't be so prominent with a quadcore.

Bump.
I'm getting the FX 4300 and I will be most probably getting the A99fx.. If I use the A99X, what's the "margin difference" between those two, practically,on overclocking?
 
Max Overclock of CPU Mhz with FX-4300 vs FX-4100. Not enough difference to hiccup about or sneeze. If one had followed the Bulldozer/Zambezi to Piledriver/Vishera transition, it was often stated that the later Piledriver might have a slightly lessor Max Cpu Overclock speed. I did not find that to be so with my FX-8350 cpu though. Max Cpu Mhz was about equal. BUT the PD outworked the BD 8 core processor by about 12 to 15% at the 'same' clockspeed. So clock for clock the PD does more real work than the earlier BD FX processor when tested at the same Cpu Speed.
RGone...
 
Max Overclock of CPU Mhz with FX-4300 vs FX-4100. Not enough difference to hiccup about or sneeze. If one had followed the Bulldozer/Zambezi to Piledriver/Vishera transition, it was often stated that the later Piledriver might have a slightly lessor Max Cpu Overclock speed. I did not find that to be so with my FX-8350 cpu though. Max Cpu Mhz was about equal. BUT the PD outworked the BD 8 core processor by about 12 to 15% at the 'same' clockspeed. So clock for clock the PD does more real work than the earlier BD FX processor when tested at the same Cpu Speed.
RGone...

I see.. And the difference of the FX-4300 on each mobo individually?(always about OCing)
 
The mobo won't make much difference at the quad core level you still need something that can support the power draw and like I said earlier the M5A99fx pro would work fine in my opinion. I would still choose the 990 chipset over the 970. You could even go with the 6350 for a few bucks more and it would handle it. I wouldn't put a 8 core in it though. It will run it but not much OC romm.
 
The mobo won't make much difference at the quad core level you still need something that can support the power draw and like I said earlier the M5A99fx pro would work fine in my opinion. I would still choose the 990 chipset over the 970. You could even go with the 6350 for a few bucks more and it would handle it. I wouldn't put a 8 core in it though. It will run it but not much OC romm.

OK thx a lot for the help guys. I will go for the fx 4300 and the A99fx. :)
 
The 4350 is only another $10. Curious to see what kind of improvements were made.
 
Back