FX HIERARCHY

[woboy]

Vishera has reclaimed a lot of credibility for AMD.
There are also sale pricing on older chips.
These are uninformed guesses. Price/performance ratings/desirability.
Generation One:
4100>8120>8150>6100
Second Generation:
4170>8150>8120>6200
Vishera:
6300>8350>8320>4300
I feel shaky on the last two calls and am not sure I have the numbers straight.
Going across generations I just do not know.
newegg is listing the FX-6100 at $105 with code. (no sale?)
ATM the 6300 seems the sweetheart at $130 on sale.
Anyone know a good listing of performance across the generations?
Rough guess:
6300>4170/4300>8350> 8320 all good and "value" dependent on pricing and personal needs vs spendable. (6300/4300 pricing has been equal)

Just are some "never buy" at any reasonable price (yes you can have fun with any of these at low enough cost to you), or not?
And if so is the 6300/8350 likely to endure or be eclipsed?

 

[RGone]

Not sure what you are trying to do. Hard to make sense of listings that mostly seem to reflect what you think about cpu price.

I had FX-8120 and GOOD mobo and cooling. Would NOT have wanted a 4 or a 6 core FX. Now have an FX-8350 and STILL the good mobo and cooling and would not have a 4 core or 6 core Vishera. So what I like and can harness fits none of the slots you have described that I can see.

I would expect for most people that only have a middling mobo and cooling that a 4300 is about all they could push faster with reasonable expectations since the 6 core and 8 core Vishera's still 'make' heat if pushed hard.

 

[woboy]

Vishera has made the 8350/8320 popular, and the 6300 is coming up as a great bargaib/enry level processor.
The 6300 is 95 watts and about $130 on sale, appealing to many.
I build low cost/cheap computers for fun and experience.
I expect to see sales and "used" processors show up. I bought an AM3+ motherboard on sale (intended to replace an 880) but found an excellent deal on an 870 AM3.
If I want to build an FX computer, how would you rank the desirability of the various chips?
With the Phenom II the 960T or the 955 are more or less the high points.
I cannot find benchmarks for FX-6100 vs FX-6300. FX- 4170 vs 4100. FX- 6300 vs FX-8120.
The reviews usually state owning the first generation, upgrading is not necessary.
Which would make chips equally desirable across the generations depending on price.
This is not true for 6100 vs 6300 or 4100 VS 4170.
What I would like to know is if there is a most desirable/ almost as good/fair/not reccommended choice list.
ATM it looks like
6300>4170/4300>8350/8320/8150/8120?[best performers] with avoid 6100?possibly 4100?
I built Athlon II and Phenom II computers using sale/used CPUs. Took too long to swith to I3/Pentium builds.
It appears, people are wearing down my disappointment in FX.
I am disabled and work part time. I build "to build" (purchase and assemble) then give away or sell cheap [removing my video cards for "cheapies"].
Only three or four times a year.
So if you were hunting a new or used FX CPU, probably to use and enjoy for three to six months and unless mightily impressed, give away or sell (selling home built computers is money losing for me).
Which chips to hunt for to make a "keeper" vs passing thru??
fwiw Anandteck BENCH FX-8150 vs FX 8350 (scroll down)
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=697
8150 vs 8320
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=698
8150 vs 6300
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=699
8150 vs 4300
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=700
The gaming benches are limited and at stock speeds. Limited to what is on website.
Anyway I am asking users to rank their experience using these chips.
RGone is very happy with his 8120, which I need to know.
He also restates the prevalent information concerning getting the "best" from FX.
Thanks to RGone and hopefully others ranking their real world experience.
Basically I think I want to which surpass or come close to a Phenom II CPU experience.
Though curiousity will probably lead to an FX build.

 

[RGone]

@woboy, when you made this statement of intent >> "Basically I think I want to which surpass or come close to a Phenom II CPU experience" << You have turned the field of play on its' edge and an entirely new result will be produced.

You only need to think back to the release of the Bulldozer processors and the rank disspointment of the AMD faithful generally and mostly overall. The BullDozer cpus were such underperformers in most AMD users minds that AMD dried up retail sales of fast Thubans so users would have to buy an FX processor. You remember now don't you?

IMO FX proessors be they Bulldozer or PIleDriver version should be run on 9xx series motherbords. There is not and will not be 'onboard' video with any 9 series chipset mobo.

Now we return to your statement above and wanting to relive the Phenom 2 performance experience and until you get to the newest FX Piledriver processor can you truly experience that wish.

Some sort of wizardry in the newer Piledriver lineup has certainly made them the 'only' choice of FX processor today. They do actually perform real work faster core for core than the FX Bulldozer. Piledriver is in people doing work, a better thing. You can read about BD vs PD pretty extensively in the AMD forum section. Look for threads or posts by ssjwizard. Good reading when he writes.

I am writing from what " I " have seen trying to help users overclock their cpus which really is not rocket science and the net is just flooded with how-tos. So from that perspective some of what I have or will say may not apply.

Take for instance my thought that only 9xx type chipset boards need be used. IF you put any FX processor in a motherboard and USE the processor as designed you might find a 'good' older 8xx chipset board that will support (use not overclock) an FX processor and have onboard video. Nearly every post in this AMD Cpu forum section is someone wanting to overclock something/anything just let me overclock. You see my drift?

There may be only 5 to 10 'true' helpers that stay in this forum section regular. You can believe what they might say. The rest are mostly passers-thru. Clock me and let me outah here.

I say that to say if you do not overclock a very power hungry 6 or 8 core FX processor you might find onboard video in a previous chipset board.

If you follow much of my 'personal' posting, I am still at my age one of those that subscribes to the GO Big or Stay at Home, theory. Hehehe. You will n0t want to build a system required to support an 8 core FX 8 core processor and GIVE it away. Too expensive.

So enter the newer FX-6300 that seems fast becoming everyone's new darling. It should be roughly 10 to 15% more powerful in real work than an FX-6100. AND be a little less HOT to deal with. AND begin to match up with your statement about giving one the previous Phenom 2 experience. FX-6100 need not apply. They don't have the real muscles of the Thuban 1090Ts and 1100Ts. But the FX-6300 has come to do business and when dolled-up rightly to do some serious over-clocking seems a real gem for the AMD faithful.

So if a FX-6100 has not the muscles of the two bigger Thubans, then you can extrapolate that the 4 core Bulldozer need not apply to whip-up on 955BE/965BE etc.

An FX-6300 with ample supporting cast at roughly 4.3Ghz is where it is at for most of the AMD faithful most likely.

In your try and give away situation, I take it, i would be investigating the AMD APU line-up. They will have onboard Video and there are probably a number of people moving from the older Llano version to the Trinity version APU and you could likely enjoy happier hunting in that arena and have onboard video to allow you to remove your video card and pass the rig on. It is a part of having to deal with the newer AMD marketing direction and the APU may well be more inline with what you seem to do with a system in the end.

RGone.

 

[ssjwizard]

I would say that the current performance rank of AMDs offerings looks a bit like this

8350 > 8320 > 6300 > 81xx > 4300 > 61xx > 41xx

If you factor price in for the average user the 6300 is definitely in the performance/cost sweet spot. Given that in almost any situation the 6300 can run circles around an 81xx BD that choice is a no brainer. TBH as much as BD was a step in the right direction it should be left in the past where it belongs. I cant honestly say that I would recommend a BD to ANYONE now that vishera is out. I cant say that about SB vs IB as both have there own merits and the difference is not so great as to make it irrelevant to go for a new SB build.

 

[woboy]

Good answers, thanks. I do not need on board graphics. I keep finding deals on low end video cards for giveaways.
EVGA had some refurbished GT240's, recently scored some gtx250s, all around $40 shipped.
Yes I will be building a couple APU systems, found two review samples motherboards for $40 each shipped (Asrock A75 Extreme6 and Sapphire Pure Platinum A75). I was too slow on a Tiger Direct CPU deal, but have an A8 3870 coming from amazon ($82). Like to find another 3670 deal.
For that matter one Intel advantage is I can give them away without video cards.
Anyway, when I first got disability I would lose benefits if my savings exceeded $2000.
Same week I was granted disability I was accepted for part time paid work training for work I can do (when medication lets me, sometimes things garble).
Always liked doing making things, can not work in machine shops any more.
Now I have to break the spending habit. Or not.
Better than watching tv.