Printable View
I am a INTEL user but recently I planning for purchasing AMD processor for gaming. But I have not any idea about AMD processor. Which AMD processor should I purchase and why? Please help for decide the select AMD CPU which is similar to my requirements. Thanks in advance……
For my opinion, I was going to put in the (X4 975) to the list also but wasn't a dissimilarity greatly other than the operating 3.6ghz frequency .Not importance the 30$ extra for 200mhz. Now 965 vs. 955 the extra 10$ is value the 200mhz. Anyways be belligerent here guys this is going to be the microprocessor I use for about 2 years!
I've at all times recognized Intel to vend say a 2.4ghz microprocessor as a 2.2ghz microprocessor for the reason that it failed the principles for a 2.4ghz. Wasn't definite how AMD did theirs for the reason that I've for all time been an Intel man until ATHLON 64's came out.
As well in terms of 955 vs. FX-4100 tie.. Wouldn’t an (L2) 8MB cache & (L3) 4 MB cache with 1833MHz memory viaduct out beat a 2MB L2 cache & 6MB with 1333MHz memory bridge? Not to talk about the bulldozer uses thirty watts fewer.
Nice much going to maintain the case, DL burner and PSU, from my dual core assemble. That leaves me to put up for sale the dual SATA drives 250GB, 1gb+ 1GB ram GSkill 6400, microprocessor X2-4100, and an shot audio on board with ALiveN6G-VSTA . Then once more I might not upgrade to SSD now yet and maintain the SATA drives. Might have to improve the PSU for the reason that it's only 12 lines + 430-watt dual. certain sufficient to run the board + possibly and CPU 1 16x card.. But Crossfire /SLI I'll require Watt 550/650 make available.
A Max speed ARTE on any released BD WHICH CONTAIN FX chip on air was about [4.5GHz], so 4.7 is out of the list. As well, a fine cooler is used for this OC approximately [4.5] on them, and can simply reach a confirmed PHENOM [IIx4 955BE] to 4.2GHz. End being, not anything is going to show a dissimilarity in presentation following [3.9GHz] in gaming, and if there is simple and Plain. My [955BE] is running 4.1GHz on a mid-high HSF ranged, and was 115$ on Newegg. I’m sorry, but an recognized top AMD chip for gaming, which the AMD [9xxs], sounds a lot better than unverified figures and benches.
put aside the other 10$ and obtain a 955, then clock to equivalent 975, those 3 are all the similar chip, just free with higher stand clock speeds
Moto So essentially your saying that AMD developed all the chips the exact identical, placed the default core clocks to [16x (955), 17x (965), and 18x (975)]? Charges 40$ only for a setting which is default on an unlocked chip? Sounds a tad totally or farfetched sparkling on AMD's case
sure, they grade the chips, good ones create quality in (975), roughly as good (965), average pass is (955), but they are the entire the similar wafer/die anything you desire to call it one slight improvement though to your query, ** sets the default core clocks to 16x (955), 17x (965), and 18x (975)? ** You meant multiplier.
I ongoing a assemble and waited for BD for myself but given new events, defaulted rear to a 975 as my support chip, it will work, I can clock it up and it’s a fine choice (I make out, I’m advising you to go [955], I don't have the budget limitation) . if Bd comes of time then I have the choice of looking at improvement later, but I won’t be looking until next generation comes out, same as informal builder just advised.
If you make a decision to go with a phenom X6 and put out of action 2 cores to make it an [X4], it will execute like an X4. Theban is made on a dissimilar procedure, so it will the majority likely use a small less power even though the disabled cores use a small control just being there.
It's for all time excellent to over clock the Northbridge next to with the cores in the Phenom II arch, so a (1055T) would do fine. I don't actually know how several games will found taking advantage of more cores, but something made with the Source engine loves cores and BF3 is capable to make use of the cores.
I would obtain the Phenom [II X4 965 BE]. The latest core Bulldozer doesn't actually offer much compensation. Also in solo threaded applications the Phenom II will execute better.
Bulldozer is a new structural design that AMD wants to tweak a bit in order for it to complete better. They need to center of attention on raising the clock rate since that was the unique reason of Bulldozer. There should be one extra microchip invention that will use socket AM3+ previous to AMD stops producing CPUs in total. Their future trickery in the APU structural design which combines the GPU and CPU. maybe AMD's expensive achievement of ATI will lastly come to fruition as a way to battle Intel custom of a power CPU core saddled with a comparatively weak graphics core.
The Phenom [II X4 chips] isn’t the identical. I choose the (970BE) based in part on the power utilization chart over at Anandtech. It uses particularly less power than the (965BE), even however it's quicker: all right, you can OC a 965BE or 955BE, but then it will suck down even additional authority, and create more temperature.