1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

AMD Bulldozer FX-6 6200 Black Edition 3.8GHz

Discussion in 'CPUs' started by ussff, Apr 2, 2012.

  1. ussff

    Gangster

    Joined: Jan 11, 2007

    Posts: 287

    I've read the Cyanide FX6100 review (A nice and honest approach! Budget gaming chip and that's my normal market!)... and read the AMD bashing thread :confused: that followed.

    I can say that 'cos I've only build budget AMD gaming systems, since socket A :cool: Athlon 1Ghz (with a moderate OC and like to buy slightly higher end RAM...) they never let me down and generally cost a lot less ££ than Intel!

    I've set my sights a little higher than normal (as this list is still almost current :p ) and thinking it has some scaleability and I'm looking at the Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD3, Crucial 8GB (2x4GB) DDR3 1600Mhz Ballistix Tactical Memory Kit CL8 (8-8-8-24) 1.5V, with an FX6200 3.8Ghz, but can I find an owner / review of this latest 6 core AMD?

    ...I suppose the "can i find an owner" comment will let lose the FX bashers :rolleyes: again... :D

    My thinking is that if the 6100 / 6200 doesn't work out; I can upgrade the CPU to the next generation if the gossip is good about AM3+ chipset.

    ...your thought's welcome on the FX6200 and options above! Is the Tactical (8-8-8-24) worth the extra cash over the Sport version on this weeks special?
     
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2012
  2. ussff

    Gangster

    Joined: Jan 11, 2007

    Posts: 287

    ...read the specs and looked at bang for buck - thinking of buying a 960t 'cos its a sub £100 phenom still on the market and will oc fine and unlock if I'm lucky, which kills off the other Phenom - 4x 965 as a challenger. That should see off the FX effect for now... :)
     
    Last edited: Apr 3, 2012
  3. CAT-THE-FIFTH

    Capodecina

    Joined: Nov 9, 2009

    Posts: 15,331

    Location: Planet Earth

    Here is a short review of the FX4170 and FX6200:

    http://www.pcgameshardware.de/aid,8...200-FX-6100-FX-4170-und-FX-4100/FX-4100/Test/

    I have not seen any others ATM.

    At least from the perspective of being a Core i3 2100 user myself the FX4170 does not seem too bad IMHO(around 5% faster to 15% slower than the Core i3 2100 although the Core i3 2120 is around £100 too). It seems a better CPU overall of gaming IMHO than an FX8150 due its stronger single thread performance,and hopefully,the price will be under £100 in the next few weeks(quite a few retailers have it for around £100 ATM). It can't quite catch a Core i3 2100 for gaming,but does not do too badly against the Phenom II X4 CPUs apart from DiRT3 which seems to cause issues for BD CPUs. Multi-threaded performance is a tad better than a Core i3 2100. OTH,it does have a 125W TDP though although idle power consumption is comparable to a Core i3 2100. The FX4100 series also tend to have less issues than the FX8100 series with heat and power consumption when overclocked(even with the stock cooler and there are a few posts on OcUK and overclock.net on this).

    The FX4170 seems to come with the same cooler as the 125W TDP Phenom II X4 CPUs:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxSa0DwY21c

    Also,the Gigabyte 900 series motherboards have throttling issues with FX CPUs. AFAIK,a newer BIOS does solve this issue.
     
    Last edited: Apr 3, 2012
  4. The Halk

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 13, 2003

    Posts: 11,812

    Location: Hamilton

    It used to be the case that AMD was an edge better than Intel across most of the board. It isn't the case now. Sandy Bridge comprehensively beats AMD at nearly all price points. The only glint is the FX-4100. Anything cheaper or more expensive and you're better off with Intel.

    Cyanide's review in my opinion was a post-purchase justification which is what a great deal of people do ; if they bought it then they'll defend it to death, regardless.

    You might consider me to be bias against AMD - you seem to be discounting anyone who says anything about Bulldozer as such, I'm afraid that couldn't be further from the truth.

    This century I've bought T-Bird, Palomino, Barton and Mobile Athlon, San Diego, Windsor, (missed Clawhammer, which is a shame as I really liked the name), Toledo, whatever an Opteron 185 was, Deneb and Thuban. During that time I've bought zero Intels

    I've always gone AMD. I looked forward to Bulldozer, I was quite excited about it and the return of FX - I've never owned an FX (although several I've owned have been the same silicon as FX). But as bulldozer approached it became clear something was wrong, and at launch I decided not to buy... and I'm glad I didn't. It offers nothing over my 1090t. Were it not for me finally solving my stability problems I'd be upgrading to Ivy Bridge later this month.

    Bulldozer is a good server chip. It has enough grunt to go up against Intel for raw processing power.... but it cannot bring that to bear in a usable way on the desktop. It's only possible with certain applications that are highly threaded. It's certainly not possible with games, only the odd exception gives Bulldozer a good viewing.

    On top of that Bulldozer doesn't overclock as well as the K parts that Intel make do - although you need to go to a 2500K to get any overclocking. Plus they are way less efficient than Intel so you've got a lot more heat to deal with.

    If you want to have faith in a CPU then by all means pick AMD, but if you want to be cold and rational about it then I'm very sorry to say that AMD are not competitive at the moment.

    The good news is that Bulldozer has done ok as far as sales go, it's a good server part. AMD themselves are doing very well against nVidia and the next gen consoles are rumoured to be powered by AMD GPUs. That means AMD will stay in the game... the greatest advances we ever saw in recent times were when AMD was hammering Intel with Athlon 64s and Athlon x2s, meanwhile Intel was failing in spades with Prescotts... as long as AMD are still afloat then there's hope of that coming back. Until then Intel will slow down and maximise profit margins.
     
  5. frank_grimes

    Gangster

    Joined: Mar 9, 2012

    Posts: 244

    Can personally recommend the 960T (if you can find one)

    I have mine in the asus sabertooth board and unlocked to x6 @ 4.02Ghz, doenst get above 54oc with prime or IBT.

    Bargain for 90 quid imo.
     
  6. mmj_uk

    Capodecina

    Joined: Dec 26, 2003

    Posts: 20,457

    If you do go with the AMD then I'd advise against the Gigabyte range in favour of Asus Sabertooth, Gigabyte's don't seem to have the same raw power delivery which is even more important with Bulldozer (when overclocking).
     
  7. MNA24

    Gangster

    Joined: Nov 19, 2011

    Posts: 150

    Location: North East

    This is true, I encountered it with a GA-990FXA-UD5 which is one up from the UD3, it has terrible Vcore droop and forces you to up the voltage just to compensate which produces way too much heat, the UD7 has LLC functionality but also a price tag that isn't worth it. Asus is definatly the way to go.
     
  8. ussff

    Gangster

    Joined: Jan 11, 2007

    Posts: 287

    I read that the UD7 and UD5 were terrible for Vcore - but the UD3 didn't suffer the same drop off, hence I went UD3 - am I right?

    I'm looking for an SLI mobo that can offer dual PCIe2 x16 lanes (which isn't yet proved as the sweet spot - just another small future proof guess from me for a gaming rig)... at sub £120 :p The Sabertooth ... I'll look again but it looked a little overpriced and GI Joe for my Red / Black HAF 912 LOL!
     
  9. ussff

    Gangster

    Joined: Jan 11, 2007

    Posts: 287

    ...the unlock is the 'sweet spot' that has my eye - they are still out there at around £96 which is a good saving on the FX 6200 at £130 ;)
     
  10. ussff

    Gangster

    Joined: Jan 11, 2007

    Posts: 287

    Massive thanks to ALL contributions.... Its nice to see people taking the time to share!

    1Ghz Athlon AXIA - start of my revolution :D

    I have a skt 939 FX51 in a box ...it went there when I bought the +4800 ...I never really took to the FX then! It seems the same now, too!

    The 939 +4800 is well past its sell date and I think I'm going to buy an AM3+ mobo with DDR3 ram and either a 960t or scout eBay for a 1100t and wait and see if the next AMD AM3+ CPU rises up to the right point!
     
  11. ussff

    Gangster

    Joined: Jan 11, 2007

    Posts: 287

    :D My German is a little rusty - but the fx6200 does ok by my estimates, its nice to see the 960t on the same graph too, even if it is at the bottom :D ...but in reality my +4800 wouldn't scratch a snakes belly :p of that lot atm! So its all relative...
     
  12. ussff

    Gangster

    Joined: Jan 11, 2007

    Posts: 287

    Summary;

    Replace a 939 +4800, with 960t for under £100 with an AM3+ mobo and ram combo - wait and see if AMD pick up the ball, with future AM3+ CPU upgrades... its no more a gamble then normal :D
     
  13. Cyanide

    Mobster

    Joined: Mar 5, 2006

    Posts: 3,952

    Location: Nottingham

    Read my build log, I knew it wasn't the best before I bought it :p

    I did my research first and knew that the 2500k could be significantly faster in a lot of cases but I also knew that if I forked out the extra cash for one I wouldn't have such an awesome looking build :p
     
  14. ussff

    Gangster

    Joined: Jan 11, 2007

    Posts: 287

    Just looking at options:

    How well does an AMD PHENOM II X4 980 BLACK EDITION DENEB core Or AMD Phenom II X6 1055T 2.8GHz (95W) THURBAN core, sound as gaming options instead of FX6200.

    Don't you just love eBay :D specials
     
    Last edited: Apr 4, 2012
  15. braveheart

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Jan 3, 2007

    Posts: 1,106

    Location: Scotland

    ive upgraded fx 6200 in my own pc and put the 1100t in my 2nd pc.. i looked at pins as am3+ use 942 as am3 using. 938 pins.. and wei score for 1100t is 7.5 as fx6200 is 7.7... 1100t still good cpu as i keep it as second pc... i put fx6200 on my asus cfv seem good run.
     
  16. braveheart

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Jan 3, 2007

    Posts: 1,106

    Location: Scotland

    when asus put beta bios for chiv to use am3+ cpu but it wont fit or work cos am3 use 941 pins with 938pins cpu as am3+ using am3 as backward plus am3+ 942pins.. i dont think am3 mobo would fit to use am3+ cpu... only am3+ can use both cpu that fit easily.
     
  17. Bishie

    Hitman

    Joined: Sep 10, 2010

    Posts: 979

    Are those scores with or without overclocking? The default score for my FX-6200 is 7.4.
     
  18. braveheart

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Jan 3, 2007

    Posts: 1,106

    Location: Scotland

    without oc... cpu 7.7, ram is 7.6, graphic is 7.9 and hdd is 5.9. my pc runn fx6200 with g skill ripjawx 12gb and asus hd radeon 6970 also 2x1tb samsung f3 hdd...
     
  19. Bishie

    Hitman

    Joined: Sep 10, 2010

    Posts: 979

    Why does my score differ so greatly when both CPUs are running at stock speeds? Something to do with the motherboard, perhaps?
     
  20. braveheart

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Jan 3, 2007

    Posts: 1,106

    Location: Scotland

    i dont use amd stock heatsink as im still using thermaltake venus 12 and it could be motherboard that may differ... i used asus bios version 1301 for cfv..
     


Share This Page