FX4170 and FX6200 benchmarks? - Overclock.net

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 23 Old 03-05-2012, 10:28 PM - Thread Starter
*cough* Stock *cough*
 
EliteReplay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,148
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Hi, AMD released those CPU at least on paper like 5days ago, but i cant find any review or any leaked benchmark of those CPU
can someone link me to any truthful info about them?

thanks in advance!
EliteReplay is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 23 Old 03-05-2012, 10:40 PM
Overclocker
 
Cannon19932006's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,021
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 138
They really haven't showed up retail, and for the most part i don't think many sites are extremely interested in reviewing these, The 6200 just popped up on newegg.com. I'm sure once they are showing up retail some reviews will show up... this is all i could find.

http://www.guruht.com/2011/12/amd-fx-6200-specifications-with-first.html
Cannon19932006 is offline  
post #3 of 23 Old 03-06-2012, 06:52 AM - Thread Starter
*cough* Stock *cough*
 
EliteReplay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,148
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cannon19932006 View Post

They really haven't showed up retail, and for the most part i don't think many sites are extremely interested in reviewing these, The 6200 just popped up on newegg.com. I'm sure once they are showing up retail some reviews will show up... this is all i could find.
http://www.guruht.com/2011/12/amd-fx-6200-specifications-with-first.html

well thanks but that is an old post... from last year that not relevant at all. rolleyes.gif
EliteReplay is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 23 Old 03-06-2012, 07:51 AM
 
Markus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Finland
Posts: 489
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 26
No benchmarks so far that I know of at least, but I'd assume that they're a tiny bit faster than the models that are already on the market.

Quote:
Originally Posted by zzM go_quote.gif
Who needs real women when you have a forum full of dudes with attractive chicks as avatars.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jellis142 go_quote.gif
Friendlier BSOD? So it's like a Blue Screen Of Coma?

Markus is offline  
post #5 of 23 Old 03-06-2012, 12:29 PM
 
Guovssohas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 97
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 2
Are they just a factory OC'd version? Or are there other differences? Seems i bit silly if it's just a factory OC imo.
Guovssohas is offline  
post #6 of 23 Old 03-06-2012, 04:18 PM
333mhz
 
polyzp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 324
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Its a simple factory OC, with possible better OCability than the 4100 and 6100, just like the AMD Phenom II 1100t ocs a bit better than a 1090t. (simply better silocone of the exact same chip). a 300 mhz clock boost will be a nice bump, but it wont perform better than just that.

In my opinion:

(Dual Module, Four threads) FX 4170 - is the new Phenom II X3 720 BE
(Triple Module Six threads) FX 6200 - is the new Phenom II X4 980
(Quad Module, Eight threads) FX 8150 - is the new Phenom II X6 1100t

So dont downgrade thumb.gif


the Real AMDFX
polyzp is offline  
post #7 of 23 Old 03-12-2012, 08:42 AM
PC Gamer
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: In the Ether
Posts: 26
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 0
For what it's worth,
Pass Mark has the FX-6200 up on the CPU charts at upper-mid, lower higher. Warning: Passmark is extremely subjective testing but provides some insight.

The interesting thing is, Passmark puts this FX-6200 above the FX-8120 by a fair 11.44% margin pressumably because the FX-6200 is 3.8GHz/ core vs the 3.1Ghz/core for the 8120. That's 11.44% faster than a 4core for @$20.00 less. Also the FX-6200 scores show only a 1.75% lower difference than the FX-8150 but $70.00 cheaper, nice chunk of change back in the pocket!

I've always been a fan of less cores but higher clocks. I mean come-on, only @2-4 games are out there for more than 2 cores right now that I know of. And, hyper-threading is useless for games unless you play Oblivion or Civ V. At the time, my little I3-550 (at the time) did just fine on games at 3.2Ghz/core vs. the I7 (at the time) with only 2.2ghz per core and the i7 only used 2 cores on the games I played so really the i3 at 3.2ghz/core= 6.4Ghz total was better for me than the I7 at 4.4ghz total on strickly 2 core gaming. smile.gif

So honestly, less cores (IMO) does not necessarly mean less power for gaming cause games are restrictive to 2-3 cores tops atm that I know of. So, I don't see what all this "OOOHH OHHH gotta have 8 cores" crap is all about if you're gonna be just gaming and medium-high web multitasking. Sure 8 cores if you're gonna do 20 things at once while Folding protiens at home, recording live TV and compling videos while using auto-cad and crap but honestly... since games are restricted to 2-3 cores, it's geek mass opinion frenzied CPU uneducated overkill IMO lol. Some of these "gotta have an 8core for BF3" gamers need to really question the salesman and read the game related technology and how the game works before they waste mommy a couple hundred bucks on an 8core just for gaming lol.

At $169.00 the FX-6200 is a great gaming platform chip esepcially since word is Microsoft fixed the single threading issue which 98%!!!!! of the games out there are single threaded!... again multithreading usless for guesstimated 98% of the games out there so (for the purely gaming aspect) it's a waste of money for the 8150 just because of one multithreaded core difference IMO.

Also, newegg reviewer says he's clocked his FX6200 at 4.4GHZ per core with more room to spare. If this 6core FX6200 truely is toping out the 4core FX-8120 by 11.44% and OC'ing very well; then, it might be the new chip for me... Sorry i5-2500k. Hello FX-6200 wink.gifthumb.gif

PS.. yes I'm assuming original poster IS a gamer... SCII profile pic and XFIRE CLUB quote on his post lol.
PSS... not having reviews on it after a while might actually be a good thing. Manfactures tend to not like having certain products in reviews constantly if they overshoot their other products too much. Example the EVGA 560ti 2win smokes the GTX 580 by 33% and the new 7970 by 10-20FPS depending on RES. but you won't see that card included in hardly any other top cards benchmark reviews unless it's a specific 2win or 2win comparison review.
RigRebel is offline  
post #8 of 23 Old 03-12-2012, 01:33 PM
333mhz
 
polyzp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 324
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 67
I suspect those passmark scores are incorrect, and they were pulled from the site it looks like.

the Real AMDFX
polyzp is offline  
post #9 of 23 Old 03-12-2012, 01:59 PM
PC Gamer
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: In the Ether
Posts: 26
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Yep... I just checked that aswell just now... dang that sucks. Have to wait and see.
RigRebel is offline  
post #10 of 23 Old 03-13-2012, 01:54 PM
AMD Overclocker
 
jonnyquality's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Exeter
Posts: 46
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 0
I have ordered mine, it arrives tomorrow,

I was running an FX-4100 , (or am right this second. )

and I've set it to stock and 4.7 OC to record test results, I will do the same tomorrow with the FX-6200 and post the results.

My Tests may not be as subjective as tomshardware or Passmark smile.gif but it will suffice for me smile.gif
jonnyquality is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off