Intel Core i3-2120 vs AMD Phenom II X4 965

[cannondale06]

yes I slam AMD in areas they deserve to be slammed on. Intel simply makes the better overall cpu at this point in time. lucky for AMD that most consumers lack knowledge or they would nearly be out of business.

[madpistol]

Originally Posted by cannondale06

yes I slam AMD in areas they deserve to be slammed on. Intel simply makes the better overall cpu at this point in time. lucky for AMD that most consumers lack knowledge or they would nearly be out of business.

Thanks for proving mine and HL2-4-Life's points.

[cannondale06]

Originally Posted by madpistol

Thanks for proving mine and HL2-4-Life's points.

are you capable of posting without rolling your eyes. he talks about his FX cpus like they are something special. if building from scratch only someone ignorant about hardware would consider an FX cpu over what Intel has to offer. sure that may be my opinion but it is based on FACTS about how the cpus compare. and nearly every professional review out there will agree with me.

[madpistol]

Keep digging bud.

[-RASCAL-]

Here are some more reviews for you to look at OP.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...rs-review.html

http://ht4u.net/reviews/2011/intel_s..._core_i3_2120/

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...2120-2100.html

As you can see, the Core i3 does a little bit better in gaming, but the Phenom II does do a bit better in some of the titles. In terms of 3D rendering, video / image editing, the Phenom II does a bit better of the majority. In some of the links provided, they used programs such as Blender, GIMP, and Photoshop for testing.

Someone had posted this before, but I'll use it as a...reference as well.
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/289?vs=102

I noticed that in one of the reviews the Core i3-2120 performs even better than the i5 and i7 Sandy Bridge alternatives...which is a little strange...


As a side, overclocking a Phenom II to ~4.0GHz will certainly not increase the power draw by 100W more - that is over estimated.

EDIT:

The Phenom II 955 is another choice over the 965. The 955 is simply a 965 with the multiplier dropped down by one (x16 vs. x17). You can always increase the multiplier in the BIOS if you wish. Additionally, the Phenom II 955 comes in both 125W and 95W (C3 revision) versions. So if you are a little concerned about overall system power draw, you can grab a 95W C3 chip. By the way, the C3 stepping overclocks better than the older revisions.

[cannondale06]

Originally Posted by -RASCAL-

Here are some more reviews for you to look at OP.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...rs-review.html

http://ht4u.net/reviews/2011/intel_s..._core_i3_2120/

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...2120-2100.html

As you can see, the Core i3 does a little bit better in gaming, but the Phenom II does do a bit better in some of the titles. In terms of 3D rendering, video / image editing, the Phenom II does a bit better of the majority. In some of the links provided, they used programs such as Blender, GIMP, and Photoshop for testing.

Someone had posted this before, but I'll use it as a...reference as well.
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/289?vs=102

I noticed that in one of the reviews the Core i3-2120 performs even better than the i5 and i7 Sandy Bridge alternatives...which is a little strange...


As a side, overclocking a Phenom II to ~4.0GHz will certainly not increase the power draw by 100W more - that is over estimated.

a Phenom 2 X4 at 4.0 will most certainly use 100 more watts than a stock 2120. the 2120 only uses about 30-35 watts and even the stock 965 uses about 100-110. that alone is already at least 55-65 watts difference. going from 3.6 to 4.0 on the Phenom will raise power consumption quite a bit depending on voltage.

[HL2-4-Life]

Originally Posted by cannondale06

are you capable of posting without rolling your eyes. he talks about his FX cpus like they are something special. if building from scratch only someone ignorant about hardware would consider an FX cpu over what Intel has to offer. sure that may be my opinion but it is based on FACTS about how the cpus compare. and nearly every professional review out there will agree with me.

Geez dude, you really ought to lighten up, down a beer or something. Did I say my FX was special? Did I even imply that it was special? Did I not concede that an i5/7 build would beat it? Man, you act like AMD owes you money or something. And please don't put words in my mouth, I have not said or implied that the FX was special. What did I say? That it was sufficiently good for gaming, that is the sum total of what I had said. Seriously, what is your problem?

I guess you must think anyone who buys AMD is some sort of ill-informed hick, but fortunately for us, the world does not revolve around you. Btw, as I had said in another thread, I put my money where my mouth is, I have a top end rig - Asus Rampage IV Extreme + i7 3960X - and I do know a little about hardware, despite what you may think, the FX was a fun build, something different. Guess what, I like how it performs because I am NOT as closed minded as you. Seriously, chill out dude.

[cannondale06]

Originally Posted by madpistol

I have to agree with this. I've seen almost no games where i3-2100 or 2120 actually benefited from the extra speed per core. Most games now benefit from more cores, and those that don't are so old that it doesn't matter anyway.

For modern games, the 965BE is better simply because it's a quad core, and a decent one at that. If you want to upgrade later to a different SB processor, the i3 makes a case for itself. However, for games, the X4 is going to outlast it.

Why people still recommend a dual core for a gaming rig is beyond me. Even the fast dual cores still don't match up to an older quad core when it comes to multi-threaded games.

please show me some games where the 965 is beating the 2120 with a playable difference if at all then.

[cannondale06]

Originally Posted by HL2-4-Life

Geez dude, you really ought to lighten up, down a beer or something. Did I say my FX was special? Did I even imply that it was special? Did I not concede that an i5/7 build would beat it? Man, you act like AMD owes you money or something. And please don't put words in my mouth, I have not said or implied that the FX was special. What did I say? That it was sufficiently good for gaming, that is the sum total of what I had said. Seriously, what is your problem?

I guess you must think anyone who buys AMD is some sort of ill-informed hick, but fortunately for us, the world does not revolve around you. Btw, as I had said in another thread, I put my, oney where my mouth is, I have a top end rig - Asus Rampage IV Extreme + i7 3960X - and I do know a little about hardware, despite what you may think, the FX was a fun build, something different. Guess what, I like how it performs because I am NOT as closed minded as you. Seriously, chill out dude.

I would certainly state that nearly anybody building a gaming pc from scratch is ill informed if choosing an FX cpu.

EDIT: we could do this all day. you AMD lovers will try and come with the silliest excuse to justify getting one over what Intel offers. I have nothing against AMD but facts are facts and Intel simply has the better cpu offerings and better upgrade path at this time.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...k,3120-10.html

If the above chart presents any surprises, they'd be the dual-core Pentium G630 and G860, which perform incredibly well, matching up to AMD's former Phenom II X4 955 flagship.

With the sub-$100 Pentiums performing so well, Intel's $125 Core i3-2100 easily beats more expensive Phenom II and FX models. And the $190 Core i5-2400 dominates the sub-$200 landscape without challenge, really. As such, we're almost-shockingly left without an AMD CPU to recommend at any price point.

AMD’s Phenom II X4 955 and FX-4100 could certainly appeal to buyers who insist on the ability to handle four threads at a time. At their $125 and $110 respective price points, however, they’re too close to the Hyper-Threaded Core i3-2100 to earn a distinguished recommendation. In our last sub-$200 gaming CPU round-up, we showed that the Core i3-2100 can match AMD's Phenom II X4 955, even while background tasks run in parallel with a game.

But, to be perfectly frank, Intel's processors are the obvious choice in titles that do demonstrate reliance on host processing power. It simply doesn’t make sense to spend more for less. And, in many games, high-end AMD processors demonstrate a quantifiable performance deficit compared to the Core i3-2100. For $190, a stock Core i5-2400 gets you more gaming prowess than any AMD CPU can hope to deliver right now, even overclocked.

[madpistol]

Originally Posted by cannondale06

I would certainly state that nearly anybody building a gaming pc from scratch is ill informed if choosing an FX cpu.

Or perhaps they simply want something different. But that thought never crossed your mind, did it?

Your antics are laughable. You really REALLY should just quit.

[cannondale06]

Originally Posted by madpistol

Or perhaps they simply want something different. But that thought never crossed your mind, did it?

Your antics are laughable. You really REALLY should just quit.

something different as in slower and more power hungry? yeah that makes sense.

its laughable, the amount of ignorance that is needed to justify buying an inferior product.

tom's review pretty much summed it up but perhaps you should email them and let them know that you will still prefer AMD.

[madpistol]

Originally Posted by cannondale06

something different as in slower and more power hungry? yeah that makes sense.

its laughable, the amount of ignorance that is needed to justify buying an inferior product.

toms pretty much summed it it up but perhaps you should email them and let them know that you will still prefer AMD.

Did I ever say I preferred AMD? No, I didn't. I said that I would choose a Phenom II X4 965BE over an i3 2120. If I were to build a new system right now, it would be either 2500k or 3570k based. They are both superior CPU's to virtually anything AMD has right now.

Calling me or anyone else ignorant simply shows that you are not open to other points of view, which in turn makes you ignorant. There is not only one right answer to every situation.

Also, your opinion is subjective. Not everyone shares it.

[cannondale06]

Originally Posted by madpistol

Did I ever say I preferred AMD? No, I didn't. I said that I would choose a Phenom II X4 965BE over an i3 2120. If I were to build a new system right now, it would be either 2500k or 3570k based.

Also, your opinion is subjective. Not everyone shares it.

my opinion is based on FACTs. look at the review I just linked too. toms came to the same conclusion I did about the i3 over the Phenom X4 based on FACTs. to recommend a slower more power hungry cpu on a platform that is not as favorable for an upgrade defies logic.

[HL2-4-Life]

Originally Posted by cannondale06

my opinion is based on FACTs. look at the review I just linked too. toms came to the same conclusion I did about the i3 over the Phenom X4 based on FACTs. to recommend a slower more power hungry cpu on a platform that is not as favorable for an upgrade defies logic.

As I had stated previously, whether your opinion is based on 'FACTS' or not, it is simply your opinion, others may share it, some may not. It is quite alright to state your opinion, let others state their and move on, the ball's in the OP's court, it is up to him to decide. But to consistently push your opinion thru like it is the only one that matters is.......well, being too self opinionated. You have stated your opinion, let others state theirs, and let the OP glean what he wants from them. Contrary to what you think, your opinion is just one of many, it is NOT more important than anyone else's. Calling anyone who builds an AMD rig from scratch doesn't defy logic, sometimes it is about cost.....not all of us are from the US. Would you believe that even an entry level Intel build cost as much as a mid level AMD build? Sometimes, it is simply for something different. I had three Intel builds, two with Extreme CPUs, when my Q6600 died on me, I was in the mood for something different, hence the FX build. You may think it is silly/stupid or defies logic to do so, but I cannot emphasize enough how little your opinion means to me. Am I pleased with the build? Damn right I am! Any regrets? Never! I have never regretted anything in life. Would I lose sleep over your low opinion of AMD?


Zzzzzzzzzzz..........

[Zodiark1593]

End the flame war, and flip a coin. Heads, go AMD, tails, go Intel.

Both are capable gaming processors, the Phenom having a lower performance per core, but has a greater peak performance when all cores are utilized, the Core i3 having good performance in single threaded tasks, but comes up short in heavily threaded tasks.

Edit: Video encoding counts as heavily threaded tasks, so that Phenom can make a great budget encoding platform.