Ultimate AMD CPU Showdown: FX-4170 vs FX-4100 vs Phenom II X4 955

Ultimate AMD CPU Showdown: FX-4170 vs FX-4100 vs Phenom II X4 955

Table of Contents

1. Introduction
2. Specifications of the AMD FX 4170
3. Specifications of the AMD FX 4100
4. Specifications of the AMD Phenom II X4 955
5. Benchmark Comparison: 3DMark Vantage
6. Benchmark Comparison: 3DMark 11
7. Benchmark Comparison: Cinebench R11.5
8. Benchmark Comparison: Pi Calculation
9. Benchmark Comparison: Gaming Performance
10. Temperature and Power Consumption Analysis
11. Conclusion

🧩 Introduction

In this article, we will be comparing three different AMD processors: the AMD FX 4170, the AMD FX 4100, and the older Phenom II X4 955. All three of these processors are quad-core CPUs that offer similar performance for a similar price. By analyzing their specifications and conducting benchmark tests, we will determine which processor stands out in terms of gaming, rendering, and overall efficiency.

🧩 Specifications of the AMD FX 4170

The AMD FX 4170 is an AM3+ CPU with a base clock of 4.2 GHz and a turbo clock of 4.3 GHz. It has a TDP of 125 watts and is manufactured with a 32 nanometer process. The FX 4170 offers 4 megabytes of level two cache and 8 megabytes of level three cache. It also supports DDR3 1866 memory natively.

🧩 Specifications of the AMD FX 4100

The AMD FX 4100 is also an AM3+ CPU with a base clock of 3.6 GHz and a turbo clock of 3.8 GHz. It has a TDP of 95 watts and is manufactured with a 32 nanometer process. The FX 4100 offers 4 megabytes of level two cache and 8 megabytes of level three cache. It also supports DDR3 1866 memory natively.

🧩 Specifications of the AMD Phenom II X4 955

The AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition is a Deneb CPU with a base clock of 3.2 GHz and no turbo core feature. It has a TDP of 125 watts and is manufactured with a 45 nanometer process. The Phenom II X4 955 offers 2 megabytes of level two cache and 6 megabytes of level 3 cache. It supports both DDR3 1333 and DDR2 1066 memory natively.

🧩 Benchmark Comparison: 3DMark Vantage

To assess the overall performance of these processors, we conducted benchmark tests using 3DMark Vantage at the performance preset. The FX 4170 scored approximately 10,400, the FX 4100 scored around 9,100, and the X4 955 scored 11,100. Although the Phenom II X4 955 takes the lead in this benchmark, the scores are relatively close, making it difficult to Notice a significant difference.

🧩 Benchmark Comparison: 3DMark 11

Next, we analyzed the processors' performance using 3DMark 11 at the performance preset. The FX 4170 scored P3,889, the FX 4100 scored P3,814, and the X4 955 scored the highest with P3,920. Once again, the Phenom II X4 955 emerges as the winner. However, the scores remain relatively similar, making it challenging to perceive any notable discrepancies.

🧩 Benchmark Comparison: Cinebench R11.5

To evaluate the processors' rendering capabilities, we conducted a benchmark test using Cinebench R11.5. The FX 4170 achieved a score of 3.45, the FX 4100 scored 2.93, and the X4 955 achieved 3.80 points. Here, the FX 4170 exhibits slight improvements over the FX 4100, confirming its superiority in rendering tasks.

🧩 Benchmark Comparison: Pi Calculation

In terms of calculating 1 million digits of pi using Super Pi, the FX 4170 proved to be the fastest, clocking in at approximately 20 seconds, compared to 21 seconds on the Phenom II X4 955 and 23 seconds on the FX 4100. The Phenom II X4 955 exhibits remarkable speed in this benchmark, outperforming both FX processors.

🧩 Benchmark Comparison: Gaming Performance

Considering Game performance, we tested all three processors using Battlefield 3 at 1680x1050 resolution with ultra settings. The FX 4170 and X4 955 CPUs demonstrated nearly identical performance, as Battlefield 3 is primarily GPU demanding. The FX 4100 achieved slightly lower averages, but the disparity is hardly noticeable during actual gameplay.

🧩 Temperature and Power Consumption Analysis

When analyzing temperature, the FX 4100 emerged as the coolest running CPU, reaching a peak of only 37 degrees Celsius (99 degrees Fahrenheit). The FX 4170 experienced a slightly higher temperature of 50 degrees Celsius (102 degrees Fahrenheit), while the Phenom II X4 955 recorded 52 degrees Celsius (126 degrees Fahrenheit). These temperatures, considering the stock coolers, are acceptable for normal operation.

Power consumption wise, the FX 4170 exhibited the lowest consumption at idle, drawing 78 watts. The FX 4100 and Phenom II X4 955 consumed 85 watts and 96 watts, respectively, in the idle state. However, under load, the Phenom II X4 955 consumed the least power, at 176 watts, compared to 195 watts for the FX 4100 and 205 watts for the FX 4170. This information is crucial for users who primarily engage in resource-demanding tasks.

🧩 Conclusion

Overall, these three processors perform admirably and offer similar performance levels. While the Phenom II X4 955 emerges as the winner in terms of raw power and efficiency, the FX series processors, specifically the FX 4170, demonstrate great potential in rendering tasks. Ultimately, the choice between these processors depends on individual needs, whether it be gaming, rendering, or power consumption.