AMD Could Leap Ahead If They Want To

[Jokester]

The overclocking lockdown is a consequence of the integration of more and more features into the CPU that were handled on other ICs. The outcome is that motherboards should be simpler and as a result (at least in theory) cheaper. If AMD go to the same level of integration as Intel in the future expect overclocking to go out the window with them as well. As it is it's probably costing Intel money to add it as feature back into the CPU.

 

[james.miller]

IGP is a huge market . . . not sure why you would think everyone using a HexCore would be a gamer? . . . think about it a bit more?

I do think about it - If you know igp is a huge market then you must have some figures to back this statement up. Just how important is an IGP to somebody with a hexcore cpu? What percentage of the market do these people represent?

Cheek! . . . my DDR2 is worth more than your house! . . . Ok not quite but it maturing quite nicely as an investment and its serving it purpose . . . what is stepping up to DDR3 going to achieve for most people? . . . what's it going to achieve?

that's the only good thing about obsolete ram - the prices as the supply dries up. good job ive got 8gb of the stuff sitting in a draw ready to sell then. I guess there is a good reason to go for ddr3 - It costs about as much as my ddr2 is worth second hand now lol. but purely from a technical standpoint no, it doesnt offer much over ddr II. Although, if it wasnt for these damn recessions and everything else, then it would most probably be far cheaper now than ddr2 has ever been, thanks to the cost to manufacture the stuff.

Jesus thats along time ago . . . AMD like everyone else makes mistakes . . . but only the wise avoid making the same mistake twice . . .

It was a long time ago, but the point was AMD have done exactly the same thing. I wouldnt be surprised if they did this again in the future. Look there is no denying that there is a certain amount 'we want more money from you' in all of this, but from where im sitting its pretty much equal on both sides. AMD did it more in the past, intel are doing it more now. And if experience tells us anything, its that in the pc market, whether its cpu's or gpu's, the top two players will swap and reverse positions.

pity about Am3+ granted but its helped somewhat by the fact that one can swap over their AM3 chips . . . not really sure how compelling USB3.0 and SATA III is really?

Let's say i want a bulldozer. What good is that to me, really? so i can buy a motherboard now and a cpu in the future - i still have to buy both one way or another. I might as well sell my 965 and my 890gx board together, as i have done in the past no matter what im moving to. This goes back to what i said in the last post - this backwards/forwards compatibility thing is overplayed imo.

Haha speak for yourself little man! . . . if we are so small and meaningless then I fail to understand why Intel have spent cold hard cash on "possibly" locking us out? . . . why would they even think of doing that?

Lol, Apple are hell-bent on locking people out of everything. Didnt harm them much, did it?

I wonder what the OverClocking industry is worth? . . . I wonder what all the Kudos they get from enthusiasts on the forums around the world and the knock on effect from the enthusiasts recommending their products is worth?

How much money do they lose from the fact OverClockers buy a cheaper chip and clock the nads off it instead of buying a mucho more expensive product . . . must be a lot if they want to stop it? . . . either that or there is some other factor I didn't consider yet?

Well, the pre-build market is worth a lot more to either of them than the enthusiast market. There must be some sort of figures we can dig up, but i do know from previous discussions that at least for intel, sales to Dell et all totally dwarfs sales to enthusiasts.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

The overclocking lockdown is a consequence of the integration of more and more features into the CPU that were handled on other ICs. The outcome is that motherboards should be simpler and as a result (at least in theory) cheaper. If AMD go to the same level of integration as Intel in the future expect overclocking to go out the window with them as well. As it is it's probably costing Intel money to add it as feature back into the CPU.

The socket 1156 motherboards did not end up cheaper than socket 775 or socket AM2+ or AM3 ones. This is despite less functionality left on the motherboards. However,the Core i3 CPUs consists of a 81MM2 CPU die and a 114MM2 GPU die. OTH,the E7000 series the Core i3 replaced had an 82MM2 CPU die meaning that they are probably cheaper to make so Intel priced the motherboards higher to compensate.

 

[Big.Wayne]

I do think about it - If you know igp is a huge market then you must have some figures to back this statement up. Just how important is an IGP to somebody with a hexcore cpu? What percentage of the market do these people represent?

Last time I checked IGP sales rule the world. . . dwarfs all discreet graphic card sales . . . If your asking how big is the market for people who use HexCores and an IGP thats a bit tougher to answer . . . I take it due to owning a HD5850 you didn't check out the IGP on your 8800GX? . . . its pure quality, Photoediting, Video Editing, Drives two 1920x1200 monitors, very sweet bit of kit . . . AMD decided you didn't need to buy a special processor for this function . . . Intel did?

that's the only good thing about obsolete ram - the prices as the supply dries up. good job ive got 8gb of the stuff sitting in a draw ready to sell then.

If your a Sisoft Sandra bench junkie then you would be justified in calling DDR2 "obsolete" . . . however back in the Real-World it's indistinguishable from DDR3 for most folks . . . there is no negative that AMD allowed people to use DDR2 and a couple of positives (a)Get more life from a product and (b)Get a better price for the so called "obsolete" ram when the times comes to sell . . . 4GB Kit of DDR2-800 when sold next year will fetch enough money to purchase a 8GB kit of DDR3-1600 . . . double the memory and twice as fast! . . . anyone who bought DDR3 at launch would have benefited little from the performance and would certainly not get such a good return from their investment . . . The DDR3 kits that will be worth buying are the 8GB DDR3-1600's/2000's . . .next year just i time for bulldozer! . . . It's a shame you didn't go AM2+ and used your DDR2 instead!

Let's say i want a bulldozer. What good is that to me, really? so i can buy a motherboard now and a cpu in the future

Well thats an exact scenario . . . its quite cool though that someone could take their Phenom II X4/X6 and plonk it in an AM3+ board with whatever bells and whistles it has and wait it out a while for revisions and price drops to the Bulldozer . . .

It was a long time ago, but the point was AMD have done exactly the same thing. I wouldnt be surprised if they did this again in the future. Look there is no denying that there is a certain amount 'we want more money from you' in all of this, but from where im sitting its pretty much equal on both sides

Where are you sitting exactly? . . . its all about more money for Intel and less value for us . . . there has been not one scrap of decent "justification" why they should scrap overclocking . . . or at least no one has been able to put a positive "spin" on it yet and take the beady eye off the facts they are alienating their faithful . . . I totally do not and will not buy this "we are not important" line a few people are trying to spin . . . we are important and anyone who says otherwise does not understand their personal power . . .

Lol, Apple are hell-bent on locking people out of everything. Didnt harm them much, did it?

It interesting you say that as I was thinking to myself that seems to kinda be what Intel want . . . a sealed proprietary box containing only Intel® inside . . . its a nightmare if it happens . . . .

I love the fact a PC can be ripped open, bits pulled about, customised , overclocked etc and its so much more affordable than a Mac . . . I think Mac sales are pretty small compared to PC sales right?

Well, the pre-build market is worth a lot more to either of them than the enthusiast market. There must be some sort of figures we can dig up, but i do know from previous discussions that at least for intel, sales to Dell et all totally dwarfs sales to enthusiasts.

Yeah I can't argue with that but as mentioned to Richdog in post #37 we all know why Intel sold a heap of PC's via DELL and AMD didn't get a look in! . . . dodgy dodgy backroom deals!

In case I haven't made my point really clear now . . . you are very important James, everyone reading this thread and who frequents these forums is important . . . this is just in normal life . . .when it comes to the world of computing you are all "very" important . . . much much more important than Intel or AMD . . . without you and your blood sweat and tears they are nothing nothing nada . . . they must do exactly what we want them to do within reason, they work for us, we keep them alive . . .

If in this case Intel becomes a bit high & mighty and thinks it can do whatever it wants to do without our say so it gets its wrists slapped . . . I'm not talking anything puny like a 3 Billion dollar loss like last year from the court cases . . . I'm talking full-on consumer backlash that will cost them dearly . .

If I hear one more person say the overclocking & enthusiast scene isn't important I will go spare! . . . do not put yourself down . . . you are all important . . . you spend money for yourself and your business and you advise others what to buy so spend wisely . . . back the company that can be "seen" to have your best interests at heart!

 

[james.miller]

I'm not going to answer every point, as it quickly gets tedious. But i will address the following:

Last time I checked IGP sales rule the world. . . dwarfs all discreet graphic card sales . . . If your asking how big is the market for people who use HexCores and an IGP thats a bit tougher to answer . . . I take it due to owning a HD5850 you didn't check out the IGP on your 8800GX? . . . its pure quality, Photoediting, Video Editing, Drives two 1920x1200 monitors, very sweet bit of kit . . .

problem: prove those IGP sales aren't predominately pre-built sales. If they are, than that doesnt work in your favour.

My board is an 890gx(Asus m4a89gtd pro usb3) . there is no 8800gx. I know exactly what it is and isnt capable of

AMD decided you didn't need to buy a special processor for this function . . . Intel did?

dont worry, on-board IGP logic will be a standard feature of all cpu's soon enough. It's going to happen. but in the mean time, it would appear AMD are doing exactly the same thing with the first releases of the Llano 'fusion' processor and the first 8-core bulldozer. As far as i remember, the scorpius platform (bulldozer and zambezi cpus) will be using Socket AM3+, whilst the lynx platform (llano, a meld of a phenomII with no L3 caches and a 5-series based dx11 gpu) will be socket FM1. Bulldozer-based fusions arent expected to hit until 2012 now.

...... that seems to mirror what intel are doing, doesnt it?

It's a shame you didn't go AM2+ and used your DDR2 instead!

why? i wanted usb3 and sata6. So i bought a board with those features. I didnt want an AM2+ board without them, and i didnt want an AM2+ board that didnt support all of the AM3 cpu's. I think i might the right decision personally.

Well thats an exact scenario . . . its quite cool though that someone could take their Phenom II X4/X6 and plonk it in an AM3+ board with whatever bells and whistles it has and wait it out a while for revisions and price drops to the Bulldozer . . .

No, like i said; either way you end up replacing both the cpu and the motherboard. It's less hassle doing it in one go.

you spend money for yourself and your business and you advise others what to buy so spend wisely . . . back the company that can be "seen" to have your best interests at heart!

No, I spend my money based on two things.

1) a budget. I'm not rich.

2) value for money.

I do not buy hardware based on which company i 'prefer'. I buy to a budget, and i buy the best i can. If you hadn't noticed, ive got an AMD cpu, a motherboard with an AMD chipset and an AMD gpu because this time around, all that hardware offered me the most at that price point. It's that simple. If it happens to be that intel offer the more attractive solution, then Intel it will be.

Feel free to start your revolution. Somehow i don't think you're going to get much support.

 

[drunkenmaster]

Who really cares about motherboard compatibility, yes it opens up choices to a degree, but who cares, almost every time I, or my brother has bought a new piece of kit its just been easier, and made more sense for several features, to go with a new mobo/cpu combo.

I have upgraded the cpu only, though I don't think I've ever upgraded to a chip I otherwise couldn't have used without a little socket compatibility.

I could have run my current 955 X2(I think, its been a while) with all 4 cores unlocked, in my old mobo, IF it hadn't have died I still wouldn't have stuck with it. Due to a RMA of a SSD I ended up moving to a sata 3 version and so a new mobo with sata 3 made more sense and was simply, easier.

In the end, when I've upgraded, due to a new pci-e speed/format, change from agp/pci, change from IDE to sata drivers, due to needing more sata connectors than IDE connectors as I got more and more sata drives, upgrading to a new graphics card, needing a pci-e 1.1 or above slot, etc, etc, a general large upgrade tends to work best with mostly newer parts and newer mobo's.

Platform stability can mean a lot in the server market, but even there its not a huge deal, its far better to upgrade your mobo and have far better socket to socket scaling and more sockets/better speeds than to stick a new expensive server cpu in an old mobo where its limited somewhere or another.

All that is rather irrelevant.

The only really important question was, were Intel going to release K series chips at a hugely inflated price, were the mobo's only going to be very expensive versions, and if so does it mean AMD ends up significantly cheaper and with Bulldozer looking like a monumental upgrade from a Phenom, and much closer to Intel's top chips than anytime in the past 4-5 years, are Intel making a mistake.

Prices have been answered, K series chips will cost, essentially, nothing extra, ok, they might come with a worse warranty and OEM with no heatsink, thats definately possible, but its not 30 or 40% extra cost to overclock. Mobo's are the last question.

If you're paying $216/£150ish for a overclocking K series chip, but have to spend £250 on one of those daft ultra high end Asus/Gigabyte type mobo's, that could be a problem for many people, and no problem for those that would waste money on that kind of mobo anyway.


A same priced Bulldozer, with essentially the same performance, but a range of mobo's from £60-150 and you could save a lot of money.

As said, the biggest issue was, were you going to have to pay say £300 instead of £200 for a overclocking enabled edition, $10 more, its basically a non issue.

Anyone suggesting overclocking doesn't matter, is an idiot though.

Why, because EVERY circle of friends has a "tech guy" they all turn to, "I'm getting a new computer, what should I be looking for".

Tech guy who overclocks his custom built computer, if AMD overclock better are faster and cheaper, tells every single friend, and ever forum, and every family member, get an AMD computer, go there, get that computer. I have a constant stream of people asking me whats good when they need a new comp.

If every group of friends in the country are all being told "get an AMD comp" not all will, but a lot will, and if everyones being told "Intel are fastest, go get one" thats what people do.

Word of mouth, and whose seen as fastest by people in the know has a HUGE effect on those who don't know, but ask those that do.

 

[Big.Wayne]

I'm not going to answer every point, as it quickly gets tedious

Don't worry James, thats not the first time I heard that!

I don't expect you to answer any points actually so don't feel obliged . . . however your not going to change mine or anyones else point of view by selectively ignoring valid points . . .

problem: prove those IGP sales aren't predominately pre-built sales. If they are, than that doesnt work in your favour

It absolutely works in my favour? . . . The point is AMD allow a consumer the choice of combining a powerful HexCore with a nice IGP motherboard? . . . What difference does it make if they are pre-built or self-built/custom built? . . . whoever builds it at least gets the choice because AMD give you that choice . . . Intel does not . .

My board is an 890gx(Asus m4a89gtd pro usb3) . there is no 8800gx. I know exactly what it is and isnt capable of

Indeed there is no 8800GX, thanks for pointing out a simple typo on my behalf, I meant the 890GX of course . . . excellent chipset that covers all bases for most enthusiasts wants/needs . . . . Need only basic graphics + a powerful Quad/HexCore processor = 890GX . . . need Crossfire X8/x8 + a powerful Quad/HexCore processor= 890GX . . . very simple solution that provides a single horses for courses solution for the great majority of end users . . .

You may count the LGA1156 as one socket but two me it counts as two as that it what it requires too match the functionality of a single AMD chipset . . . time for you to reconsider the Intel socket/chipset Shenanigans me thinks!

dont worry, on-board IGP logic will be a standard feature of all cpu's soon enough. It's going to happen.

Haha thanks James, your an absolute fountain of knowledge . . . thanks for pointing out the obvious . . . I'm sure someone will find that useful!

but in the mean time, it would appear AMD are doing exactly the same thing with the first releases of the Llano 'fusion' processor and the first 8-core bulldozer. As far as i remember, the scorpius platform (bulldozer and zambezi cpus) will be using Socket AM3+, whilst the lynx platform (llano, a meld of a phenomII with no L3 caches and a 5-series based dx11 gpu) will be socket FM1. Bulldozer-based fusions arent expected to hit until 2012 now.

...... that seems to mirror what intel are doing, doesnt it?

No James it doesn't . . . when AMD include the graphics on-chip it will be used for more than just desktop and HD-material viewing . . . it will be able to play modern games at quite decent quality apparently . . . I'm not talking Clarkdale 1024x768 low quality gaming either . . .

You can attempt to construct some kinda "Justification" for Intels designs but its abundantly clear to myself and many others that they are putting themselves before the consumer and contructing a myriad of non compatible platforms that really is not needed . . . less is more, and as much attention should be paid to hardware interoperability . . . granted sometimes it is necessary to make the technology advancements possible but other times it is plain and simple profiteering on Intels behalf, the more stuff that doesn;t fit togther - more sales for Intel

This does not serve our best interests, it serves the corporations best interests . . . Profit $$$$

why? i wanted usb3 and sata6. So i bought a board with those features. I didnt want an AM2+ board without them, and i didnt want an AM2+ board that didnt support all of the AM3 cpu's. I think i might the right decision personally.

What do you mean you didn't want an AM2+ board that didn't support all of AMD's CPUs? . . . I bought an AM2+ just over a year ago and that supports all AMD's modern CPU's? . . . why would it have been any different for you exactly?

You think you made the right decison? . . . you left your DDR2 in the draw and spent your money on an AM3/DDR3 motherboard that would work with your DDR2 so you then bought new DDR3?

Hope the USB3.0 & SATA III was worth the extra . . . good echnology that . . . really noticable!

No, like i said; either way you end up replacing both the cpu and the motherboard. It's less hassle [for me] doing it in one go.

"hassle" is very subjective James and I guess it depends how much of an enthusiast you are . . . your first example is fair enough and that is you can't use your current 890GX to run a next gen AM3+ processor . . . but my example if perfectly valid . . . someone who is sitting there running either a AM2+/AM3 mobo with a Phenom II X4/X6 can easiliy pick up a next gen board when it comes out and plop their very capable AM3 processor into the new board . . . there is no pressing need to buy a new chip unless the AM3+ processor totally mulla the current breed?

I'm not that keen on shifting from my 785G AM2+/DDR2 platform but if I did upgrade to an AM3+ platform It would most likely be to pickup some Crossfire technology . . . others may just want USB.30/Sata III because according to you its worth having . . .

Its a boon to have the option to keep ones processor if ones processor is meeting your requirements/needs . . . Intel do not give you this option, more profit for them $$$

No, I spend my money based on two things.

1) a budget. I'm not rich.

2) value for money.

I do not buy hardware based on which company i 'prefer'. I buy to a budget, and i buy the best i can

You missed my point James . . . if given the choice in a market place where similar products are for sale . . . the savvy modern consumer not only works to budget & needs but also is aware of a scenario called "ethics" and should buy from the company that doesn't appear to be a money grabbing corporation that preferes to serve its own interests before the interests of its customers . . .

Intel can clearly be seen to be doing this for all those with eyes to see!

Feel free to start your revolution. Somehow i don't think you're going to get much support [from me]

Don't worry James, I'll fight the good fight by myself if needs be, and through all my efforts you and others will benefit, thanks for the chatter anyway!

 

[Jokester]

The socket 1156 motherboards did not end up cheaper than socket 775 or socket AM2+ or AM3 ones. This is despite less functionality left on the motherboards. However,the Core i3 CPUs consists of a 81MM2 CPU die and a 114MM2 GPU die. OTH,the E7000 series the Core i3 replaced had an 82MM2 CPU die meaning that they are probably cheaper to make so Intel priced the motherboards higher to compensate.

With the exception of the iGPU, currently we still have NB of sorts, and we still have a full SB so the level of integration isn't there yet.

Intel also don't make the motherboards only the chipset - it would be interesting to see though how much they charge for an X58 chipset and what they used to charge for an X48 chipset.

 

[james.miller]

Wayne,

* I can promise you, I dont selectively ignore any point, valid or not. But I will only respond to those worth responding to.

* You say Intel are robbing us blind when they supply a seperate platform for cpu's with onboard gpu's, yet when AMD do the same thing (llano) its ok because we can play games on them? There's common sense and then there's that.

* I bought an entire platform, i did not move from an existing am2/+ board and cpu. No AM2+ board offered 125w cpu support, usb3 and sata6 onboard. My 890gx does. that made the decision very simple.

* I sold my 4gb of ddrII (for virtually what i paid for it) along with my e2160 and abit ip35 as a bundle. the other ram i own was acquired from other sources. that'll teach you to make assumptions.

* It's very presumptuous to assume i will benefit from your little crusade in any way - i've never benefited from anything you've said previously. there's some good advice there from time to time, sure. But unfortunately most of it is marred by personal beliefs and this insane crusade against Intel that you insist on leading. It's no wonder people get so fed up you with your apparent level of arrogance and self-importance.

There is no doubt that what intel got up to in the past is shady to say the least. They should be, and have been, made to pay for it. however this is now and if my next platform is intel based, then that's because intel provided me with the better kit at the time. you will not see me buying in to an AMD platform if it isnt the best for my needs.


That's it, really. Nothing else needs to be added

 

[Ryan-3]

Overclocking is such a small market it'll make no real difference to Intel.

+ Intels chips are good enough at standard speeds anyway

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Intel does have an edge when it comes to mini ITX motherboards and SFF PCs overall as they have more motherboards which have PCI-E 2.0 16X slots. If the situation does not change that much in the next year or so it probably means my next system will also have an Intel CPU.

* You say Intel are robbing us blind when they supply a seperate platform for cpu's with onboard gpu's, yet when AMD do the same thing (llano) its ok because we can play games on them? There's common sense and then there's that.

However, socket AM3+ will have motherboards with IGPs too so it does muddle things a bit IMHO:

http://www.techpowerup.com/135075/Zambezi-AM3+-Core-Logic-Slated-for-Q2-2011.html

* I sold my 4gb of ddrII (for virtually what i paid for it) along with my e2160 and abit ip35 as a bundle. the other ram i own was acquired from other sources. that'll teach you to make assumptions.

Upgrading the processor only does have one advantage though - you don't need to re-install the OS and all your applications. Not everyone has a retail copy of an OS for their computer and OEM ones are tied to the motherboard.

+ Intels chips are good enough at standard speeds anyway

The same goes with AMD processors too. I know plenty of gamers who don't bother to overclock their CPUs whether they are AMD or Intel ones.

 

[Sayso]

What ever is the best CPU/mobo combination at the price i have to spend gets my money, its as simple as that, the same with GPUs

If an unclockable Intel CPU beats a AMD CPU that you can clock to 5Ghz it gets my money.

A lot of us on here (with it being the OVERCLOCKERS forum ) would be upset if we could no longer OC our CPUs or have to pay extra to do so, but surely it would be idiotic not to use the fastest CPU you could afford!!

But saying that Im hoping the Bulldozer CPUs at least go toe to toe with I7s if they do and they are decently priced i will go with them next time round...mainly because i have dealt with Intel and AMD directly and AMD are a lot better with there customer support.

 

[Richdog]

* It's very presumptuous to assume i will benefit from your little crusade in any way - i've never benefited from anything you've said previously. there's some good advice there from time to time, sure. But unfortunately most of it is marred by personal beliefs and this insane crusade against Intel that you insist on leading. It's no wonder people get so fed up you with your apparent level of arrogance and self-importance

His posts are getting increasingly cringeworthy, and it just gets to the point where you can't be bothered to reply. If he has a point, it gets lost in all the rubbish that accompanies it. It's... awkward to read.

 

[kitfit1]

A very interesting "debate" this is turning into lol.
From a purely personal point of view, if AMD cpu's were as fast as Intel's are at the moment and clocked as well, then i would be using one. If in the future Intel sold cpu's that were not clockable, then i would also swap to AMD.
The reason is very very simple, i love clocking and have been doing it since the 1990's.
It's a hobby, a big challenge and i enjoy it. I like benching, which is also a challenge.
So, Mr Intel, try to sell me a cpu that can't be clocked and i'm afraid that my money will be going somewhere else. That said, yes, i do use an unlocked 975, but i can still clock a 920 if i wanted to. Not being allowed to clock a cpu would get my back up so much, i would just walk away from anything else that Intel had to offer regardless.

 

[Cyber-Mav]

im all for the overclocking, but with amd's current performance i dont see the point of having to overclock a 6 core phenom to 4ghz that still ends up slower than a 3.4ghz 4 core i7.

the way things are now, amd needs overclocking just to play catchup.

 

[dmxdex2020]

why would intel make their cpus harder to OC.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

im all for the overclocking, but with amd's current performance i dont see the point of having to overclock a 6 core phenom to 4ghz that still ends up slower than a 3.4ghz 4 core i7.

the way things are now, amd needs overclocking just to play catchup.

Actually in applications which can effectively use all six cores a Phenom II X6 can be quite competitive with a Core i7 quad core. However,in applications which use less than six cores the Core i7 will be faster. Also,the Phenom II X6 and its associated motherboards are much cheaper too.

Anyway,until AMD Bulldozer is released it is hard to say how competitive it will be with Intel Sandy Bridge.

 

[Richdog]

Actually in applications which can effectively use all six cores a Phenom II X6 can be quite competitive with a Core i7 quad core.

Well, you'd hope that a hex core would be competitive with a quad core in specific multi-threaded apps that made use of all cores...

However,in applications which use less than six cores the Core i7 will be faster.

Also pretty self-explanatory.

 

[DragonQ]

I'd imagine 4 cores with HyperThreading is a match for 6 cores actually - I wouldn't be surprised if the i7 beat the X6 in multi-threaded apps at the same clock speed.

EDIT: This set of benchmarks only has the 1090T conclusively beating the i7 920 in one test, Everest, when both are at the same clock speed. The site doesn't mention if HyperThreading is on or not but judging by the results, I assume it is.

I can't find any other clock-for-clock comparisons (I thought it'd be easy!) but I'm sure someone else can.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I'd imagine 4 cores with HyperThreading is a match for 6 cores actually - I wouldn't be surprised if the i7 beat the X6 in multi-threaded apps at the same clock speed.

EDIT: This set of benchmarks only has the 1090T conclusively beating the i7 920 in one test, Everest, when both are at the same clock speed. The site doesn't mention if HyperThreading is on or not but judging by the results, I assume it is.

I can't find any other clock-for-clock comparisons (I thought it'd be easy!) but I'm sure someone else can.

Perhaps it is time you used the search function??

When the Phenom II X6 was first released there was a big debate about this. There were plenty of threads about this which also looked in detail at the programmes used in testing. For example Cinebench 10 gave lower scores for AMD processors than Cinebench 11. On top of this the Phenom II X6 is better compared to the socket 1156 Core i7 processors as the socket 1156 motherboards are closer in pricing to the AM3 ones and also use cheaper dual channel RAM kits. Even the cheapest socket 1366 motherboards are around £110 to £120.

Anyway for the price of a Core i7 930 you can get a Phenom II X6 1055T and a 870 or 770 based motherboard.

In this review a 2.8GHZ Core i7 930 is very similar in speed to a 2.8GHZ Phenom II X6 in 3D rendering and video encoding:

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1414/5/

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1414/4/

The Phenom II X6 1055T is similar in speed to a 2.8GHZ Core i7 860 and just behind a 2.93GHZ Core i7 870 in 3D rendering and video encoding:

http://www.guru3d.com/article/phenom-ii-x6-1055t-1090t-review/12

Also,remember that the Core i7 930 and Core i7 860 have Turbo Boost upto 3.06GHZ and 3.46 GHZ respectively across all six cores too.