• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

AMD Phenom II X6 1055T & 1090T Reviews

In the video encoding and rendering benchmarks in these reviews the Phenom II X6 processors seem to be doing quite well(consider their cost):

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...1055t-1090t-six-core-processors-review-9.html

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3674/amds-sixcore-phenom-ii-x6-1090t-1055t-reviewed/7

http://www.bjorn3d.com/read.php?cID=1853&pageID=8962

http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/amd_phenom_x6_1090t/6.html

Coupled with the lower cost of the motherboards they look very good value for money for rendering and video encoding.
 
from that link you've given stulid:

"There are a number of tasks where new AMD processors do really well. These are the tasks dealing with video processing and transcoding. This is where Phenom II X6 look way better than in all other cases, they even run faster than Core i7-860 or Core i7930. So if you work with media content a lot, we would strongly recommend you to consider the new AMD processors."
 
from that link.

Now that we have measured Phenom II X6
performance in several popular applications we
can draw a very sad conclusion that new six-core
AMD processors can only compete successfully
against quad-core competitor solutions that do
not support Hyper-Threading technology. As for
Core i7 processors, which do support this
technology, they will be faster in most cases. So,
Phenom II X6 should probably be considered an
alternative to Core i5 CPUs at best.
 
I just think some peeps will read the words they want to see and miss those they should read ...

Im AMD biased and I admit the X6 cant compete with the 980X but the reveiws all show that the X6 not only holds its own it outperforms some of the Intel Extreme chips and the general 920 - 930 chips at threaded apps like encoding.

Yes the i7 and even i5 better the X6 at gaming but who buys a 6 core cpu for gaming ??? the whole point of more cores is for threaded operations and at the moment games are holding back because the majority of consumers have only just got to 2 cores let alone 4 or 6.

Certain apps will be optimised for Intel however many cores are available but in general on a level playing field the X6 is a good chip for the money if you use the right software and benefit from the extra core power rather than hyperthreaded cores which are not a 100% boost per thread but rather 20%

OK think I will adjourn to the bar before I get hung drawn and quartered for daring to say AMD for the win on price/performance :D Intel for the higher performance & an empty wallet :cool:
 
mglover070588 said:
You are right, but releasing a cpu WORSE than the current competition means it is bound to not be a huge success.

I think the new Nvidia range have proved this.

I can see AMD grabbing a few buys from the budget pc builder and crap PC shops like PCWORLD selling it as OMGWTFBBQ massive 6 core cpu best ever.

I am also an AMD fanboy at heart! However since core2 they have been trailing behind.
Click to expand...

The situation in not the same because the price points are vastly different.

If your going to release a lesser performing product then you better be way cheaper & AMD are good at doing exactly that & expect the price to get even better after the gold rush.
 
Cozman said:
OK think I will adjourn to the bar before I get hung drawn and quartered for daring to say AMD for the win on price/performance :D Intel for the higher performance & an empty wallet :cool:
Click to expand...

LOL!

You always seems to make me laugh at the end of your posts & your quite right that Intel own the performance crown but over all AMD own the price/performance.
 
CAT-THE-FIFTH sometimes makes me think he'd like to mate with his AMD processors he loves them that much ! :D:D

On a serious note; after reading *almost* all the reviews posted, as well as a good few user reviews, I'm still going the i7 920 route (hopefully within the next 2 weeks! woot!). The x6 seem to be great for price/performance, especially considering the motherboard/dual channel memory prices, compared to x58/tri channel. If I already owned an am2+/am3 board it'd def be worth buying. Though for my new system (mostly gaming/modding, some encoding) the 920 appeals to me more :P
 
The X6 came out as I expected it really, it's not uber but still a very powerful CPU that brings 6 core CPU's to the masses. Intel will probably start pumping out 6 core cpu's to compete with it now, or at least lower the price of their current ones.
 
Final8y said:
http://techreport.com/articles.x/18799/1

Interesting value proposition near the end & a better assortment of multi threaded tests included .
Click to expand...

Interesting review all round. I'm becoming more sold on AM3 as a platform to buy into now as much as the X6 processors. Better value boards/features 6 cores available now for a reasonable sum and the prospect of a Bulldozer drop-in upgrade in a year's time. I think that's enough to keep me away from the dark side:D
 
With this noob overclocker having got an impressive 4Ghz on all 6 cores last night - I'm glad i upgraded from my 965BE and didn't get a Core i7.

AMD have made some excellent changes to these 45nm chips- Bring down the volts, up the cores all whilst keeping the socket and heat output the same is pretty downright awesome if you ask me!
 
so are these are on par with i7 ? was thinking of getting i7 rig but wondering about amd now.
never had amd before do these chips run on am3 boards only or do they work on am2 boards too? with less features.
 
If "the deal" or "the benefit" of the 1090T is only overclocking it, then I have a hard time justifying to myself to purchase one. I don't overclock - did once but not anymore.
I just want solid good reliable performance out of the box without having to nervously sit and watch temperatures rising and do hours and hours of stability tests just to find it makes Prime95 for 24hrs, but when loading up FSX the whole thing crashses.

Regarding the whole debate of utilizing multi-cores in games I think the statement that Legitreviews made pretty much sums up the essential - the game developers need to to optimize !

.."Not every testing scenario showed the benefits of having six-cores and twelve threads, though. For example, in gaming we saw a little performance boost here and there, but nothing significant at the resolutions we actually play games on. Crank up the image quality and the screen resolution and you'll be limited by the graphics card way before the flagship processor of either company. The game developers need to stop porting games over from consoles and walking away from them! PC users deserve some solid code that takes advantage of 8 or more threads. It was an eye opener to see some of our gaming benchmarks only putting our processor under 20% load during testing!.."

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1289/21/

*Sigh* - I want a six-core just because then "I haz six cor'z", but I don't gain anything from it when my major work is mostly on Photopshop CS4 and gaming. :(
I don't know... maybe I should wait for something faster.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom