Hardware AMD Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition

Greetings!

Although those gaming benchmarks prove the lack of CPU performance compared to Intels i7, on a real world test one would at the very least enable 4X44 and 16XAF, puting more stress on the GPU and partially hiding that lack of performance.
Considering the price, the comparison with the more expensive i7 platform seems out of place.

 

Not at all matey, good for you!

 

7 out of 10; that's not bad...

 

AMD Phenom II X6 1055T 2.80GHz Processor on a UK componant webaite this very day for £153.91 on a 'Super Special' is hardly a bad deal!

Personally id like to see more a a £ for £ comparison with other such popular chips in the price band, look at the i3-530...... a bargin! One of the finest x2 core chips ever made, however you look at the 631 and its a bit of a stinker. To say that the AMD is a 'bad' cpu is a tad unfair. Price par performance ratio is all that should count in my honest opinion, not that it doesnt beat Intels deep pockets editon of whatever that have in mainstream production at the time. We are living in a world of much skintness lately and bang for buck is far more inportant than how much ' Shiney ' it has to it.


As for the tard that said BitTech is Intel biased is a bit of a moron and anyone with half a brain or a consumer of the sister mag will know from past readings that when praise has been deserved it has more than duely been givien. If you really dont like these guys efforts and opinions then why the hell are you here reading about it ... ?

 

The amount of continued abuse towards Bit-Tech here staggers me.

I can honestly hold my hand up and admit I hate, hate with a passion all things AMD/ATi due to various reasons I don't need to go into here.

However, this abuse for lets be honest, a typical AMD review of late is completely uncalled for. How can some people take positive results from one review as gospel but then condem Bit-Tech for giving a bad call on others.

I read reviews elsewhere showing the GTX470/480 as fantastic new cards that will dominate for years. As a Nvidia fanboy, I was shocked at the results from Bit-Tech showing them as a pretty much disappointment. I took that as an honest unbias conclusion because they do the tests thoroughly and competently that I or many of you can't.

If you don't like the conclusions then fine, go play somewhere else with those rose tainted glasses on. In the end it will cost you dearly.

 

Remember the i5 is fast enough @stock to match this in multithreaded apps. The only use for this atm is very heavily threaded programs and for someone who doesn't want to overclock or spend on a new motherboard and ram. Theres no point to the future proofing argument either since both companies will have new products out and even their old tech will be cheaper if still around by the time games go fully multi threaded.
In gaming i3's offer such performance that they can't be ignored. In fact I find it hard justifying anything above the athlon II 435 except for upgrade purposes on AM2/3. Maybe usb3 or sata 6 on cheaper AMD boards but I wouldn't say their deal makers for me espeically when Ive unused slots on my motherboard I could just get an add in card. Id rather have an i3 over a phenom II if I was to build from scratch especially for gaming.

 

I want to know how this processor matches up to others when running multiple applications, say virus scan, + game, + multiple windows in chrome (running tube say).

similarly with rendering + word + excel + oracle.... + flash

these multiple tasks tend to bring my old (dual core) computer to its knees at times and I'd be happy if I could allocate a couple of cores to some background processes.

 

Built this at the weekend:-

Antec Three Hundred
Gigabyte GA-H55M-UD2H
Intel Core i3-530
Corsair XMS PC3-12800C9 1600MHz
VTX ATi HD 5770 1GB
Arctic Cooling Freezer 7 Pro Rev.2
Corsair CX400W
Samsung Spinpoint F3 500GB
Sony 24x DVDDW Sata

Total cost (inc. VAT & Delivery) £545

I know it's £100 more than the affordable one in this months buyers guide but I followed the CustomPC mag 081 build instead.

Windows 7 ultimate installed (just a spare copy lying around) and stable overclock to 4.07GHz using (185 X 22) following the instructions @ http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2010/03/03/overclocking-intel-core-i3-530/1 which were very easy to follow. Never trusted my overclocks before but this really made it simple.

Got the overall media score of 1579 which may have been throttled by the 32bit OS.

 

seems overpriced, +-£100 more then the X4 955 BE for 2 more cores and a auto overclock feature unless i'm missing something

 

goodness fanboy's making themselves heard.

anyways will there be thuban based quads, triples, and duals? Those should be a much better value than this thing. +1 to an old architecture cant be fixed with more cores.

 

Greetings!

Overclockers .co .uk has the 955 BE for £126, the X6 1055 for £167.

 

There would be Thuban based quads (the X4 unlock to X6 thing)

I'm still using my Q6600 though - I have no need to upgrade.

 

Might wanna fix this.

 

In my view the 1055T replaces the i5 750 as the midrange 'gamers choice' the 1090T is a little harder to swallow in my own testing it's pretty much keeping up with i7s and has lower platform cost and greatly improved compatibility with high end RAM.

There will be unlockable quad core Thubans and more x5 variants release in the coming months.

In their defence, we have been spoiled for the past couple of years, with AMD having to release their CPUs with much less OC headroom than Intel. And since Intel CPUs are generally easier to overclock than AMD a lot of people, myself included forgot how to overclock AMDs, partly because the first Phenoms just wouldn't.

Head over to the AMD section of XS and you'll plenty of posts by users looking to switch to Thubans after years of Intel dominance. Part of this is a response to Intel's tactic of changing CPU sockets and mounting holes with each CPU tick and platform segregation making upgrades costly.

 

Fixed

 

I don't know, but looking at all your comments recently you seem to be trying very hard to push this product...

 

I'm going to do the same... I was almost selling my Q6600 and mobo just to buy the X6 1090T (all because I have an extra AM2+ board) and keep the DDR2 1066mhz... But it's just not worth it, it's faster than my Q6600 but not that much to make me change sides.

These X6 are good for multi-thread (some aps), but for gaming they just plain suck... Still going to wait for Sandy Bridge or Bulldozer...

 

Your forgetting that intels manage more per tick and also overclock like beasts. Tomshardware and I have a thread on here that links to a some cpu bottleneck benchmarks and the i3 shines

 

cheers for the response, logical and reasonable. I know that any time there is a review of a key players new product it turns into a boiling pot and becomes difficult to seperate fanboyism from a genuine question as to why the review had a different outcome than other reviews. Maybe it was the tone of the bit-tech review that has so many people shooting off. A lot of the other sites have left the impression that this is a step in the right direction for AMD who are finally giving people a viable alternative whereas the bit-tech conclusion is quite damning, regardless of the 7/10 score. I appreciate bit-techs honest reviews, by and large there is consensous amongst review sites (with the exception of obvious allegences). Your review reflecting dissapointment while so many others are breathing a sigh of relief was what I considered confusing*

*not to be read I'm angry with Bit-Tech for not liking phenom. Confusing, like when we had the Niece treaty referendum over here and one poster told you to vote no cos Ireland would loose it's neutral status and the next poster told you to vote yes cos Ireland would remain neutral. Where's the middle ground there?

 

I agree Intel are miles ahead