Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

AMD Phenom II X6 1090T 'Black Ops' Overclocking

Last response: in News comments
Share
a b K Overclocking
April 28, 2010 12:24:13 AM

I spy cpu upgrade some day. I want a 65w E edition when they come out.
Score
3
April 28, 2010 12:28:25 AM

In the same vein, the gaming benchmarks are a reminder that the latest and greatest graphics cards really do need a capable processor behind them if you want to unleash their potential. An overclockable CPU like the Core i7-920 or -930 can really open up a Radeon HD 5870 or GeForce GTX 480 when you get it up to the 4 GHz range. Dipping down to 3.2 GHz doesn’t really help the 1090T win any battles in the games (Call of Duty excepted, where Turbo CORE seems to improve performance over the X4 965). If you’re a gamer, save the money you’d spend on a six-core CPU, buy your favorite overclockable processor, and spend the difference on graphics or an SSD to cut level load times. AMD’s hexa-core Phenom II X6 1090T is decidedly a productivity-oriented part designed to improve the performance of threaded apps. It extends the usefulness of Socket AM3 until Bulldozer emerges in 2011. As a result, your 790FX-based motherboard will do the job just fine—it’s probably not worth upgrading to 890FX at this point. Turbo CORE is conceptually a good answer to Turbo Boost, but I had a hard time proving its effectiveness in the real-world. Best-case, it helped the 3.2 GHz 1090T keep pace with the 3.4 GHz 965 in single-threaded titles.
Score
-26
Related resources
April 28, 2010 12:42:31 AM

Way to quote the conclusion of the full article, Inova, without giving any indication of whose words those are, or where you got them from.
Score
21
April 28, 2010 12:46:01 AM

You should still cite Tom's when you use long quotes like that in0va3, even when you're on their site.
Score
12
April 28, 2010 12:52:15 AM

wow it can run crysis....Har har har.

I can't wait to get my hands on one.
Score
-12
April 28, 2010 1:07:51 AM

you can save $6 and get a Core i7-920 that out performs the new X6 1090T even at stock settings... has been around forever, and shows extreme headroom.

Sad day for AMD on this round. I hope they have something in the pipeline more exciting.
Score
-18
April 28, 2010 1:09:42 AM

Congrats builder, you proved it has issues with Crysis.
Score
12
April 28, 2010 1:10:48 AM

Just buy the cheaper one then overclock it, it's not that much more difficult without the black edition!
Score
1
Anonymous
a b K Overclocking
April 28, 2010 1:31:38 AM

Gian124
"you can save $6 and get a Core i7-920 that out performs the new X6 1090T even at stock settings... has been around forever, and shows extreme headroom"

i believe this event is to try and establish how much headroom the x6 has (AMD must be pretty confident of the headroom to be throwing such an event), as for the 920 out performing the x6 i believe that was on most games only, the x6 left the 920 in the dust on threaded applications, and if this thing got headroom to spare that advantage might not be so compelling, but your right thuban is just a stop gap, bulldozer is the real game changer.....
Score
4
April 28, 2010 1:39:55 AM

it not really a chip for gaming but for work and content creation. if i was a using this for work i rather this AMD for 200$ then spending a 1000$ i can just save my money and buy the next new chip that comes out. i will have money left over. i dont mind loosing a second or something when creating content. It not a gaming chip so showing Crysis does make any sense.
Score
11
April 28, 2010 2:07:31 AM

otacon72But bulldozer won't be out until 2011 and this quote says it best.."Not only does Bulldozer have just a single floating point unit for each pair of integer units. It's also limited to executing floating point instructions in 128-bit chunks. Later this year, Intel should have launched its Sandy Bridge architecture complete with 256-bit floating-point power."AMD is forever stuck in the value market.


Wow so you have the silicon on hand? Can I see some bulldozer benchmarks? FPU is 256 bit in BD. 90% of comsumer apps use interger ops, not fp. why waste silicon on FPU? just beef up intergers. Besides, this is about thuban and how it sucks at gaming, but good for productivity..
Score
1
April 28, 2010 2:20:00 AM

Value is what I am after, I have a hard time spending "bragging rights".
Score
5
April 28, 2010 2:28:45 AM

wow of course on toms any comment showing AMD in a negative light gets thumbed down. toms article even showed us the benchmarks and AMD is just barely on par with the 920. how do you keep defending them. please get over yourselves.
Score
-10
Anonymous
a b K Overclocking
April 28, 2010 2:37:56 AM

otacon72 :
But bulldozer won't be out until 2011 and this quote says it best.."Not only does Bulldozer have just a single floating point unit for each pair of integer units. It's also limited to executing floating point instructions in 128-bit chunks. Later this year, Intel should have launched its Sandy Bridge architecture complete with 256-bit floating-point power."

actually this was probably a strategic move on AMD behalf if i translate correctly (and not being a big wig at AMD i might be wrong) but the idea was to move alot of intensive computational task to the GPU, for all intent and purpose the GPU is converted to a general purpose processing unit which is much more capable at executing computational repetitive and intensive task in parallel then a CPU can (kind of like that fermi is trying for). AMD is probably betting that the FPU might not be so important in the future but rather large banks of processing units to execute threaded applications in parallel

and yes this is a value proposition, because a general purpose GPU core is far cheaper then a ful CPU core, but at the same time it's far more streamlined too and allows for the possibility of scaling non-linearly (you could add more GPU cores with out the need for adding CPU cores or you could add more CPU cores while scaling back the GPU cores, chances are this may well be tied to the TDP, as we are already seeing how chips are being geared to fit a certain TDP for a certain market)

but as stated this is just my interpretation of bulldozer....
Score
2
April 28, 2010 2:46:44 AM

Honestly the i7 930 and 1090T seem equal to me. It really just depends what applications you plan on using. If you want to go multithreaded, if you're doing mass rendering, or whatever, then the 1090T is a good option.

If you're doing fewer multithreaded things, then the 930 will work better for you.

I'm sure we'll see some more benchies in the future that will illustrate greater differences between the hexacores and the 930.

But for now, six cores for under $300 is pretty cool stuff.
Just my $.02. Cheers.
Score
10
April 28, 2010 3:03:13 AM

From what I've read from these forums, AMD is cost-effective, but Intel has better performance.
Score
0
a b K Overclocking
a b À AMD
April 28, 2010 3:11:43 AM

AlexTheBlueWay to quote the conclusion of the full article, Inova, without giving any indication of whose words those are, or where you got them from.

I was wondering where I'd read those words before!
Score
1
Anonymous
a b K Overclocking
April 28, 2010 3:55:34 AM

to complicated, to complicated. Sorry I cannot read all this stuff.
Score
-6
April 28, 2010 3:56:18 AM

multi-core isn't working out the way we hoped. Bring back the Ghz race !!!
Score
1
April 28, 2010 3:57:29 AM

I just wonder how much my AM2+ 790fx board will bottleneck this kind of processer
Score
1
April 28, 2010 4:25:50 AM

shadow187Congrats builder, you proved it has issues with Crysis.

Guess you didn't read the earlier article, did you?
Score
0
Anonymous
a b K Overclocking
April 28, 2010 4:36:39 AM

abbadon_34
"multi-core isn't working out the way we hoped. Bring back the Ghz race!!!"

we fast approaching the limits of silicone, it probably cheaper to manufacture faster chips then multi-core chips (die size wise), silicone has finite properties, as you begin to push the GHz there is a point beyond which the silicone begins to heat up at an exponential level due to it's internal structure, the only way your going get these things to go faster is to use more exotic cooling solutions or a more exotic semi-conductor material

if there was an easy way to make these chips go faster you think intel with the kind of research budget at it disposal, would have, truth is multi-core is the future, software guys just have to catch up..... until someone figures how to commercialize the photon based CPU
Score
3
April 28, 2010 4:44:35 AM

In video/audio compressión, render, virtualization, encryption, PII X6 1090 is on par with it 960 or even surpass i7 975.

Comparing i7 930 with this chip for thinks that matters is just pure intel drone nonsense.

Look at hexus review.
Score
5
April 28, 2010 6:16:21 AM

Great. Another super-clockers event where participants will use LN2 instead of the typical air (and water) systems most of the real-world users of these CPUs will actually employ. Sorry if I seem underwhelmed...
Score
3
April 28, 2010 6:23:38 AM

i7 is not "6$ more expensive". Don't forget Intel motherboards cost more than AMD's.
Score
6
April 28, 2010 9:32:05 AM

should three catagories, 1) AIR , 2) WATER , 3) ALL ELSE (LN2 etc) .

Or subdive air into stock and commonly availible, then internet water to externer water, then whatever they can possible do with an unlimited budget and uncommmon expertise. Bottom line, price/Ghz STABLE , no power nor FPS nor other qualitative measures.
Score
2
April 28, 2010 9:44:21 AM

AMD should just give up. Intel is clearly superior in all categories and will be forever so bye bye AMD.
Score
-9
April 28, 2010 11:46:41 AM

I guess the real "Wow" here is the fact that it keeps up nicely with the 980X in most threaded Apps, and leaves the rest in the dust. The Thuban you can purchase right now from Tiger Direct for $220 with Bing Cash Back.

Is the 1090T worth $220? Absolutely! And you also must factor in that fact that the MB/Memory combination is much cheaper on the AMD platform.

I will be getting a 1090T.
Score
1
April 28, 2010 12:17:00 PM

AMD YOU FAIL!!!
Black OPS website down, error message.
App Engine Error :

Over Quota

This Google App Engine application is temporarily over its serving quota. Please try again later.
Score
-5
April 28, 2010 12:44:54 PM

killerclickAMD should just give up. Intel is clearly superior in all categories and will be forever so bye bye AMD.


And if and when AMD goes bye bye, as you cleverly put it, will you be happy when Intel screws you over with some kind of netburst 2.0 architecture, overpriced processors and a lack of innovation?

That would be the inevitable result of the loss of AMD as a CPU competitor.

If you are an Intel fan, you SHOULD support a healthy AMD.
Score
7
April 28, 2010 1:34:41 PM

I'm excited to know the results of overclocking!
Score
3
April 28, 2010 2:31:22 PM

Oh thanks for reposting those builder I was having a little buyers remorse. I run at 1900x1200 where there is hardly any difference at all. Plus I paid ~ $220 at TD yesterday for it. The intel chips are better but in my case I don't want to pay $300 per each fps.
Score
0
April 28, 2010 2:50:48 PM

1st duke of marlboroughJust buy the cheaper one then overclock it, it's not that much more difficult without the black edition!


Overclock requires additional POWER. I don't know how you save $$$.. unless someone like your parents or girl/boy friend paying for electricity.
:) 
Score
-1
April 28, 2010 3:28:05 PM

If you want gaming performance, go with the i7-930. If you want highest overclock-ability, go with the i7 930. If you want multi-threaded performance, still go with the i7-930. People tend to forget that the i7 does 8 threads and it's about the performance of a true 6 core CPU. AMD will never catch up, though this is a great upgrade for AM3 socket owners. If I had an AMD motherboard right now, I'd get this chip in a heartbeat. If I were starting fresh, no one can beat the triple-channel DDR3 performance of X58 and overclock on air of the 930. Both solutions are the same price when you factor in the MB + CPU, so really AMD is playing catchup even in the value added department.
Score
1
April 28, 2010 3:29:14 PM

If you want gaming performance, go with the i7-930. If you want highest overclock-ability, go with the i7 930. If you want multi-threaded performance, still go with the i7-930. People tend to forget that the i7 does 8 threads and it's about the performance of a true 6 core CPU. AMD will never catch up, though this is a great upgrade for AM3 socket owners. If I had an AMD motherboard right now, I'd get this chip in a heartbeat. If I were starting fresh, no one can beat the triple-channel DDR3 performance of X58 and overclock on air of the 930. Both solutions are the same price when you factor in the MB + CPU, so really AMD is playing catchup even in the value added department.
Score
2
April 28, 2010 3:42:05 PM

kartui7 is not "6$ more expensive". Don't forget Intel motherboards cost more than AMD's.

And that they are introducing new sockets/chipsets for next generation of processors, so wheather you upgrading now, or planning to soon, you're out the cost of 2 motherboards, one to use the 930 and one for later upgrade.
As opposed to the 1090T, which works on mobos as far back as AM2+ (so you don't need a new one), and will more then likely be compatible with AM3r2 socket mobos when those come out, assuming I know AMD at all.
So its not just $6 + cost of different mobos. Depending on wher eyou are in the upgrade cycle, the 1090T can be a drop-in upgrade with zero additional costs (exception of maybe some new thermal paste?)

Not to mention that on productivity, 1090T outpaces the 930 and they match just about exactly in gaming. GPU is bottle neck and both are plenty powerful to feed said GPU, esp if you push them to the 3.8-4GH range, which is easy even on stock cooling, never-mind if you throw a quality air sink on there (Noctua or some-such)

"The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed."
Score
-1
April 28, 2010 4:33:52 PM

is already sold out in tigerdirect ~ impressive ~
Score
0
April 28, 2010 4:41:51 PM

twuOverclock requires additional POWER. I don't know how you save $$$.. unless someone like your parents or girl/boy friend paying for electricity.


Pack a lunch one day out of the next 365, and you will pay for the difference in energy consumption between a stock AMD and a moderately OC'd I7.

Of course, you'd be eating out of a feed bag every day for a year to offset the difference in the cost of the chips themselves.
Score
0
April 28, 2010 4:47:57 PM

GAMES GAMES GAMES! Yes, they are awesome. No, they're not everything. If you're looking for a CPU just (or mostly) for gaming... chances are you're not going to buy a AMD X6 CPU. Intel does have AMD beat on that front no doubt. I wouldn't buy a truck for racing and I wouldn't use a sports car to tow a boat. Use the right tool for the job.

If you're looking for a CPU for video encoding/rendering, number crunching or exstream multitasking, AMD brings great value to the table. Add to the fact that this might bring all other CPU down a little in price is also a good thing, even if you're planning on going with a Intel CPU.
Score
1
April 28, 2010 4:58:22 PM

Anandtech made it go to 4 GHz with standard cooler. Not too bad for six core... Not something special either. It seems to be relative near other Pentium II prosessors in that area. The Anandtech has normally not been very agressive with their overclocking though.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3676/phenom-ii-x6-4ghz-an...
Score
1
April 28, 2010 5:47:00 PM

I agree about the LN2. I don't really care if someone could even OC my 486 to 10 GHz at absolute zero. I can't make that happen so it's still going to sit in my shed.
Score
1
April 28, 2010 6:49:37 PM

The difference between the i7 930 and X6 is usually not more than 10% (win or lose), and when the x6 beats the 930 it is generally tied with the 975.

That being said, an i7 975 is basically a 3.3ghz i7 930.

It really is going to come down to clock rate, in heavily threaded apps the x6 wins at stock, but with the i7s consistently able to hit over 4ghz on air, thuban needs to prove it can keep up at these speeds to be viable. My 930 runs at 4ghz at stock vcore, if Thuban has THAT kind of potential then hallelujah: intel finally has a fight on its hands.

For an example, a 980x is $1000 and can be beat (at stock) by a $300 930 at 4ghz or higher. The X6 needs to have enough headroom to match the 930, the proc it is priced against, or it is just a paper tiger.

It's a stopgap measure, we all know that, but if the chip has loads of latent potential then it will most likely become an enthusiast favorite for years. Like the old C2D Wolfdale chips that everyone loved.
Score
1
April 29, 2010 11:12:45 AM

I gotta say i want one , a 6 core cpu at a reasonable price , gotta love AMD
Score
0
May 10, 2010 1:33:45 AM

in0va3In the same vein, the gaming benchmarks are a reminder that the latest and greatest graphics cards really do need a capable processor behind them if you want to unleash their potential. An overclockable CPU like the Core i7-920 or -930 can really open up a Radeon HD 5870 or GeForce GTX 480 when you get it up to the 4 GHz range. Dipping down to 3.2 GHz doesn’t really help the 1090T win any battles in the games (Call of Duty excepted, where Turbo CORE seems to improve performance over the X4 965). If you’re a gamer, save the money you’d spend on a six-core CPU, buy your favorite overclockable processor, and spend the difference on graphics or an SSD to cut level load times. AMD’s hexa-core Phenom II X6 1090T is decidedly a productivity-oriented part designed to improve the performance of threaded apps. It extends the usefulness of Socket AM3 until Bulldozer emerges in 2011. As a result, your 790FX-based motherboard will do the job just fine—it’s probably not worth upgrading to 890FX at this point. Turbo CORE is conceptually a good answer to Turbo Boost, but I had a hard time proving its effectiveness in the real-world. Best-case, it helped the 3.2 GHz 1090T keep pace with the 3.4 GHz 965 in single-threaded titles.

Score
0
May 15, 2010 8:02:33 AM

the greater goodGAMES GAMES GAMES! Yes, they are awesome. No, they're not everything. If you're looking for a CPU just (or mostly) for gaming... chances are you're not going to buy a AMD X6 CPU. Intel does have AMD beat on that front no doubt. I wouldn't buy a truck for racing and I wouldn't use a sports car to tow a boat. Use the right tool for the job.If you're looking for a CPU for video encoding/rendering, number crunching or exstream multitasking, AMD brings great value to the table. Add to the fact that this might bring all other CPU down a little in price is also a good thing, even if you're planning on going with a Intel CPU.

Very well put.
Score
0
!