Phenom II, 790GX, thoughts.

[Proximon]

By now folks have seen the benchmarks and heard the reports on overclocking. I'm really not trying to beat this dead horse... we have already mammoth threads over in the CPU forums on this. Rather, I'm trying to find some consensus not on the CPU quality, but on possible new AMD build and whether mid-range AMD builds are now practical again.

All the reviews are saying that AMD is now "competitive" again.

Phenom II
Anandtech places the Q6600 exactly between the Phenom II 920 and 940 on most benchmarks. In fact, there seems to be very little difference between the two CPUs over all. This is not so different then from the 9950, which also compared about even with the Q6600.
AMD Phenom II X4 940 & 920: A True Return to Competition
TH Phenom II review

The difference of course is in the overclocking, and apparently here the new Phenoms compete well with Intel. They don't clean up here as was forecast by AMD, but the average overclocker will get just as much from Phenom II as they would from an Intel Q6600.

So, you can get a Phenom II and, with some overclocking, get all the performance you need out of it... in this way, I guess you can say that AMD is back in the game.

Obviously there is still no competition for Q9550 or i7.

So newegg puts the Q6600 at $190 today.
The Phenom II 920 is $235 (+$45).
The Phenom II 940 is $275 (+$85).

The 790GX chipset
This is where things get interesting in my view, as the 790GX and 790FX are great chipsets. You can get really nice crossfire speeds out of these at reasonable prices, and onboard graphics of the 790GX are excellent. Prices have come down some, as well.

So, you could get some decent performance out of these builds now, as long as you overclock.

What about SLI chipsets under for AMD? Are there any good ones, or is it pretty much like the Nvidia chipsets for Intel?

I would like to put AMD into my guide, but I just can't quite find a spot for it yet. I think the price has to come down some.

Of course, if you already own an AM2+ board, this seems like a great upgrade option.

Can anyone see a reason to include either of these new CPUs in recommendations just yet?

 

[FHDelux]

This is beating a dead horse, but i can answer your question in short. If it was really worth recommending, you wouldn't have to ask if it was worth recommending, because you would know. Why does everyone here run E8X00s and Q6600s? Because they are a phenomenal deal price to performance.

The word competitive though doesn't mean caught up. AMD needs some help in the performance per clock then they will be gtg.

 

[dirtmountain]

I disagree with FHD. The AMD CPUs are competitive at their price range with Intel. Comparing a 940 on a 790GX/SB750 to a Q9400 on a P45 is head to head. The 940 on a 790FX/SB750 is a viable answer to a Q9400/Q9450 on a X38/X48. Agreed there is no current comparison from AMD to the i7 and the Q9550/Q9650 are faster, but no reason not to recommend a chip that holds it's own at it's price range.
When ATI came out with the 4850/4870 you didn't see people say "well the GTX280 is faster so only an idiot would get the slower GPU" the $650 price of the GTX280 at introduction made it not cost effective.

 

[jay2tall]

^ I agree. AMD has at least gotten their graphics cards in order. Now it's time to get their CPU's up to par.

I am not bias on anything I just know what's good. But in the CPU area you have to go with intel. The ONLY place I could recommend AMD is if you are in the budget area and you do not plan to overclock.

 

[buzznut]

Yes, I think you answered your own question-these processors are now AMD's top of the line and can be dropped in existing motherboards. For now, they can be recommended to owners of mobos containing sb750 chipsets who want an upgrade.

As for the rest of the line, we will have to wait and see how the new motherboards, memory, and processors work together in Feb.
I guess we'll see then if they may be competitive with i7.

Probably more likely to be competitive with i5, but of course that is speculation.