Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Intel Core i7 875k vs AMD Phenom II X6 1090T

Last response: in Overclocking
Share
September 7, 2010 9:54:29 AM

Hello guys. I was talking in another thread about the temperature of Intel's chips (which are high), vs the temperature of AMD chips.

I like GTX 460 because Nvidia FINALLY found a way how to make cooler chips. I hate things that run at 90C-95C because that can damage my components.

I damaged my beautiful ASUS P6T Deluxe (a $250 motherboard), and a expensive Soundblaster X-Fi Fatal1ty Champion Edition, because my expensive GTX 295 SLI just damaged the whole freaking computer

I highlight the word EXPENSIVE because I learned the lesson.

Expensive is not necessarily better, so a 1090T processor might not be as good as the $1000 Intel counterpart, but maybe it's just a more efficient product.

Now, back to my case, I have 2 options
1) AMD - runs cool at 65C
2) Intel - runs hot at 80C-90C

In my own personal experience, AMD Phenom II X6 1055T was very slow with video games. However, when I disabled Turbo and overclocked that baby to 4.0Ghz, man, that CPU was running my GTX 470 to 100% of it's speed.

I was running Crysis 1920x1080 on High, Average FPS: 52.75 with the 1055T.
Can I expect the same with an Intel chip?
Unfortunately I sold my GTX 470 so I can't compare

If I overclock a 1090T @ 4.2 Ghz, then 6 real cores running cool and overclocked at a nice speed will be hard to beat

I like Intel because with 4 cores Intel is very similar performance to AMD with 6 cores

so Intel is more 'efficient', I know for a fact that with Intel my games will run 3-10FPS faster than with AMD

Maybe Intel Virtual cores (or whatever the name is), really works great in games.

I've seen benchmarks comparing the Intel Core it 930 vs AMD Phenom II X6 1090T, and they run about the same

the Phenom X6 runs better with true multi-core programs, such as Adobe Premiere CS5

however, in games, I remember Crysis running around 7-8 FPS higher with the Intel processors.


The way I see it, if I buy and spend money on Nvidia GTX 460, or GTX 470, I might as well buy a processor that uses every ounce of power in that video card.

Intel motherboards also have SLI, AM3 motherboards don't

however, with the SLI Patch, I can enable SLI on AM3 motherboards with no problems.

I like the fact that AMD makes every possible attempt to allow users to keep using their motherboards for long, long time

I know people with AM2 motherboards payed $299 and had an amazing 6 core processor, just a BIOS update.

I know on the other hand that Intel makes every single possible attempt to force users to change motherboards every 1-2 years.

So, I was thinking maybe donating this computer to my mom (I think a Intel Core i7-875k overclocked at 4.0Ghz might be a bit too much for Solitaire), but I want to have a good computer in my house, I can use it if I don't have one or if I sold mine.

So, what do you say guys?

Intel as the main computer and AMD as a backup?

or AMD as a main one and Intel as the backup?

One last thing thought, I know for a fact that Windows 7 64-bit is a GREAT program for multicore.

Windows 7 will use every ounce of juice my 1090T can handle, so do you think an Intel Core i7 875k runs better than an AMD 1090T or is it the other way around?
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
September 7, 2010 3:04:24 PM

Quote:
ROFL

Sounds like you already know EVERYTHING, why do you need us?

Any of those processors will run 100% of a midrange card like 460 or 470, so it really doesn't matter until your running 2 high end cards like GTX480.


Quote:
2) Intel - runs hot at 80C-90C


I got my laugh for the day. Anyone else?




Indeed, i suspect i will be laughing for a few days as those temps are damn near impossible, hell, even 60c would be considered on the higher side but 90? thinking he's using lava in his cooling system as opposed to water or coolant?
September 7, 2010 10:05:20 PM

I need you guys because I've seen a lot of experts in Toms Hardware

My idle temperatures are 39 C
My high temperatures are 71 C

I overclocked an Intel Core i7 875k to 4.1Ghz and those are the temperatures, my max temperature with Acronis True Image Home was 85C-90C

I overclocked an AMD Phenom II X6 1055T to 4.0 Ghz and my max temperature with Acronis True Image Home was 60C

The TJ Max for Intel is 99C
the TJ Max for AMD is 65C

So it's fact, not fiction.
AMD is 35C lower than Intel

You can even read the Intel Core i7 875k overclocking tutorial from Toms Hardware, they had problems too since the CPU will reach temperatures close to the 99C TJ Max limit.

So they were only able to overclock their CPU to 4.13Ghz, so I pretty much have the same results

Anyway, before making fun of anybody at Toms Hardware, please, remember this place is a place where people should grown, not make fun of each other

And you guys are way confused with Intel, you think an overclocked Intel reaches 60C max!!???

haha
you obviously haven't done it or you live in Alaska
Related resources
September 7, 2010 11:27:58 PM

Tj max is the maximum allowable temp for a processor's internal cores, if you reach Tj max the processor's THERMTRIP# signal will activate shutdown to prevent damage to the processor.

So I am correct, I should never reach those temperatures

overall, I am now happy with 4.0 Ghz. It requires less voltage and the temperature is lower, and I won't even feel the difference

Thanks guys
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
September 8, 2010 3:33:01 AM

Are you using the same cooler on both chips? Same airflow?

Just asking because my i5 750 (which is cooler than the HT chips) runs significantly cooler than that at 3.6GHz (I wish i remember the numbers, but I don't offhand), though I was lucky and it was a very low voltage chip (which helps a lot, as you can imagine).
September 8, 2010 3:50:33 AM

Amd six core is the best processor when overclocked......ant its more future proof....
September 8, 2010 7:25:03 AM

Yeah I like the fact that AMD tries people that have old motherboards to do a small BIOS update and still use their products.

I think it's impressive the 1090T runs on an old AM2 motherboard with DDR2 RAM

I will like to try the 1090T, maybe I can reach 4.2 Ghz with 6 cores, that will be pretty sweet.

to EXT64, same room, same case, same cooler, same month of the year, same everything

a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
September 8, 2010 12:59:13 PM

Running a Core i7 CPU above 65c on full load is not something anyone would advise, sure, if you're stressing the CPU and you hit 71c or even a little higher for just a few moments, that is fine but while gaming or performing intensive tasks, i would not let my CPU get that hot...

Instance: I have my Q6600 @ 3.6 and my load temps don't go higher than 62c, if i try to OC it more to say, 3.8, i can keep it stable but the temps jump quite a bit to 69c, therefore, 3.6 works for me, the performance gain from 3.6 to 3.8 is not justifiable for the prospect of frying my CPU...

So again, we're not trying to make fun of you, it may have made us laugh but we're still trying to help you.
September 8, 2010 7:48:55 PM

Yeah well 4.0Ghz seems like a good temperature for me

Low 39C
High 62 C

If I run Prime95 the temperature might go up to 76C-80C

but I don't run Prime95 every single day, so that's good

Now, Acronis runs 10C hotter than any other program on the planet, I don't believe the programmers are good at saving resources

so when I run that program I will downclock to 3.8Ghz

Going from 4.0Ghz to 4.1Ghz seems to put a lot of stress on my CPU

first of all I have to raise the voltage a lot
and then the gain is not great, it's just 100 Mhz
but the temperature does goes up
September 9, 2010 6:13:20 PM

The 1090T WILL run on an AM2 motherboard, but you require a BIOS update

but there's no point in discussing this

I know that Sandy (4 cores, 8 threads) will require yet another motherboard change
and Sandy (second half of 2011, 8 cores, 16 threads) will require yet another motherboard change

so if you want the latest of Intel you need 2 motherboard changes in the next 12 months

Now, AMD will also release Bulldozer around the second half of 2011, and that will have 16 cores, 8 modules.

In other words, in Intel terms, 8 cores, 16 threads

the problem is that AMD calls the threads cores, and the cores modules

this is because AMD will have 16 cores, but they will share certain things.

To be honest, 2011 will be an exciting year, but the only thing I know is that AMD will try to include as less motherboard changes as possible

Intel will try to include as many motherboard changes as possible :) 

haha

I really want to buy an AMD motherboard since I like a lot of things that the company is doing.

I want to have a computer with Intel and another one with AMD
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
September 9, 2010 8:50:11 PM

Just to finish up my little comment, my i5 at 3.6GHz tops out around 59C.

My 1055T at 2.8GHz tops out at 48C.

Both use a Hyper 212+, and in terms of raw computational power, in LinX the 1055T edges out the i5 by a few gflops (however in single threading the i5 crushes the 1055T).
September 9, 2010 10:08:42 PM

Well the issue is that Windows 7 64-bit is a good multi-thread application, so in theory, for every day Windows 7 64-bit use, will the 6 core AMD Phenom II X6 1090T core be better than the Intel Core i7 875k?

I think so

The one thing I hate about Intel is they want you to change motherboards every 6 months.

Next year Sandy will force Intel fanatics to switch to a brand new motherboard on January (4 cores, 8 threads)

and then again switch to yet another new motherboard on the second half (8 cores, 16 threads)

September 10, 2010 12:47:53 PM

Oh dammit

so AM2 is not the same as AM2+?

No idea about that

but anyway, my POINT IS, AMD tries to be backward compatible, Intel doesn't

I am not so sure I want to change motherboards two times next year, 2011 I want to enjoy my computer, not install/reinstall Windows every 6 months
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
September 10, 2010 3:36:33 PM

really, i wish both AMD and Intel would just learn by example and go the same route as LGA 775... such a nice platform in it's prime...
September 17, 2010 10:08:22 AM

judging by your choice of words, and overall lack of technical knowledge surprising on a reputable website such as this, i think you have a lot of homework to do still before balancing out what your wants/needs are. you are going back and forth talking about a processor series that costs up to a thousand dollars and back to a processor that is less than 300 bucks. as for CPU bottlenecks with graphics cards, perhaps you are super-human but my eyes cannot tell the difference between 60 fps and 100 fps. honestly, intel gives you bragging rights. yes, intel is the fastest CPU. but the ultimate question is; is it worth it? also, is this something that you NEED? for a great multimedia machine, and a sweet gaming rig, AMD is sufficient, but i'm not saying it's the only choice.

i'll reiterate, you are going back and forth to two different processors with a nearly 400-500 dollar price difference. you just don't compare mid-upper i7's to phenom II. perhaps if your questions or concerns were between some i5's vs phenom II's, this forum would be more willing to help rather than laugh at you.

and yea, that mess about 80-90 Celsius gave me a big ol' banana grin :) 
September 17, 2010 10:20:45 AM

jonpaul37 said:


So again, we're not trying to make fun of you, it may have made us laugh but we're still trying to help you.


this guy says he needs and wants our input and help, and right after he corrected someone for trying to help him understand what "TJ Max" is.

this guy is a know it all, and comparing the top 6 core AMD to the top 4/6 core Intel is just stupid. regardless of how biased or how much you favor one company over the other, every one of us here would choose to have intel's flagship.

sidenote (sorry to the AMD gods for admitting that on an internet forum)

this person is the kind of guy who writes newegg reviews with 5/5 bars of "Technical Knowledge," and then starts talking about how 80 degrees Celsius is quite normal for only "Intel" cpus.

****To answer initial question, if it was the question? lol :D 
Please, if you can specify what it is that you're trying to achieve let us know. If you want a cooler more energy efficient platform, it would be an Intel CPU with ATi (AMD) GPU.
September 19, 2010 3:24:12 AM

Rafara,

Well I might as well stir the pot some more... and to get some more guys "on your side"...

If you think Sin7 is a good multitasking OS then suggest you try something that had a design goal a bit more in that direction instead of something hacked to that goal.
:pfff: 

I'll not mention any names [putting on armor] but... it starts with "L" and ends with "x".
;) 

Compiz & Plugins

Compiz Cube & Wine

Vista under Ubuntu
November 13, 2010 4:11:23 AM

Quote:
No AM2 does not support AthlonII or Phenom II. AM2+ does. AM3 does.

Yes AMD did a good job keeping it's customers happy. But it's over now. New socket soon.



actually many AM2 baords can have a bios update to supports some of the lower end AM3 chips. The Asus A2M-VM can run the full range of athlon II cpu but its a am2 board.

But no an AM2 board will not run an X6.
!