In the interest of preventing the usual intel fanboy nonsense, I compiled comments from AMD X6 conclusions from a huge variety of websites.
http://www.guru3d.com/article/phenom-ii-x6-1055t-1090t-review/20
http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=24332&page=12
http://hothardware.com/Articles/AMD-Phenom-II-X6-6Core-Processor-Review/?page=14
http://www.legionhardware.com/articles_pages/amd_phenom_ii_x6_1090t_be_1055t,9.html
http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/amd_phenom_x6_1090t/12.html
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=910&type=expert&pid=12
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-phenom-ii-x6-1090t-890fx,2613-14.html
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/31407-amd-phenom-ii-x6-10
55t-1090t-six-core-processors-review-17.html
http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,746125/AMD-Phenom-II-X6-1090T-and-1055T-Six-cores-on
-a-budget/Reviews/
http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/amd_phenom2_x6_1090t/19.htm
http://anandtech.com/show/3674/amds-sixcore-phenom-ii-x6-1090t-1055t-reviewed/12
http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=508&Itemid=63&lim
it=1&limitstart=11
http://www.bjorn3d.com/read.php?cID=1853&pageID=8969
http://www.lostcircuits.com/mambo//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=81&Itemid=
1&limit=1&limitstart=23
http://www.pureoverclock.com/review.php?id=966&page=13
http://www.guru3d.com/article/phenom-ii-x6-1055t-1090t-review/20
...look at content creation, 3D design, video transcoding etc where
applications are heavily threaded then the Phenom II X6 1055T performs roughly at the
level of a Core i7 860~870 ( 300~550 USD), and the 1090T closes in on the Core i7
950/965 (580/800 USD).
http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=24332&page=12
The mere thought of a well-clocked hexa-core processor with Turbo functionality
being made available for less than £250 would have seemed little more than a hopeful
dream just months ago. The fact that AMD has made that dream a reality with the Phenom
II X6 line, in a backward-compatible socket no less, is certainly worthy of
acclaim.
http://hothardware.com/Articles/AMD-Phenom-II-X6-6Core-Processor-Review/?page=14
in all but a couple of tests, performance of the AMD Phenom II X6 1090T fell
somewhere in between the Intel Core i7 870 (Lynnfield) and i7 975 (Bloomfield),
although it was much closer to the 975 more often than not.
Our tests showed the 1090T performing in roughly the same neighborhood as the
Core i7 870 and Core i7 975 depending on the application, but the Phenom II X6 1090T
costs hundreds of dollars less than both.
http://www.legionhardware.com/articles_pages/amd_phenom_ii_x6_1090t_be_1055t,9.html
Here the Phenom II X6 1090T, and even the slower 1055T, out gunned the Core i7
930, while they were significantly faster than the Core i5 750. The only processor to
beat the new Phenom II X6’s was the Core i7 980XE, but at more than three times the
price of the 1090T, this is hardly a concern.
under the right circumstances the Phenom II X6 processors are extremely fast,
faster than the Core i5 and Core i7 quad-core processors.
http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/amd_phenom_x6_1090t/12.html
...as soon as you feed it well threaded software, each X6 runs over their
respective competitor with ease. So much ease in fact, that it ends up beating the Core
i7-870 and 920 on many occasions.
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=910&type=expert&pid=12
When comparing price/performance, the 1090T is very competitive with the 930,
and seriously wipes the floor with the 950 and 870 parts
$285 vs. $999 for approximately 90% of the performance.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-phenom-ii-x6-1090t-890fx,2613-14.html
As a result, it’s easy to recommend the Phenom II X6 1090T for folks able to
employ its six cores. Video work, threaded Photoshop filters, rendering—in those
workloads, AMD’s new flagship is, in many cases, able to keep up with the quad-core
Core i7-975.
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/31407-amd-phenom-ii-x6-10
55t-1090t-six-core-processors-review-17.html
Frankly, AMD have done an ACE job with these new processors. The results really
do speak for themselves.
http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,746125/AMD-Phenom-II-X6-1090T-and-1055T-Six-cores-on
-a-budget/Reviews/
when you look at bang for the buck or the fastest cpu in the sub-300 Euro
category, AMD has more to offer.
While some of the more expensive Intels quadcore processors can keep up with
AMDs sixcore cpus, the future and more threaded applications will shift the bias more
toward AMDs offerings, making them even more attractive. AMDs Phenom II X6 10xxT is
really putting Intel under pressure.
http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/amd_phenom2_x6_1090t/19.htm
When it comes to gauging the performance among similarly priced processors, the
six cores of the 1090T start to shine. When benchmarked, the 1090T was able to keep up
or beat the majority of the quad core processors and even topped the 980X a few
times.
http://anandtech.com/show/3674/amds-sixcore-phenom-ii-x6-1090t-1055t-reviewed/12
If you're running applications that are well threaded and you're looking to
improve performance in them, AMD generally offers you better performance for the same
money as Intel. The 1090T can easily trump the Core i7 860 and the 1055T can do even
better against the Core i5 750.
http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=508&Itemid=63&lim
it=1&limitstart=11
If we base the competition by price (assuming AMD's assertion of a sub-$300 MSRP
is legitimate), the Phenom-II X6-1090T is the hands-down winner on all fronts, as it
beats the i7-920 in nearly all performance measures while also offering an unmatched
price-performance ratio over the expensive i7-980X.
The Music tests in PCMark Vantage certainly lend proof to at least one area of
dominance, while the TV and Movies tests showed us that the X6-1090T could match
performance with the 980X... and cost nearly $840 less.
In terms of real-world professional design application performance, nearly all
4-thread SPECviewperf benchmarks agreed that AMD made the best processor for their
tasks.
After review of our test results, it's difficult to ignore how well the 3.2GHz
six-core AMD Phenom-II X6-1090T has done in comparison to Intel counterparts. Equally
impressive is how well the 3.4GHz quad-core AMD X4-965 kept up, and confirmed the power
contained within AMD's Phenom-II architecture. The X6-1090T may not have always placed
first in every benchmark we tested, but it occasionally offered unrivaled performance
and generally finished at the top.
http://www.bjorn3d.com/read.php?cID=1853&pageID=8969
it is clear that AMD is continuing on the path of delivering excellent
performance at an affordable price.
http://www.lostcircuits.com/mambo//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=81&Itemid=
1&limit=1&limitstart=23
The interesting part about the Thuban six-core processors is that they are still
a value proposition, yet, they are getting dangerously close to Intel’s top performing
flagship CPUs.
AMD’s new flagship CPU, the Dragon that doesn’t bite its own tail but shows in
benchmark after benchmark that it is a serious contender.
http://www.pureoverclock.com/review.php?id=966&page=13
AMD's Phenom II X6 is a fantastic chip, both at stock and overclocked speeds.
Its overclockability now settles into Intel’s Core i7 territory, previously
unattainable until now.
the Phenom II X6 can beat the Core i7 in programs that can fully utilize the six
physical cores, whereas the Core i7 (Bloomfield / Lynnfield) only has 4 cores, and the
4 virtual threads don’t scale nearly as well as real, physical cores.
Value-wise, the Leo platform simply can't be beat. For the cost of the Intel
980X alone, you can have most of the components for a complete AMD Leo-based
setup.
Thuban is definitely a game changer.