Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

AMD vs INTEL ( corei 7 930 vs phenom ii x6 1090)

Last response: in CPUs
Share
April 28, 2010 12:01:15 AM

i want to buy cpu and my heay program is gaming,autocad and heavy calculation and video....
so i have 320$ for cpu.and i am between i7 930 and 1090t
in froum i read that when you overclock to cpu i 7 930 is better than 1090t.is it true?
April 28, 2010 12:08:33 AM

Alfred_i said:
i want to buy cpu and my heay program is gaming,autocad and heavy calculation and video....
so i have 320$ for cpu.and i am between i7 930 and 1090t
in froum i read that when you overclock to cpu i 7 930 is better than 1090t.is it true?

from the benchmarks i have seen the 1090t had better score in video and music infact in music it out scored 1200$ intel chip but its hard to say for what u r doing i go for the 1090t u have to take benchmarks with a grain of salt for as the 1090t did better in some benchmarks the i7 930 did better in others so it up to u what u need the cpu for and how much better it does those tasks
April 28, 2010 12:17:33 AM

just read somemore benchmarks and reviews and most r saying that the 1090t tops the i7 930 in most benchmarks and is very close to the i7 975 but still readding lol
Related resources
April 28, 2010 12:20:43 AM

i don't see overclocked 930 vs 1090t have you link?
a b à CPUs
April 28, 2010 12:24:34 AM

There is no evidence to support that an overclocked 930 is better than an overclocked 1090T. In fact, considering that a 1090T beats the i7 975 EE in a lot of benchmarks, it is much more likely that clock for clock, the X6 is faster albeit by not a huge margin.
April 28, 2010 12:30:51 AM

jennyh said:
There is no evidence to support that an overclocked 930 is better than an overclocked 1090T. In fact, considering that a 1090T beats the i7 975 EE in a lot of benchmarks, it is much more likely that clock for clock, the X6 is faster albeit by not a huge margin.

so you tell me that if i buy 1090t 309$,like intel 800 969$.but in gaming 1090t is not good as phenom ii965 or 930.have any link that 1090t beat 975ee?
a b à CPUs
April 28, 2010 12:33:05 AM

Alfred_i said:
i want to buy cpu and my heay program is gaming,autocad and heavy calculation and video....
so i have 320$ for cpu.and i am between i7 930 and 1090t
in froum i read that when you overclock to cpu i 7 930 is better than 1090t.is it true?


Its a tradeoff. The I7 930 is a stronger gaming chip, 1090t is better for encoding. Your doing both, but it looks to me like more encoding. I would go 1090t for sure.

As for your overclocking question, it depends. IF you can overclock them both to the same speed, say 4 GHZ, the 930 would be a little faster as it does a little more work per clock cycle. But the 1090t has an unlocked multiplier which makes for an easier overclock.

Multiplier overclocking is a much preferred route in my view. It also puts less stress on other components like board chipsets and memory since you can leave the MB setting at stock.

Finally, AMD is better at keeping an upgrade path. For example, in a year you decide to upgrade your cpu, but wish to continue using your other components. AMD is far more likely to have a faster, drop in, replacement available than Intel. A big advantage down the line.


April 28, 2010 12:33:30 AM

jennyh said:
There is no evidence to support that an overclocked 930 is better than an overclocked 1090T. In fact, considering that a 1090T beats the i7 975 EE in a lot of benchmarks, it is much more likely that clock for clock, the X6 is faster albeit by not a huge margin.


Let's be clear jennyh the 1090t lose more benchmarks then it win against the i7 975EE and the i7 930 can be overclocked to the same clock speed
as the i7 975 and higher, so no the 1090t will not just beat i7 930 running at the same clock speed.
a b à CPUs
April 28, 2010 12:35:08 AM

FALC0N said:
Finally, AMD is better at keeping an upgrade path. For example, in a year you decide to upgrade your cpu, but wish to continue using your other components. AMD is far more likely to have a faster, drop in, replacement available than Intel. A big advantage down the line.


I seriously doubt that.
April 28, 2010 12:45:47 AM

i ask to say your reason with document(link,benchmark)
i am a civil engineer now you know that what exactly i want.
thanks every body
a b à CPUs
April 28, 2010 12:52:47 AM

earl45 said:
Let's be clear jennyh the 1090t lose more benchmarks then it win against the i7 975EE and the i7 930 can be overclocked to the same clock speed
as the i7 975 and higher, so no the 1090t will not just beat i7 930 running at the same clock speed.


You do realise the i7 975 EE is higher clocked than the 1090T right? :pfff: 
April 28, 2010 1:00:35 AM

jennyh said:
You do realise the i7 975 EE is higher clocked than the 1090T right? :pfff: 


My point still remain the same it lose more then it wins.
a b à CPUs
April 28, 2010 1:18:25 AM

earl45 said:
My point still remain the same it lose more then it wins.


No your point was that clock for clock the i7 930 would beat the 1090T.

What actually will happen is, the 930 will win the benchmarks it always won in, and the X6 will win the benchmarks it always won in.

It is well known that the 930 is a poor overclocker comparitively btw.
a c 207 à CPUs
April 28, 2010 1:24:30 AM

Alfred_i said:
i ask to say your reason with document(link,benchmark)
i am a civil engineer now you know that what exactly i want.
thanks every body


As you can tell by my name, we're in the same field .... I have yet to see an AutoCAD box with an AMD processor.
a b à CPUs
April 28, 2010 1:28:00 AM

How many 6 core cpu's have you seen I wonder?
April 28, 2010 1:30:51 AM

Alfred_i said:
http://www.techspot.com/review/269-amd-phenom2-x6-1090T...
here is overclocked 1090t but it loss core i930 in 2.8!!!hey jennyh!!!did you see this?


Thank you for proving my point to blindside jenny.
point in fact the i7 930 is the comp. for the 1090t
and holds up pretty damn good, 4 cores is giving
6 cores a problem.
a b à CPUs
April 28, 2010 1:31:45 AM

Try to imagine this at 4ghz and you'll get the point. Real cores > HT *so long as the software is good enough*. Thuban is totally destroying the i7's here because the software is good. Any time the software is good, this will occur. Why? Because Thuban is faster, it really is that simple.

April 28, 2010 1:32:45 AM

one thing :
is the all of program that test cpu with them and bencahmarked.do they support 6 core?
a b à CPUs
April 28, 2010 1:36:35 AM

jennyh said:


It is well known that the 930 is a poor overclocker comparitively btw.


Your kidding right ? You have to give me a link where that was observed. Compared to what, the 920? They achieve a 50% o/c by just about anyone.

Made this post in the other thread, but its more relevant here because the question posed here.


Quote:
Strange as it might seem, but a quad-core CPU on Intel Nehalem microarchitecture with Hyper-Threading technology overclocked to 4.0 GHz almost always outperforms six-core CPU from AMD. At the same time I can’t say that Thuban’s frequency potential is higher that of Core i7 CPUs on Lynnfield and Bloomfield cores. Therefore, there is only one possible conclusion here: microarchitecture of contemporary Intel processors makes them faster than AMD processors working at the same clock frequency. And even a 1.5 times increase in the number of computational cores can’t make up for that. That is why we again arrive to the same conclusion that AMD’s only weapon in the battle for consumers is their pricing policy.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/phenom-ii-...

a b à CPUs
April 28, 2010 1:37:34 AM

No not all of the benchmarks support 6 cores.

If they did, Thuban would be miles ahead. This is where it appears to be falling behind - in poorly threaded apps, but the reality is it's the software that isn't optimised for the cpu. The cpu itself is clearly superior so long as the software is up to it.
a b à CPUs
April 28, 2010 1:39:09 AM

Notty all I see is a bunch of synthetics except for a couple (cinebench, x264) and they are both almost identical - one win each.

What about my pov ray benchmark? Or this BC2 one where Thuban takes apart all the intels, especially the i5 750 which loses by over 10% even when clocked to 4.3ghz vs the stock 1090T? How does the 1090T at stock beat Gulftown at 4.2ghz?

April 28, 2010 1:39:53 AM

yes in video and rendering amd is the best in price/performance.but in another field.i tell you that i am a fan of amd.but i want to choose intellectual answer!!so tell me the best choice without prejudice.i adopt you jennyh
April 28, 2010 1:42:13 AM

Alfred_i said:
yes in video and rendering amd is the best in price/performance.but in another field.i tell you that i am a fan of amd.but i want to choose intellectual answer!!so tell me the best choice without prejudice.i adopt you jennyh



She can't.
a b à CPUs
April 28, 2010 1:43:19 AM

autocad I have no idea, 'heavy calculation' sounds like it will suit intel cpu's more and video normally suits intel too.
a b à CPUs
April 28, 2010 1:43:51 AM

earl45 said:
She can't.


Weird but I just did.
April 28, 2010 1:45:56 AM

so if i buy 1090t.where i know that the program support 6 core!!!but there is an one thing.if they didn't support the 6 core why in they core i980x is better than all 4core?
a b à CPUs
April 28, 2010 1:46:31 AM

Synthetic benchmarks will use 6 cores and hyperthreading for intel cpus better than most programs buyers of these cpus might encounter. The tests at least showed 4ghz quad vs 4 ghz hex . Intel always ran every productivity program faster, IMO, AMD might be tied in a lot of them , but it took 50% more cores. Is that a bad thing ? NOPE, the price is in the ballpark. Theres room on the podium for AMD to take the silver medal , for now :) 
April 28, 2010 1:47:15 AM

notty22 said:
Your kidding right ? You have to give me a link where that was observed. Compared to what, the 920? They achieve a 50% o/c by just about anyone.

Made this post in the other thread, but its more relevant here because the question posed here.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/phenom-ii-x6-1090t/table-3.png
Quote:
Strange as it might seem, but a quad-core CPU on Intel Nehalem microarchitecture with Hyper-Threading technology overclocked to 4.0 GHz almost always outperforms six-core CPU from AMD. At the same time I can’t say that Thuban’s frequency potential is higher that of Core i7 CPUs on Lynnfield and Bloomfield cores. Therefore, there is only one possible conclusion here: microarchitecture of contemporary Intel processors makes them faster than AMD processors working at the same clock frequency. And even a 1.5 times increase in the number of computational cores can’t make up for that. That is why we again arrive to the same conclusion that AMD’s only weapon in the battle for consumers is their pricing policy.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/phenom-ii-...



Thanks again for showing jenny she's lying, that show running at the same clock speed the 930 is king over the 1090t it's as simple as that.
April 28, 2010 1:50:06 AM

notty22 said:
Synthetic benchmarks will use 6 cores and hyperthreading for intel cpus better than most programs buyers of these cpus might encounter. The tests at least showed 4ghz quad vs 4 ghz hex . Intel always ran every productivity program faster, IMO, AMD might be tied in a lot of them , but it took 50% more cores. Is that a bad thing ? NOPE, the price is in the ballpark. Theres room on the podium for AMD to take the silver medal , for now :) 



I totaly agree with you.
a b à CPUs
April 28, 2010 1:50:08 AM

The i7 980x has faster clocks and more cache than the other cpu's and that is why it still beats the quad cores in some apps that only use a few cores.

However, if you consider the price of it, it's simply not worth it except for extreme professional work. As a gaming cpu it's terrible simply due to the price.
a b à CPUs
April 28, 2010 1:50:17 AM

earl45 said:
Thanks again for showing jenny she's lying, that show running at the same clock speed the 930 is king over the 1090t it's as simple as that.


Actually if you looked at those benchmarks at stock speeds you'd see the intel still won. :whistle: 

Once again I'll invite you to explain the following benchmarks :-



Do you see how the stock X6 easily beats all intels except the 980X? Look at how massive the gap is between the 1090T and the i7 920, or the 860 that Chad likes to talk about - it's almost 30% faster than the 860 here in true multithreaded apps.



And here? Thuban shows it is a real gaming cpu. Nothing will truly challenge multithreaded cpu's in gaming like BF2 will.
a b à CPUs
April 28, 2010 1:56:06 AM

earl45 said:
Someone who has 955 or a 965 like yourself the 1090t is a terrible purchase for gaming too, because you gain nothing in gaming with this chip.


I also have a q6600 which I could sell and buy a 1055T for not much more. :) 
April 28, 2010 1:56:21 AM

this place is where that we want to help together .plz don't toil
April 28, 2010 1:56:30 AM

jennyh said:
The i7 980x has faster clocks and more cache than the other cpu's and that is why it still beats the quad cores in some apps that only use a few cores.

However, if you consider the price of it, it's simply not worth it except for extreme professional work. As a gaming cpu it's terrible simply due to the price.



Someone who has 955 or a 965 like yourself the 1090t is a terrible purchase for gaming too, because you gain nothing in gaming with this chip.
April 28, 2010 2:01:39 AM

jennyh said:
I also have a q6600 which I could sell and buy a 1055T for not much more. :) 



The hype you put out about this chip has fallen very short of the mark you set.
April 28, 2010 2:05:50 AM

why do you expliot like this!!!amd and intel compete with together and this is good for us.and you battle toghether for that?it's funny.
April 28, 2010 2:10:50 AM

earl45 said:
Thank you for proving my point to blindside jenny.
point in fact the i7 930 is the comp. for the 1090t
and holds up pretty damn good, 4 cores is giving
6 cores a problem.

i love the way u guys say 4 core hold up to 6 cores when we all know that intel 4 cores has ht witch is really a small core within a big core
a b à CPUs
April 28, 2010 2:11:19 AM

As a enthusiast there is definitely some cool novelty vibes with a 6 core cpu, I'd be lying if I said otherwise. With that rebate today,pretty exciting, I hope Intel counters with another 920,750,860,930 type cpu. This was AMD's first strong counter punch at the high end in a while.
April 28, 2010 2:24:11 AM

ellric46 said:
i love the way u guys say 4 core hold up to 6 cores when we all know that intel 4 cores has ht witch is really a small core within a big core

if you look at the prices you don't say it!!!if i want buy an 1000$cpu like core i980x i go to buy opteron 12core amd 6172 or 6 core amd 8435.we want choose the best option with 320$ and we don't want to compare amd core with intel core.so if you want this go to another topic and say it.
April 28, 2010 2:25:56 AM

notty22 said:
As a enthusiast there is definitely some cool novelty vibes with a 6 core cpu, I'd be lying if I said otherwise. With that rebate today,pretty exciting, I hope Intel counters with another 920,750,860,930 type cpu. This was AMD's first strong counter punch at the high end in a while.

good point its good that they r both threwing punches and i hope they keep at it for i use both amd and intel i just hope bulldozzer is as good as they say it will be i would love to see that 1000$ itel chip come down to lets say 400 to 500 so i can see what it can do lol
a b à CPUs
April 28, 2010 7:14:27 AM

BadTrip said:
I seriously doubt that.


Somehow that doesn't surprise me BadTrip. There is a solid history to draw from, and it is not disputed by anyone who knows what they are talking about. However, my experience with you suggest you are not in that category.
April 28, 2010 1:21:23 PM

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html
amd 1090t rank is 3!!and it catch all the intel cpu in 900$ except core 980x.it is a big problem for intel i think the reaction of intel is same with last year it means that core i9 is better than phenom ii6 but very expensive.and like phenom iix4 965 and corei7.but amd will have better selling.and i think in 2011 or 2012 amd cacth intel as we know ati cathed geforce
July 3, 2010 10:43:15 PM

If people have to argue for pages and look at counless benchmarks to see if a CPU that is twice as expensive as another is better, worse, or the same.. and after the benchmarks it's still not 100% clear.. anyone who doesn't have a limitless disposable budget is going to pick the cheaper one. $130 vs $300 on ebay.

And by the way if all you are doing is autocad.. you can run that on a $2 processor and a $25 video card. Single core 3ghz w/ x1300 or better, and a couple GB's of RAM would MORE than handle the largest and most complex building known to man. You're just making lines w/ compound points then filling it in with simple textures at the most. My mom is a landscape architect who uses autocad in conjunction with photoshop and sketchup on billion dollar projects in Dubai and she uses a laptop from the 90's w/ no upgrades lol.
a c 103 à CPUs
July 3, 2010 11:40:02 PM

How about a Commodore 64 overclocked to 4GHz or an etch a sketch.
July 2, 2011 5:21:06 PM

If our friend wants a cpu for PROFESSIONAL USE

1) YOU NEVER OVERCLOCK IN BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT
Business environments need STABLE performance OVER huge time margin = never overclock

2) DESIGN 3d PROGRAMS WILL BENEFIT MORE FROM INTEL CPU+NVIDIA GPU (CUDA). Whoever says that APP from AMD Radeons is good , yes its good BUT! its not implemented in PROGRAMS YET!


3) It's not that AMD doesn't have good performance CPUs. It's just that from an IT point of view, along a PC Technician and Service point of view, i would never recommend an AMD cpu for a business work. Unfortunately its a trust that has been built over the years in the proffesional world from INTEL...and AMD can't beat it with a good chip every once in a while..Not to mention Program support might not help alot if you mention you have AMD cpu...Seen it in many accounting programs in my country....


Dear friend, don't check for differences in performance of 1-10%. These differences may be THE OTHER WAY depending what PROGRAM you will use. Some programs might work better with INTEL on a matter where AMD cpu might beat the INTEL chip. That's why i recommend that you buy INTEL cpu for your business...
a b à CPUs
July 2, 2011 5:26:30 PM

i hope you guys saw the data of the OP and how its irrelevant now with sandy bridge cpu's....
a c 201 à CPUs
July 2, 2011 5:43:06 PM

This topic has been closed by Hunter315
!