Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

1090T vs i7

Last response: in CPUs
Share
June 25, 2010 2:19:34 PM

Hi,

Building a MINI-ITX PC...all sorted except for the choice, AMD or INTEL

Current board offer AM3 or 1156....so i'm left to choose between the 6 core AMD or an 8 series i7

6 real cores vs 8 HT cores.

Both will be bundled with a top spec (£250) GPU something like the GTX470.

Will bold on 4gb DDR3 6-6-6-20 RAM

Also going to be used for programming/database testing (lots of indexing and criteria) and running film decoder.

Any thoughts?

Would prob get the cheaper 6 core (not the black edition T)

Thoughts?

All to be housed inside a nice Silverstone SUGO 05 so can have a big cooler and full 9" graphics card

More about : 1090t

June 25, 2010 2:23:31 PM

Actually may use the 1050T.. £100 cheaper!
Related resources
June 25, 2010 2:46:59 PM

also the socket 1156 / 1366 is going to change again next year? but the 1050t will be a bit more future proof.

Looking at new games like BFBC2....it can use up to 6 cores....so would it run better on 6 true cores VS the 8 hyper thread cores an i7 could offer? Different instruction set. Always thought real cores would win the show?
a b à CPUs
June 25, 2010 3:06:19 PM

Quote:
The i7 would be better for gaming. The 1050T will get better as more apps begin to use more cores.

The 1055T is good for 4-4.2ghz and it's pretty darn cheap. Hard to pass up.

The GTX470 is 9.5" long.


The Phenom II X6 won't be getting any better vs. the Core i7. If anything... it may be getting worse as more apps support SSE4 and higher.

Right now, as it stands, apllications which make use of more cores still pit an equally clocked Core i7, overall, as being equal to a Phenom II X6 of the same clock speed. And applications that use less cores shine on the Core i7 architecture.

What the Phenom II X6 has going for it is the price. Hard to pass up a 1055T at its current price.


lmartinefc said:
also the socket 1156 / 1366 is going to change again next year? but the 1050t will be a bit more future proof.

Looking at new games like BFBC2....it can use up to 6 cores....so would it run better on 6 true cores VS the 8 hyper thread cores an i7 could offer? Different instruction set. Always thought real cores would win the show?


Intel has a better architecture therefore core for core Intel is quite a bit faster. In applications that make use of more core, Intel's HT boost the Core i7s performance. And with SSE4 and higher being adopted now (more and more) the multitasking and multicore performance for Core i7 based processors (in encoding and editing applications) will rise.

As for the Phenom II X6, (Video, Audio etc) applications that don't yet make use of the 6 core will get a boost but since most do make use of the 6 cores... performance will stagnate.

And for future proofing.. current information suggests that Bulldozer is going to be a Quad Channel processor (thus making current motherboard built on AM3 obsolete as they're only capable of Dual Channel). Perhaps AMD will still allow the Bulldozer to run on current motherboards... but who would want to run a castrated Bulldozer system?
June 25, 2010 3:09:43 PM

Well that leaves me with one option then .... the intel i7...

But im running it through mini itx, and there are only socket 1156 available, no triple channel 1366 (will this change?)

So will have to run an i5 750 or and i7 8XX series.

Would this be running a castrated i7 or does triple channel only offer a slight advantage over dual channel?

Considering an i7 8XX is about the same as an i5 750 and other major reason to go for one over the other?
a b à CPUs
June 25, 2010 4:38:33 PM

i7 8xx would be your best bet then for the type of work you're looking to do. As for Triple Channel Memory... the performance benefits are negligible. Only the 980x really benefits from Triple Channel memory.
a b à CPUs
June 25, 2010 4:48:41 PM

If you're planning on using that graphics card then the only Mini ITX case you can use is the new Silverstone Sugo SG07 - it will fit a Radeon 5790 and has a 80+ certified 600W PSU.

http://silverstonetek.com/products/p_contents.php?pno=S...

Oh, and I'd personally get a Radeon 5850 over the GTX470 - very similar performance but uses much less power and pumps out much less heat - very important for your SFF system. Plus you can give it a bit of an overclock to boost it near to a 5870.

EDIT: for 9.5 and 10 inch cards you might be able to use the Lian Li PC-Q07B and put in a full ATX PSU
a b à CPUs
June 25, 2010 6:17:46 PM

Quote:
Socket 1156 is being killed off in 5 months for socket 1155 and Sandy Bridge. There's that reason and the limited PCIE lanes which make it a bad buy. AM3 and an X6 1055T that will easily do 4.2Gghz is what you want.


Socket AM3 is being killed off in 5 months as well (as we know it as Bulldozer will be using a Quad Channel memory configuration).

As for the limited PCIe lanes.. this is a miniITX... not important to mention that.

The only thing that is important is the performance in the applications mentioned (or type of applications). And for his use... a Core i7 8xx series is his best bet.

As for Overclocking.. it's a MiniITX lol.
a b à CPUs
June 25, 2010 9:17:22 PM

Let's not forget, the 1155 is only getting 20 lanes as well. And 2011 isn't supposed to come out until late (Q4) 2011.

I hate how much they're gimping the 'mainstream' chipsets. Hell the 2011 is getting 40 3.0 lanes, 4x the bandwidth! Come on intel!
a b à CPUs
June 25, 2010 9:37:00 PM

Quote:
I think i'm done with intel. Prices are just too much bullshit for what they offer. Amd might be alittle slower but low 100 dollar boards are what i like.


I hear ya. Intel is pulling a bunch of crap by making a super dumbed down version of their chipset/cpu (6MB L3 compared to 20MB) and calling it mainstream to take away attention from their ridiculous 'enthusiast' motherboard costs.

20 lanes might not effect 1156 too much but with a new CPU arch its pushing it. They're going to end up forcing high-end gamers into their 'enthusiast' setup just for the PCIe lanes... which you would think could have been avoided.
a b à CPUs
June 25, 2010 10:03:32 PM

Quote:
Socket 1156 is being killed off in 5 months for socket 1155 and Sandy Bridge. There's that reason and the limited PCIE lanes which make it a bad buy. AM3 and an X6 1055T that will easily do 4.2Gghz is what you want.


The OP didn't even mention gaming. He's doing programming and database testing. PCI-E lanes aren't going to matter. Even if he did game, a single GTX 470 isn't going to have an issue at all. Perhaps there's be a little loss with SLI, but still not really worth fussing over.
a c 151 à CPUs
June 26, 2010 1:49:34 AM

if the OP is willing to settle for a 1055T then an i5-750 would meet that level just as well in my opinion. Though with the OP's limited board selections a 1055T is probably the best solution.
a b à CPUs
June 27, 2010 1:48:42 AM

Quote:
Wrong again. The first bulldozers will be AM3. Bulldozer won't change sockets until they merge gpu with cpu.


*rolls eyes* you sir need to learn to read.

We're talking about needing to change motherboards.. not sockets.

Current AM3 based boards are Dual Channel capable. Bulldozer will be Quad Channel capable due to the need for more bandwidth to feed each processor Core.

Perhaps you might be able to use it in current AM3 boards but AMD has NOT confirmed this. Right now it is a rumor.
a b à CPUs
June 27, 2010 1:53:18 AM

Quote:
Not true at all. Apps that use a true 6 cores will run much faster on a 6 core cpu than a i7 4 core. It will get better as apps use more cores. Quoting directly from TH's review.


You base this on what?

I base my observations on:
http://www.hardwareheaven.com/reviews.php?reviewid=964
http://www.guru3d.com/article/phenom-ii-x6-1055t-1090t-...
http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=24332
http://hothardware.com/Articles/AMD-Phenom-II-X6-6Core-...
http://www.legionhardware.com/articles_pages/amd_phenom...
http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/amd_...
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=910
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2010/04/27/amd-ph...
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-phenom-ii-x6-10...
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2363071,00.a...
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-r...
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/phenom-ii-...
http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,746125/AMD-Phenom-II...
http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/amd_phenom2_x6_...
http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/982
http://www.techspot.com/news/38729-amd-phenom-ii-x6-109...
http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/prozessoren/2010/tes...
http://anandtech.com/show/3674/amds-sixcore-phenom-ii-x...
http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.php?option=com_conten...
http://www.bjorn3d.com/read.php?cID=1853
http://www.lostcircuits.com/mambo//index.php?option=com...
http://www.pureoverclock.com/article966.html
http://www.vmodtech.com/main/article/amd-leo-platform/a...
http://www.pcworld.fr/article/materiel/cpu/phenom-core-...

And based on these results.. aside from the odd result here and there...

Core i7 > or = Phenom II X6 per clock.

Core i7 sometimes loses per clock but it is rather rare. In applications that use all 6 cores, the Phenom II X6 tends to still lose (most of the time) per clk.

Now what I stated is that many of these applications (where the Core i7 loses) are not optimized for SSE4, 4.1 and 4.2. Therefore AMDs performance in those applications is already optimal whereas there is room for the Core i7 to grow, performance wise, should these applications use those optimizations.

So my conclusions are correct and you're wrong. Deal with it.. people who argue with me tend to be wrong. You see I don't read other people's conclusions. I could care less about the articles associated with benchmarks. I read the raw data and information pertinent to said raw data. I then am able, all on my own, to formulate my own conclusions. So to be honest.. I don't give a *** what Toms conclusions are...lol
a b à CPUs
June 27, 2010 1:56:14 AM

Quote:
Bulldozer is rumored to work on AM3r2 so while most will buy a new board for that yummy quad channel memory others will probably use AM3

That's a rumor.

I heard a rumor that pigs fly. Therefore we may need to build special pens for all of the pigs out there less they all fly away.
a b à CPUs
June 27, 2010 11:31:58 AM

ElMoIsEviL said:
I heard a rumor that pigs fly.


Oh, In Cincinnati they do. :whistle: 

(just showing a few of the pigs)






:lol: 
a b à CPUs
June 27, 2010 12:00:58 PM

in performance, the i7 930 beats the 1090T is about 60% of the benchmarks, mostly gaming. However, as a build, the 1090T, and even more so the 1055T, are cheaper, now amd is getting some QUALITY mobos for their 8xx series, the x6 runs cooler, more energy efficiently, is more future proof, and will possibly increase in the benchmarks it wins over time, due to more cores used in apps and games. therefore, OVERALL the x6 is a better cpu imo, although it really depends on what you are doing, for MAINLY gaming, id go with a x4 955, an i5 750, or the i7. for mainly apps and synthetics, id go with the 1055T or 1090T. The 1090T does the same as the 955 in gaming, so its not bad at gaming, its just 2x the cost of the 955 for no added gain, but as games use more cores, it will likely show better fps.
a b à CPUs
June 30, 2010 10:28:46 PM

I don't think sandy or bulldozer will tickle my fancy once I get my 30" and 2 5870s (after price drops).

Come on I want to upgrade! Bring the heat AMD! I'm not paying $350 for a $200 mobo (sorry intel)!
June 30, 2010 11:22:55 PM

Ah borlocks to it ill just wait 5 months. Got some guy offering me his i5 750 for £90. Just got 6Gb DDR3 1333Mhz off him for £70.

But thinking ill leave to processor, and all mentioned above....might as well wait 5 months to get either the new intel socket or the new AMD bulldozer

Any initial specs on either of these? Specs, names (intel i9 ??), speed, cache...new features (other than quad channel ram)
a b à CPUs
June 30, 2010 11:39:10 PM

not many specs are out on the bull dozer, mainly cuz its such a new architecture. i believe it will have a HT like system, but any of the specs that are given cant be related to any other cpus out now, its going to be very new. might be good, might be bad, will probably be more expensive, and will probs start out at 32 nm and am3, might go into am3+ and 28 nm, it all depends, and nobody knows for sure until we get our hands on it.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
July 1, 2010 1:30:43 AM

OP, 1055t will blow your socks right off, and it will run way way cooler in your small form factor design by at least 15C compared to i7. Seriously gtx 470 and 1055 is all you need!!! The future moves on us quick so no point dawdling too much, decide buy build and use before the next upgrade cycle is on us!!
July 1, 2010 7:23:57 AM

I would recommend use the 1090T, save you $80.

July 1, 2010 8:23:19 AM

If you keeping looking to the future to buy pc parts you will never have a pc to use. Buy now, Buy current and enjoy! I agree the i7 are nice but for the system you are building low heat is a plus and the AMD 1055t or 1090t works. By the time you rebuild this system or even upgrade you will need a new motherboard anyway. If something you want is coming out in a week or even two wait but otherwise just move on with your build.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
July 1, 2010 8:33:12 AM

optimusn said:
I would recommend use the 1090T, save you $80.


I cannot see 1090t being sense in Small form factor PC as you will ot be mega OC on 1090 due to cooling restrictions, but you could OC the 1050t to 1090t stock settings very easily with these restrictions and save £150.00 or half the price for same performance!
July 1, 2010 11:10:06 AM

Thanks guys

I do have a PC at present. It is an atom 330 dual core (with HT) running @ 1.6. Had some fun overclocking it but now back to stock settings. Running it with 4gb DDR3 in dual channel but its limited to 1066Mhz. 512Mb of this if borrowed by the ION chipset for GPU. Can play some modern games (CoD on low settings - other games from last year etc)...and GTAIII runs like a dream, lol

I just though if I was going to shell out might as well get the new chips. But guessing they'll cost a bomb. Might see how cheap the 1050 gets over the next couple of months. It would be a good compromise. Cheap, 6 true cores. Maybe not as sharp and lightning as the i7, but better than the i5. And alot cheaper (and this price will only go down going forward). All mobo are cheap for this as well
July 1, 2010 11:15:13 AM

And for me...im basing my experience of 'fast' on my previous unit. A Q6600 clocked to 3.2Ghz running 1:1 with 800Mhz ddr2 4-4-4-12 and a 5770. So how would the AMD 1050 and GTX 470 compare? Would like to strap 8Gb RAM to it and move up to 64 bit computing. At present I only ever bother with 4gb RAM as I only use 32 bit windows.

How would 64 bit windows benefit me, other than being able to access more RAM? other features of this environment. better GPU interactions? more streamlined processing (as the chips are 64 bit).
July 1, 2010 11:21:43 AM

Although.......being offered an i5 750 chip for £90. Could probably put him down to £80. Then strap it to a socket 1156 mini itx (same price as a socket 3).

The 1050 would be about even with an i5 750? Most benchmarks put the 1090 around an i7 930 mark

Comments welcome on all 3 posts welcome
a b à CPUs
July 3, 2010 5:09:56 AM

The i5-750 is the same CPU as the i7-8xx minus the hyperthreading. So in apps that require 4 or less cores, the i5 would lead significantly.

The same goes for the Phenom II X6 with programs threaded for more than 4 cores. The 6 cores will significantly lead the 750 if you can fully use them, and the 1055T is very overclockable.
!