Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD 965 or 10555T

Last response: in CPUs
Share
August 5, 2010 12:21:37 PM

Hello hardware people! I talk to you from the software side. :p 

1. Which processor would be a better choice? For example; why have four cores when six is the same price?
2. I'm slightly sceptical about the X6 being as well refined as the X4, although it does benchmark much higher...
3. Is it simple (for a beginner) to overclock any processor, and the 'Black Edition' just makes it a one click process?
4. Will the power consumption be much higher with the 6 core option, or will 'Cool & Quiet' take care of that?

The computer will be used for video editing, as well as virtualisation, multiple applications and casual gaming.

(A) AMD Phenom II X4 965 (BE) - 3.4GHz
(B) AMD Phenom II X6 1055T - 2.8GHz


Thanks in advance for any help and advice. :) 

More about : amd 965 10555t

August 5, 2010 12:57:16 PM

i struggled with the same decision, in the end i ended up with the 1055t, for 2 main reasons,

1. price is almost the same
2. x6 is super easy to over clock, i'm running at 3.6ghz on simple air. the highest i've ever seen my temp go up to is 54C - and that was after playing GTA4 for about 3 hrs straight.

August 5, 2010 1:02:20 PM

xaero1ne said:
i struggled with the same decision, in the end i ended up with the 1055t, for 2 main reasons,

1. price is almost the same
2. x6 is super easy to over clock, i'm running at 3.6ghz on simple air. the highest i've ever seen my temp go up to is 54C - and that was after playing GTA4 for about 3 hrs straight.


The price has me stumped too. I really can't understand why they're the same price, and yet the X6 benchmarks so much better.
I love your analogy, by the way! I know a few people who can't even get GTA4 to run, and yet the X6 steams away on air alone.
Related resources
a b à CPUs
August 5, 2010 1:05:06 PM

I would definetly go for the 1055t, its more futureproof (if there were a thing) because more and more programs are being able to utilize 6 threads. Which means that when the 4 core processors fall behind in threading, you will pick up speed with the 6 cores.
August 5, 2010 1:05:08 PM

IMHO the 1055t is the best bang for your buck, plus 6 cores is a lot nicer for video editing and productivity
a b à CPUs
August 5, 2010 1:12:17 PM

If you run multiple VMs simultaneously (and they're all doing things, not just sitting idle) then 6 core would benefit you. Video editing may benefit depending on what it is you are actually doing. If you do encoding at all then you can expect a benefit with 6 cores if you're using the right encoder. Gaming will show little to no benefit in almost all cases, but there are a few exceptions.
August 5, 2010 1:13:41 PM

Computerrock1 said:
I would definetly go for the 1055t, its more futureproof (if there were a thing) because more and more programs are being able to utilize 6 threads. Which means that when the 4 core processors fall behind in threading, you will pick up speed with the 6 cores.


Yeah, the words 'future proof' and 'computer' don't go in the same sentence these days, do they? :lol: 
But that's what I was wondering - the multithreading capabilies of future applications. Thanks for that.

xaero1ne said:
IMHO the 1055t is the best bang for your buck, plus 6 cores is a lot nicer for video editing and productivity


I would have thought so, but I decided to check as the clock speed is lower, and it's an 'early' 6-core model.
August 5, 2010 1:19:49 PM

randomizer said:
If you run multiple VMs simultaneously (and they're all doing things, not just sitting idle) then 6 core would benefit you. Video editing may benefit depending on what it is you are actually doing. If you do encoding at all then you can expect a benefit with 6 cores if you're using the right encoder. Gaming will show little to no benefit in almost all cases, but there are a few exceptions.


Well you're not making it any easier for me to resist purchasing this processor, are you? :p 
Well, when I say 'gaming', I mean Microsoft Flight Simulator and the odd casual game on Roller Coaster Tycoon or Grand Theft Auto. :sol: 
I would be doing a lot of rendering, but it's basic stuff at only 720p - I'm not an expert, but my current computers' 8 hours is ridiculous.
August 5, 2010 1:23:54 PM

Does anyone who owns the 1055T have any experiences with the power consumption?
I've heard of the 'Cool & Quiet' feature on these processors, but does it actually work?
I'm planning on getting either a 650W or 750W power supply, although 650W preferably.
August 5, 2010 1:25:29 PM

like i said earlier, the 2.8 stock clock speed can be easily over come with a decent HSF, i bumped mine up to 3.6 in about 20 minutes.
a b à CPUs
August 5, 2010 1:25:55 PM

From my experience with AMD, its throttling program, cool and quiet is very effective. Even while its not throttling it manages to keep my cpu cooler. Also there is CE1 programming in the cpu, which is another power saving feature for AMD.
August 5, 2010 1:28:55 PM

to me cool n quite is very effective in the sense that the when you need the power it's almost instant. i haven't really paid that much attention to see any difference in my power bill, my system runs 24/7 anyways
August 5, 2010 1:31:53 PM

xaero1ne said:
like i said earlier, the 2.8 stock clock speed can be easily over come with a decent HSF, i bumped mine up to 3.6 in about 20 minutes.


I'm going for an after market heatsink and fan anyway, because I want a quiet rig. Plus I'm obsessed with cooling. :lol: 

Computerrock1 said:
From my experience with AMD, its throttling program, cool and quiet is very effective. Even while its not throttling it manages to keep my cpu cooler. Also there is CE1 programming in the cpu, which is another power saving feature for AMD.


Well, as long as it does an acceptable job, and doesn't need full clock speed to open up Notepad, I'm happy. :sol:  Thanks for your input.
August 5, 2010 1:34:18 PM

xaero1ne said:
to me cool n quite is very effective in the sense that the when you need the power it's almost instant. i haven't really paid that much attention to see any difference in my power bill, my system runs 24/7 anyways


I never actually considered the response speed, but I'm happy to hear that it doesn't lag as much as a bloated copy of Vista increasing the size of the page file. :na: 
August 5, 2010 1:39:31 PM

so there you have it, i believe the clear choice is the 1055T
a b à CPUs
August 5, 2010 1:47:50 PM

Remember that CnQ isn't going to save you a cent while you're rendering ;) 
August 5, 2010 1:51:04 PM

xaero1ne said:
so there you have it, i believe the clear choice is the 1055T


Now that I've heard all this, and thought about it, I would agree. :sol: 

randomizer said:
Remember that CnQ isn't going to save you a cent while you're rendering ;) 


I'm happy to spend that cent in order to have a beatiful 720p video at the end of it. :na: 
August 5, 2010 7:16:51 PM

Thanks to everyone who posted on this topic. :D  I've decided on the 1055T.
August 5, 2010 7:17:04 PM

Thanks to everyone who posted on this topic. :D  I've decided on the 1055T.
!