Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD Phenom II X6 1090T VS INTEL I5 750

Last response: in CPUs
Share
December 9, 2010 8:58:23 AM

I would like to have your opinion about who is better?Iam talking about price/performance so i can make a buy!!
the intel costs about 185 euro the amd costs 235 euro!

thanks for your time!
a b à CPUs
December 9, 2010 10:12:05 AM

chrs1984 said:
I would like to have your opinion about who is better?Iam talking about price/performance so i can make a buy!!
the intel costs about 185 euro the amd costs 235 euro!

thanks for your time!

You want to just know or you are interested in buying? If you are going to buy then its important for us to know that what are you going to use your PC for?

@dipankar: Not everyone buys a PC for gaming, you know. So its better to clarify first.
a b à CPUs
December 9, 2010 10:56:47 AM

Yeah, if the OP isn't gaming at all but doing stuff like 3D works and heavy rendering then he will get more benefit from 1090T...
Related resources
December 9, 2010 1:34:29 PM

hell_storm2004 said:

@dipankar: Not everyone buys a PC for gaming, you know. So its better to clarify first.


He has a mindless automatic macro that posts that response into any thread that has this subject. (He needs to add correct punctuation to the copied message.)

a b à CPUs
December 9, 2010 1:39:14 PM

keithlm said:
He has a mindless automatic macro that posts that response into any thread that has this subject. (He needs to add correct punctuation to the copied message.)

:D 
a b à CPUs
December 9, 2010 1:47:08 PM

X6 overclocked to 4.0 GHz is really hard to beat for price / performance. Yes the I5 is a touch faster, but debatable if it would be noticed in a gaming rig with a good GPU. In case you missed the new X6 article... http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/phenom-ii-x6-1100t-...

Not gaming = X6
December 9, 2010 3:01:46 PM

Quote:
As for OCing X6 hardly scales beyong 4ghz while i5 overclocks past 4ghz with ease and scales nicely.i5 is cheaper and provides maximum bang for money.


You seem to be using the word "scales" as referring to a increase in frequency. Scaling and frequency are related but they are not the same thing and scaling can't be used as a substitute.

Scaling is determined by how much performance changes as the frequency changes. Claiming that the X6 hardly scales beyond 4Ghz would be disingenuous; it is not too hard to find results that show that the X6 generally scales almost linearly as the frequency increases above 4.0Ghz.
a b à CPUs
December 9, 2010 3:12:45 PM

Sorry... I am looking at a local store (MicroCenter) which has the 1090T + MSI 785G-E53 for $240. The I5 750 is $200 then you need a MB. Don't see the cost / performace ratio in favor of Intel here. Or... where can you get into an I5 750 for $250?

With a good GPU and all other things being equal, how many FPS do you feel would be sacraficed to the 1090T over the I5 750?
a b à CPUs
December 9, 2010 3:32:29 PM

Oh... You are 19! That makes sense now! Try posting without attacking... (sorry OP)
a b à CPUs
December 9, 2010 4:16:12 PM

Compare the prices with the mainboards. You will find that once you compare it on that basis, the Thuban will come out slightly cheaper.

I will not go into the benchmark discussion again. Until such time as games and applications are more multi-thread aware, these benchmarks will never play towards the strength of the Thuban, since the individual cores have a lower IPC than the Nehalem cores.

I will point out, though, that there is an upgrade path for Thuban. When AM3+ mainboards come out, you can migrate to a new mainboard and install your Thuban processor and memory. Once the BD processors settle out, you can then upgrade the processor as well. When you purchase an i5, it will only work with the 1156 mainboard. When SB and IB come out, you will have to buy new processors and mainboards to take advantage of those architectures. This isn't a problem if you expect to build a new machine every 12-18 months, but most of us have to work within a budget, so making those small transitions and still gaining the advantage of near-cutting edge technology is a nice bonus.
December 10, 2010 5:32:11 AM

Thanks for your answers i really appreciated!By the way ia planning using it for gaming and decopressing movies from rar files!I think that intel is better but a mobo with intel costs too much epecially if i want a usb 3!So maybe ishould stick with a phenom II 955!
thanks for your time guys!
p.s i keep my pc for many years iam not upgrating every 1 or two years!
a b à CPUs
December 10, 2010 5:48:14 AM

chrs1984 said:
Thanks for your answers i really appreciated!By the way ia planning using it for gaming and decopressing movies from rar files!I think that intel is better but a mobo with intel costs too much epecially if i want a usb 3!So maybe ishould stick with a phenom II 955!
thanks for your time guys!
p.s i keep my pc for many years iam not upgrating every 1 or two years!


^
Then take a look at CsG_kieran_2 link above:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/109?vs=146

Intel i5 is faster at 7-zip world compression.
But just like you said earlier, you want a decent system for long term and not too expensive, this is can be achieve with AMD CPU+Mobo.
If you buy i5 (4cores) for now then you won't be able to upgrade later to 6cores CPU like 1090T.
a b à CPUs
December 10, 2010 6:12:50 AM

Well, the OP will not upgrading for a long time, just like he said above.
So, if he getting 4cores cpu right now and later in the future there's more and more applications that uses more than 4cores, the 4cores cpu will become "old" faster than if he get 6cores cpu now...
That's my "thinking", maybe I was wrong, I don't know.
a b à CPUs
December 10, 2010 6:49:12 AM

Well... We may argue on whatever we want. But its best to get the factors cleared from the OP himself. What he will be doing with his PC, how long will he be keeping it, what's his budget.
December 10, 2010 11:52:59 AM

if you like cores then get two 8 core opteron lol. now thats pricy
a b à CPUs
December 10, 2010 11:56:23 AM

dipankar, you really are Intel's shill. Price IS an important factor, since quite a few people don't have an unlimited budget because we have to worry about things like...mortgages, kids, bills, insurance, businesses, etc., which, as young as you are, you are not having to deal with yet (I hope, for your sake). Eventually, your folks will have to wean you off the teat as well, and some of this reality might seep into your sense of the world. For right now, focus on college, etc., and don't let our reality get in the way of your opinions, right?

We should also start to see more use of GPGPU once OpenCL gets wider adoption. AMD, Nvidia and Intel have all thrown in their support for this standard, as well as Apple and Microsoft, but AMD has adopted it wholesale in favor of their home-built Stream, while Nvidia is adapting CUDA to work within OpenCL. With widespread adoption, you would then expect to see processing-intense applications able to leverage any processing resource (including the CPU, GPU and any other coprocessors) by accessing a single programming layer (in this case, OpenCL) much like a games designers now access OpenGL or DirectX. Granted, i have explained this in layman's terms, but needless to say, it is a quite a bit more complex than this explanation.

As for the situation right now, when you are talking about a system, you have to talk about it as a whole, and not just one part or another. It's like taking any single phrase I have said out of context. Pairing a very fast CPU with a very slow GPU will make a horrible gaming system. The opposite is true as well.

Any processor that is in a system that does not include enough memory will have problems as well. And if the user intends to put the machine through intensive disk i/o, irregardless of CPU choice, you do not want him using a 5900 rpm HD, but you would rather advise him towards a 10,000 rpm HD or even an SSD if the budget is there.

Also, GPU selection is just as important as CPU selection, and in a game system, even more important. CPU is just one piece of the whole, and it must work well with all the other pieces involved. If the user, for instance, wants to run Linux, then GPU selection becomes even more important because some chipsets do not have Linux support. I'm not saying this is the case here, but there are factors that do come into account other than just benchmarks.
a b à CPUs
December 10, 2010 12:48:01 PM

It's the reason why we ask for more details from the OP like "what do you plan on doing with this system?" or "what kind of budget, overall, are you working with?" rather than just toss out benchmarks and opinions. We have no idea of his situation...all he asked was which processor gave the better price/performance without giving any further information.

For games, sure, the i5 may be a better performer, but is it a better buy? It depends on his budget and how much GPU his budget can afford. What if the purchase of the i5 only leaves room in his budget for a 5770, whereas a Phenom II system would allows him to move up to a 6850. He would probably see a bigger gaming performance from being able to buy the 6850 than he would from buying the i5. These decisions are not made in a vacuum.
December 10, 2010 3:28:11 PM

@ OP, Getting a AMD based Mobo will give some good options for value (price VS raw performance.If you want solid gaming and don't want to invest in 200 bucks jus in a Cpu, get a Tri core.If you have more cash on your hands get a Phenom quad, and you really want to spend cash and have bragging rights get X6.Intel is the faster platform blah blah 5 more FPS in crysis and blah blah 7 more FPS in Far Cry 2.......but it is at times 10-30% more expensive.My suggestion is grab a solid board from AMD like a 880 or 890 chipset and get a tri core, once you need more speed either buy a new cpu or unlock the 4 th core (if yer lucky) or over clock the CPU.Just my 2 cents
January 15, 2011 5:33:30 PM

Stick with your 955, the Phenom II X6s are VASTLY overrated.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/146?vs=191

Here's a comparison of the 1090T vs the 760. For RAR and 7 Zip compression the 760 wins hands down and that's before overclocking the two where Intel's 32nm process will easily outshine the Phenom II X6's 45nm. By the way the AMD processor costs more.

The X6 and i5 trade blows even in content creation with the i5 winning in most real world apps and the X6 winning in heavily threaded benchmarks that don't translate to real world performance. See the 7 zip benchmarks vs. the real life application.

As for gaming the i5 demolishes the X6 in games that are CPU limited.

Once again, this is comparing the more expensive 1090T to the 760 and before they are overclocked. If you get both of these chips to their maximum OC the 760 will stomp it even more.

For anyone who thinks game developers are going to start using six cores they need to get some common sense. Developers scan your system information for a reason: they want to sell games to the MOST people. If Blizzard sells SC II to someone with an i7 and GTX 580 it makes the same amount of money as they do selling to someone with a C2D and a 9600GSO. Guess what there's more of? C2D's and 9600GSO (maybe not the GSO anymore but you get the point). This will continue to be the case for at least the next 5 years.

Now that Sandy Bridge is out the AMD fanboys have even less hope of successfully spreading their misinformation. Not that I don't feel bad for AMD: less revenue and less profit means less R&D and always falling behind.
!