Would the amd 1090t bottleneck the amd 7970?

[stanistheman]

Would the amd 1090t bottleneck the amd 7970 or the gtx 680

 

[tlmck]

In general, no. Compared to just about anything Intel Core i series, yes. I could not find it right away, but Tom's did a recent article about AMD CPUs causing some sort of bottleneck.

One other thing to look out for is if you play any older DX9 games, you'll likely be disappointed. It seems the new cards have some sort of issue there. DX11 games should be fine.

 

[melikepie]

Would the amd 1090t bottleneck the amd 7970 or the gtx 680

nope it should work fine without any problem so yep

 

[stanistheman]

I Mean i could go with the bulldozer thoughts?

 

[melikepie]

I Mean i could go with the bulldozer thoughts?

well i did and the bulldozer depends on your use beacause how it works poeple would say go with tthe 1090T but i would get a FX 4100 and a H70, H80 or H100 and overclock it to death but whatever the bulldozer ones will not bottleneck it but people say they suck but they really work very well for me so it's your choice. on dirt 3 i saw all 8 threads being used like 1/8 of the thread usage so it runs epicly then benchmarks say so if you want to either overclock a 4 core bulldozer, get a 6 core bullzoder and maybe overclock it a bit or get an 8 core bulldozer but anyway ive used it on games and it works fine i have no idea how benchmarks can say such resaults i have a FX 8120 and it works almost like a 8 core sandy bridge but i think the bulldozer only does bad while your rendering things.

 

[tlmck]

I Mean i could go with the bulldozer thoughts?

The Bulldozer would actually be worse. Take a look at Tom's latest gaming hierarchy chart. You'll notice that even low end Sandy Bridge chips such as the Core i3 series, beat anything AMD has to offer, even when the AMD is overclocked(refer to the first page of the article. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-5.html

As a long time AMD fan(since 386dx40), it makes me sad. But I am also pragmatic. I go with whatever is best for my situation whenever I build.

 

[stanistheman]

The Bulldozer would actually be worse. Take a look at Tom's latest gaming hierarchy chart. You'll notice that even low end Sandy Bridge chips such as the Core i3 series, beat anything AMD has to offer, even when the AMD is overclocked(refer to the first page of the article. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-5.html

As a long time AMD fan(since 386dx40), it makes me sad. But I am also pragmatic. I go with whatever is best for my situation whenever I build.

So your telling me that a core i3? dual core would beat the 1090 wow that makes me NOT wanna get the 1090t AT ALL

but i mean i can get the 1090t for 149.. so yea

 

[stanistheman]

I WANNA CRY :-( I really had my heart set to amd gaming rid you know? just to be different from the rest *sigh* i might just wait for ivy bridge....

 

[tlmck]

The reason to get the 1090t would be if you had apps that could take advantage of all those cores. In gaming, I cannot think of any that I play, although I am sure there are a few out there. Keep in mind also that the Core i3 is multi-threaded, so it acts basically like a quad core. Also, where I live, I can get them for $99 all day long at Microcenter.

I would also note the disclaimer at the bottom of the first page of the Tom's article which states that the comparisons are for gaming only. If you factor in other things such as video encoding/editing, 3D modeling, or other multicore friendly apps, then the advantage would swing towards AMD at least in terms of price.

 

[stanistheman]

You can go ahead and get the AMD rig, just be aware that you'll be spending slightly more money (even moreso considering that overclocking is basically a requirement for a new AMD rig - add $30 for a Hyper 212+ cooler minimum).

So, you spend $30 more (960T) or $60 more (1090T - dangerously close at that point to the FAR superior i5-2400) than an i3-2100 to get roughly equal gaming performance as the i3 IF your CPU can hit 4.0 GHz+. And, you sacrifice any sort of drop-in upgrade path.

I'm not saying you can't do it, just that if you're gonna do it you should go in eyes open to what you're getting from an AMD build.

hehe thanks man for your time. im gonna have a long hard think about this thanks for everyhting

 

[noob2222]

For gaming the dual core i3-2100 will beat any stock AMD processor. It takes a 4.0 GHz+ Phenom x4 or x6 to be even with the i3-2100.

The theoretical computing power of a 6 core Phenom is probably higher than the i3, but the i3 will perform better in games and it gives you a great upgrade path to a 2500k or higher later on if you need an upgrade. (edit - my CPU usage while gaming typically sits between 25-35%.... games just don't need/use tons of cores)

There's no reason to build a new rig around AMD right now for gaming unless you are a die hard AMD fanboy. And, like I said - the 960T at $125 is a better deal than the 1090T at $150. Sadly the i3-2100 is a better deal for gaming than either of them

Do you even realize how aged all those single threaded games are? The entire article was catered for intel.

 

[melikepie]

So your telling me that a core i3? dual core would beat the 1090 wow that makes me NOT wanna get the 1090t AT ALL

but i mean i can get the 1090t for 149.. so yea

nope thats wrong the phenom is much better then a i3 i dont know what he's talking about

 

[melikepie]

Whatever you need top know that benchmarks are not gaming tests they are just seing how fast the cpu will start outputing numbers on a full load nothing to do with the game itself.

 

[melikepie]

Would the amd 1090t bottleneck the amd 7970 or the gtx 680

Im just gonna tell you the awnser of what you asked

NO the phenom is far from being able to bottleneck something like that but the only reson why people say the bulldozer iss so bad is beacause how it runs but it's fine in gaming and really works but benchmarks just tell you basicly for example the time it took for the cpu to add 1 to 10,000 numbers whichs really dont do much for gaming and for the price of a 1090t vs i3 or i5 the 1090t will win for overall be better for that price.

 

[melikepie]

Please come back when you are interested in posting in english with coherent argumentation.

I like how you think that gaming benchmarks have "nothing to do with the game itself"....

first im talking about non gamig bencharks
second gaming bencharks depend on the gpu to
third find the same setup with both CPUs on a gaming benchark that uses cpu power to then ask me

 

[tlmck]

Random note: If you have a microcenter store anywhere near you, you should get intel no questions asked - they have the i3-2100 for $100, the i5-2400 for $150, and the i5-2500k for $200.

i5-2500k = $180

http://www.microcenter.com/

 

[tlmck]

first im talking about non gamig bencharks
second gaming bencharks depend on the gpu to
third find the same setup with both CPUs on a gaming benchark that uses cpu power to then ask me

Non gaming benchmarks are irrelevant to this discussion since the OP is building a gaming rig. Not all benchmarks are GPU dependent. It depends on which game.

I am afraid your third sentence did not translate well so I cannot respond.

 

[melikepie]

Non gaming benchmarks are irrelevant to this discussion since the OP is building a gaming rig. Not all benchmarks are GPU dependent. It depends on which game.

I am afraid your third sentence did not translate well so I cannot respond.

translate well? whats that

 

[tlmck]

translate well? whats that

It means it made no sense.

 

[deadjon]

Here is the Deal.

The 1090t WILL bottleneck the 7970 in some cases. The main ones of concern would be Elder Scrolls: Skyrim and Battlefield 3 (Multiplayer). Both these games are fairly poorly optimised for CPU performance and only fully use 2 or 3 threads, as a result the lower single threaded performance of the 1090t will cause the bottleneck.

In comparison the i3 2100 has excellent Single threaded performance, and although it only has 2/4 Cores/Threads, games that are out these days barely utilise that fully (Although 4 - 6 threaded games are becoming more common). As a result the i3 2100 performs better than the 1090t.

Bare in mind that an i5 2300/2400/2500/2500k will outperform a 1090t in all cases including the heavily threaded applications due to the fact that its single threaded is higher even than that of the i3 AND it has twice as many cores.

Unfortunatly this leaves AMD without a recommendable CPU at any price point - the Sandy Bridge CPU Architecture is simply too strong - Even the Dual Core Pentiums are going head-to-head with the Phenom II 955 and keeping up.

And most people forget this little comparison but Intels Single Core Celeron G540 @ 2.5Ghz is much faster than its price point counterpart the Athlon II 250 Dual Core @ 3.0Ghz.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/celeron-g540-g440_6.html#sect0
This helps prove the point that single threaded performance still matters and Sandy Bridge has LOTS of it.

TL: DR - 1090t will be a bottleneck in some games, in Skyrim and BF3 you will notice FPS spikes and/or lower than 30fps gameplay in certain cases.

 

[melikepie]

Here is the Deal.

The 1090t WILL bottleneck the 7970 in some cases. The main ones of concern would be Elder Scrolls: Skyrim and Battlefield 3 (Multiplayer). Both these games are fairly poorly optimised for CPU performance and only fully use 2 or 3 threads, as a result the lower single threaded performance of the 1090t will cause the bottleneck.

In comparison the i3 2100 has excellent Single threaded performance, and although it only has 2/4 Cores/Threads, games that are out these days barely utilise that fully (Although 4 - 6 threaded games are becoming more common). As a result the i3 2100 performs better than the 1090t.

Bare in mind that an i5 2300/2400/2500/2500k will outperform a 1090t in all cases including the heavily threaded applications due to the fact that its single threaded is higher even than that of the i3 AND it has twice as many cores.

Unfortunatly this leaves AMD without a recommendable CPU at any price point - the Sandy Bridge CPU Architecture is simply too strong - Even the Dual Core Pentiums are going head-to-head with the Phenom II 955 and keeping up.

And most people forget this little comparison but Intels Single Core Celeron G540 @ 2.5Ghz is much faster than its price point counterpart the Athlon II 250 Dual Core @ 3.0Ghz.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/celeron-g540-g440_6.html#sect0
This helps prove the point that single threaded performance still matters and Sandy Bridge has LOTS of it.

TL: DR - 1090t will be a bottleneck in some games, in Skyrim and BF3 you will notice FPS spikes and/or lower than 30fps gameplay in certain cases.

whatever but the 1090t is fine for gaming i all cases well not 4 6990s on crossfire but even a 2600k can't handle that

 

[deadjon]

whatever but the 1090t is fine for gaming i all cases well not 4 6990s on crossfire but even a 2600k can't handle that

I'll quote myself here.

1090t will be a bottleneck in some games, in Skyrim and BF3 you will notice FPS spikes and/or lower than 30fps gameplay in certain cases.

Lower than 30fps....

LOWER than THIRTY FPS

http://www.overclock.net/t/1184541/fixed-skyrim-issue-1090t-bottlenecking-2x-gtx-460s

This is a post from a user using the 1090t and 2 GTX 460s - Look at the GPU usage comparison at the bottom.

This is NOT okay.

Oh and a 2600k could handle it fine if it weren't limited by its 20 PCI-E 2.0 lanes.

a 3930k would be fine with it right now

 

[intelnvidia]

No one is considering the cost of a high end amd mobo vs a high end intel with the same features.. U save a bit on the amd and amd3+ will be supported by the next amd cpus code name piledriver

 

[noob2222]

Please post benchmarks rather than conspiracy theories if you want to show where the AMD chips outperform their Intel counterparts in games. And don't say BF3 multiplayer... I'm talking about quantifiable, non-anecdotal evidence that shows that in general (not in one or two outlier cases), a $120 AMD chip will outperform a $120 i3-2100.

Oh, now you want to reduce your statement to only include a $120 amd chip?

For gaming the dual core i3-2100 will beat any stock AMD processor.

running away already doesn't look good for defending your statements.

Lets look at overclocked cpus since thats what the OP is planning. http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/4350/amd_fx_8150_bulldozer_gaming_performance_analysis/index5.html

aside from hawx 2 and farcry 2, thats a tie with Intel having a 500 mhz advantage, 5.2 ghz I7 vs 4.7ghz BD. not looking good for saying Intel >>>> AMD.

so farcry 2 won on the intel by quite a bit, and I am sure everyone will agree that if you check any and all farcry 2 benches, its all intel cpus >> all amd cpus ... ever stop and wonder why?

From the earliest stages of development, Intel engineers worked closely with Ubisoft Montreal to make sure the Dunia engine could bring the game world fully to life by being multi-threaded. The result is the kind of game the Intel® Core™2 Extreme was made for.

http://game-on.intel.com/eng/games/farcry2/default.aspx

wow .. so if Intel works on developing a game from the start, AMD suffers at the hands of Intel. Imagine that.

So what other games have Intel had their hands on (or should I say wallet). http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/2007/20070914corp.htm

Ok, now intel owns an entire physics engine. Guess what AMD, your out of luck getting any use out of that. What does that include?

Spoiler

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Havok_(software)
Oh, look there is starcraft II, Just cause 2, and Skyrim

obviously some games are going to use the havoc engine more than others, but they aren't hard to spot.

Wether the game choices by toms was an accident or not is anyone's guess. Looking at the remaining 3 titles, you have metro 2033, your I3 handily loses to 4 of amd's cpus, and the other 2 games, BF3 and Dirt 3 are a tie.

How about some resident evil 5, another look at Hawx 2, and Stalker. those aren't on the havoc engine list. whats that at the bottom twice?
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1741/14/

Trying to find reviews that cover the I3 2100 are fairly few, mainly because its not considered a future proof cpu.

 

[noob2222]

Here is the Deal.

The 1090t WILL bottleneck the 7970 in some cases. The main ones of concern would be Elder Scrolls: Skyrim and Battlefield 3 (Multiplayer). Both these games are fairly poorly optimised for CPU performance and only fully use 2 or 3 threads, as a result the lower single threaded performance of the 1090t will cause the bottleneck.

In comparison the i3 2100 has excellent Single threaded performance, and although it only has 2/4 Cores/Threads, games that are out these days barely utilise that fully (Although 4 - 6 threaded games are becoming more common). As a result the i3 2100 performs better than the 1090t.

Bare in mind that an i5 2300/2400/2500/2500k will outperform a 1090t in all cases including the heavily threaded applications due to the fact that its single threaded is higher even than that of the i3 AND it has twice as many cores.

Unfortunatly this leaves AMD without a recommendable CPU at any price point - the Sandy Bridge CPU Architecture is simply too strong - Even the Dual Core Pentiums are going head-to-head with the Phenom II 955 and keeping up.

And most people forget this little comparison but Intels Single Core Celeron G540 @ 2.5Ghz is much faster than its price point counterpart the Athlon II 250 Dual Core @ 3.0Ghz.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/celeron-g540-g440_6.html#sect0
This helps prove the point that single threaded performance still matters and Sandy Bridge has LOTS of it.

TL: DR - 1090t will be a bottleneck in some games, in Skyrim and BF3 you will notice FPS spikes and/or lower than 30fps gameplay in certain cases.

SKyrim is for the most part a single-thraded game, saying BF3 is the same is a complete load of crap. your link to the forum post showed skyrim jacking one cpu core to 99%, the next one was 30% the main issue ended up being a problem with Nvidia's drivers .. imagine that ..

BF3 multiplayer

BF3 cpu usage

http://www.techspot.com/mediagallery.php?f=458&sub=images&img=Phenom_II_X6_1100T.png&full=true

Battlefield 3 is one game that absolutely loves multiple cores. see how the i5 takes a hit compared to the i7? imagine what the i3 does. wonder if its down there with the 980 or 560.