Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Phenom II X6 1090t vs FX-6300

Last response: in CPUs
Share
December 22, 2012 8:54:01 PM

I have the option of getting one of two board/CPU combos at a very good price. One is a new MSI 990 chipset board with a FX-6300. the other is a nearly new Asus 890 chipset board with a Phenom II X6 1090t. They are within $10 of each other in cost, so that is no issue. And I know both boards work fine.

Which would be the better choice for gaming (and general PC use)? Thanks.

More about : phenom 1090t 6300

Best solution

December 22, 2012 10:34:41 PM

If you can find a 1090T within 10 bucks of an FX-6300 you're one lucky person. It's almost impossible to find Phenom II 1xxx CPUs these days.

The 1090T is far superior for nearly everything, 6 legit cores vs 3+3 physical/virtual and almost 30% better per core performance/efficiency make the 1090T the clear winner

Good luck!
Share
a c 78 à CPUs
December 23, 2012 1:25:42 AM

I think it's a wash personally:

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/699?vs=146

I have a 1045t that has been overclocked to run a little better than a stock 1100t, and I really like it.

However, it appears that Piledriver is what Bulldozer should have been. I would probably get a 6300 over a 1090t.
m
0
l
Related resources
December 23, 2012 1:42:21 AM

Z1NONLY said:
I think it's a wash personally:

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/699?vs=146

I have a 1045t that has been overclocked to run a little better than a stock 1100t, and I really like it.

However, it appears that Piledriver is what Bulldozer should have been. I would probably get a 6300 over a 1090t.

@Z1NONLY
Hmmm... you're right about it appearing to be a wash. They trade points on everything I have little interest in, but the chart only specs out a few games. And then only with older games at mid a resolution of 1680x1050.

@darksparten
I wonder if the Piledriver cores that share resources that don't mind being shared, are better/faster than the older K10 cores of the 1090tBE, though. Just wondering...
m
0
l
a c 78 à CPUs
December 23, 2012 1:48:47 AM

1405 said:
@Z1NONLY
Hmmm... you're right about it appearing to be a wash. They trade points on everything I have little interest in, but the chart only specs out a few games. And then only with older games at mid a resolution of 1680x1050.

@darksparten
I wonder if the Piledriver cores that share resources that don't mind being shared, are better/faster than the older K10 cores of the 1090tBE, though. Just wondering...


From what I have read, Piledriver cores are still not as good as the Phenom II cores when compared clock for clock. However Piledriver is able to run at much higher clock speeds "out of the box" and it's able to run those faster speeds in the same TDP envelope(s) as the Phenom II's running slower clocks..
m
0
l
December 30, 2012 1:24:42 AM

Z1NONLY said:
From what I have read, Piledriver cores are still not as good as the Phenom II cores when compared clock for clock. However Piledriver is able to run at much higher clock speeds "out of the box" and it's able to run those faster speeds in the same TDP envelope(s) as the Phenom II's running slower clocks..

How fast would the 1090t have to be O/C to outperform the FX-6300 "out of the box" do you think?
m
0
l
a c 78 à CPUs
December 30, 2012 2:10:12 AM

The 6300 is actually running one of the slower Piledriver clock speeds (stock). So you wouldn't have to OC far.

Just match the 3.5Ghz speed and tweak your turbo to work a little over 4Ghz, and you would have the 6300 beat. But then you will be pushing ~130-140W while the 6300 is chilling out at 95W. (If power consumption is a concern)
m
0
l
December 30, 2012 2:34:29 AM

Z1NONLY said:
The 6300 is actually running one of the slower Piledriver clock speeds (stock). So you wouldn't have to OC far.

Just match the 3.5Ghz speed and tweak your turbo to work a little over 4Ghz, and you would have the 6300 beat. But then you will be pushing ~130-140W while the 6300 is chilling out at 95W. (If power consumption is a concern)

Thanks. Power consumption isn't a concern as long as I can cool it. Do you think the stock cooler w/heat pipes will do the job?
m
0
l
a c 177 à CPUs
December 30, 2012 3:39:53 AM

1405 said:
Thanks. Power consumption isn't a concern as long as I can cool it. Do you think the stock cooler w/heat pipes will do the job?


The stock cooler isnt much but can run a very small overclock, but not recommended, its suppose to do the job without an oc, a $30 investment in a CM Hyper 212 evo would b worth it.

My two cents i prefer the 6 true cores over the module core design of the fx line, i mean either cpu i doubt ull see much of a performance difference

From what i see in benchmarks, like many cpus one pulls ahead at certain games/applications but overall very similar to each other.

Beside the cpu could look more at the motherboard ud be getting with it, as 990fx motherboards usually have features the 890fx boards dont
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
December 30, 2012 7:28:03 AM

i would personally get the newer technology ie the fx-6300 rather than the now outdated 1090t as both perform pretty much the same and fx-6300 does it while consuming less power
m
0
l
a c 78 à CPUs
December 30, 2012 10:53:57 AM

1405 said:
Thanks. Power consumption isn't a concern as long as I can cool it. Do you think the stock cooler w/heat pipes will do the job?


Probably will work for such a small bump, but I would just spend the $30 and get a 212 as mentioned above.
m
0
l
December 30, 2012 2:52:53 PM

Thanks to all for your valuable insight. I managed to get a considerable price reduction on the PhIIX6 1090t BE & Asus M4A89GTD PRO combo. So, the miser in me won out and I opted for it over the FX combo. After digesting the info you all gave me, I don't feel I made a terribly bad decision. The FX combo would have been brand new, while the PHII combo was gently used (I have confidence that's the case). And yes, I will look into getting the 212 cooler when I move into overclocking.
m
0
l
January 2, 2013 2:24:02 PM

Best answer selected by 1405.
m
0
l
!