AMD Phenom II X6 1090T 'Black Ops' Overclocking

I spy cpu upgrade some day. I want a 65w E edition when they come out.

In the same vein, the gaming benchmarks are a reminder that the latest and greatest graphics cards really do need a capable processor behind them if you want to unleash their potential. An overclockable CPU like the Core i7-920 or -930 can really open up a Radeon HD 5870 or GeForce GTX 480 when you get it up to the 4 GHz range. Dipping down to 3.2 GHz doesn’t really help the 1090T win any battles in the games (Call of Duty excepted, where Turbo CORE seems to improve performance over the X4 965). If you’re a gamer, save the money you’d spend on a six-core CPU, buy your favorite overclockable processor, and spend the difference on graphics or an SSD to cut level load times. AMD’s hexa-core Phenom II X6 1090T is decidedly a productivity-oriented part designed to improve the performance of threaded apps. It extends the usefulness of Socket AM3 until Bulldozer emerges in 2011. As a result, your 790FX-based motherboard will do the job just fine—it’s probably not worth upgrading to 890FX at this point. Turbo CORE is conceptually a good answer to Turbo Boost, but I had a hard time proving its effectiveness in the real-world. Best-case, it helped the 3.2 GHz 1090T keep pace with the 3.4 GHz 965 in single-threaded titles.

Way to quote the conclusion of the full article, Inova, without giving any indication of whose words those are, or where you got them from.

You should still cite Tom's when you use long quotes like that in0va3, even when you're on their site.

Nuf said:

wow it can run crysis....Har har har.

I can't wait to get my hands on one.

you can save $6 and get a Core i7-920 that out performs the new X6 1090T even at stock settings... has been around forever, and shows extreme headroom.

Sad day for AMD on this round. I hope they have something in the pipeline more exciting.

Congrats builder, you proved it has issues with Crysis.

Just buy the cheaper one then overclock it, it's not that much more difficult without the black edition!

Gian124
"you can save $6 and get a Core i7-920 that out performs the new X6 1090T even at stock settings... has been around forever, and shows extreme headroom"

i believe this event is to try and establish how much headroom the x6 has (AMD must be pretty confident of the headroom to be throwing such an event), as for the 920 out performing the x6 i believe that was on most games only, the x6 left the 920 in the dust on threaded applications, and if this thing got headroom to spare that advantage might not be so compelling, but your right thuban is just a stop gap, bulldozer is the real game changer.....

it not really a chip for gaming but for work and content creation. if i was a using this for work i rather this AMD for 200$ then spending a 1000$ i can just save my money and buy the next new chip that comes out. i will have money left over. i dont mind loosing a second or something when creating content. It not a gaming chip so showing Crysis does make any sense.

But bulldozer won't be out until 2011 and this quote says it best..

"Not only does Bulldozer have just a single floating point unit for each pair of integer units. It's also limited to executing floating point instructions in 128-bit chunks. Later this year, Intel should have launched its Sandy Bridge architecture complete with 256-bit floating-point power."

AMD is forever stuck in the value market.

Wow so you have the silicon on hand? Can I see some bulldozer benchmarks? FPU is 256 bit in BD. 90% of comsumer apps use interger ops, not fp. why waste silicon on FPU? just beef up intergers. Besides, this is about thuban and how it sucks at gaming, but good for productivity..

Value is what I am after, I have a hard time spending "bragging rights".

wow of course on toms any comment showing AMD in a negative light gets thumbed down. toms article even showed us the benchmarks and AMD is just barely on par with the 920. how do you keep defending them. please get over yourselves.

otacon72 :
But bulldozer won't be out until 2011 and this quote says it best.."Not only does Bulldozer have just a single floating point unit for each pair of integer units. It's also limited to executing floating point instructions in 128-bit chunks. Later this year, Intel should have launched its Sandy Bridge architecture complete with 256-bit floating-point power."

actually this was probably a strategic move on AMD behalf if i translate correctly (and not being a big wig at AMD i might be wrong) but the idea was to move alot of intensive computational task to the GPU, for all intent and purpose the GPU is converted to a general purpose processing unit which is much more capable at executing computational repetitive and intensive task in parallel then a CPU can (kind of like that fermi is trying for). AMD is probably betting that the FPU might not be so important in the future but rather large banks of processing units to execute threaded applications in parallel

and yes this is a value proposition, because a general purpose GPU core is far cheaper then a ful CPU core, but at the same time it's far more streamlined too and allows for the possibility of scaling non-linearly (you could add more GPU cores with out the need for adding CPU cores or you could add more CPU cores while scaling back the GPU cores, chances are this may well be tied to the TDP, as we are already seeing how chips are being geared to fit a certain TDP for a certain market)

but as stated this is just my interpretation of bulldozer....

Honestly the i7 930 and 1090T seem equal to me. It really just depends what applications you plan on using. If you want to go multithreaded, if you're doing mass rendering, or whatever, then the 1090T is a good option.

If you're doing fewer multithreaded things, then the 930 will work better for you.

I'm sure we'll see some more benchies in the future that will illustrate greater differences between the hexacores and the 930.

But for now, six cores for under $300 is pretty cool stuff.
Just my $.02. Cheers.

From what I've read from these forums, AMD is cost-effective, but Intel has better performance.

I was wondering where I'd read those words before!

to complicated, to complicated. Sorry I cannot read all this stuff.

multi-core isn't working out the way we hoped. Bring back the Ghz race !!!

I just wonder how much my AM2+ 790fx board will bottleneck this kind of processer

6.7 GHZ already: DAMNNN

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forum [...] p?t=249825

Guess you didn't read the earlier article, did you?

abbadon_34
"multi-core isn't working out the way we hoped. Bring back the Ghz race!!!"

we fast approaching the limits of silicone, it probably cheaper to manufacture faster chips then multi-core chips (die size wise), silicone has finite properties, as you begin to push the GHz there is a point beyond which the silicone begins to heat up at an exponential level due to it's internal structure, the only way your going get these things to go faster is to use more exotic cooling solutions or a more exotic semi-conductor material

if there was an easy way to make these chips go faster you think intel with the kind of research budget at it disposal, would have, truth is multi-core is the future, software guys just have to catch up..... until someone figures how to commercialize the photon based CPU

In video/audio compressión, render, virtualization, encryption, PII X6 1090 is on par with it 960 or even surpass i7 975.

Comparing i7 930 with this chip for thinks that matters is just pure intel drone nonsense.

Look at hexus review.

You are probably right in 2012 floating point performance on the CPU won't matter much for the serious professional. Why have built in processing units when a dedicated add-one, -two or more will be so much more efficient.

Great. Another super-clockers event where participants will use LN2 instead of the typical air (and water) systems most of the real-world users of these CPUs will actually employ. Sorry if I seem underwhelmed...

i7 is not "6$ more expensive". Don't forget Intel motherboards cost more than AMD's.

should three catagories, 1) AIR , 2) WATER , 3) ALL ELSE (LN2 etc) .

Or subdive air into stock and commonly availible, then internet water to externer water, then whatever they can possible do with an unlimited budget and uncommmon expertise. Bottom line, price/Ghz STABLE , no power nor FPS nor other qualitative measures.

AMD should just give up. Intel is clearly superior in all categories and will be forever so bye bye AMD.