The multi threaded efficiency test includes most of the other benchmarks including 3ds Max, Adobe Photoshop, HandBrake, MainConcept, WinRAR and 7-Zip.



Apparently, power efficiency increases with overclocking in multi-threaded applications. However, more aggressive overclocks up to 3.8 GHz have a negative impact on overall power consumption.
I hope Intel Fan go away because I don't want to hear about $1000 CPU when you can have these for 1/5 the price... affordable and efficient
if only intel would bring out a 32nm quad core already...
Great article. Need to do these article on more processors that are affordable to the masses.
Interesting article.
I am interested in seeing Bulldozer released.
Wow...AMD's silicon is pretty awesome and a hexa-core is a great thing to compete on the desktop, but when you look at the new i7 875K ($320), all arguments about platform aside, I don't think AMD's value lead here is all that clear. This doesn't even include your previous analysis the10-20% efficiency increase which overclocking the Lynnfields can yield.
How long will AMD make us wait for Bulldozer? Serious fans would probably be suffocating right now by holding their breath for its release.
... i bookmark this one... when i get my 1090T, this article will be usefull...
FTFA:
I disagree. If I had 200 dollars to spend on a CPU, why do I need to know how a 1000 dollar CPU stacks up to a 200 dollar CPU? It's clearly out of my price rage. Showing a side-by-side comparison of what Intel offers and what AMD offer at the same price-point would be very relevant.
ok... AMD 3.4Ghz for $300... Intel I7 920 $280 at 3.6Ghz.
What I would have found more interesting is a comparison between an overclocked 1090T and an overclocked i7 930 which costs approximately the same (unless you have access to microcenter and can get the i7 for $200).
ok... AMD 3.4Ghz for $300... Intel I7 920 $280 at 3.6Ghz.
You forgot to mention the i7 isn't stock..
really wish they had included the 1055t in this article.
is it worth spending the extra 100 dollars when overclocking is taken into account?
why not theres no tests results in games like GTA IV or Flight Simulator X, where the cores are heavily used. without this article is useless
Could have added a performance / power chart with frequency increase
really wish they had included the 1055t in this article. is it worth spending the extra 100 dollars when overclocking is taken into account?
Probably not, but then some would argue the 1090T Black Edition might be higher binned and would be easier to overclock because of the unlocked multiplier.
Should include the 1055T...Can it same efficiency at 3.4Ghz like 1090T..?Then we can judge its efficiency & performance also..Y spend xtra 100$ if that performance we in 200$???
What a great article.
I am stunned.
So running a CPU at 400W isn't stable huh?
I'd like to add that if you upgrade your AMD rig you don't have to spend extra 120$ on mobo and 150$ on new ram and Intel already announced that next cpu after i7 will have a new socket. I've found benchmarks that show phenom x2 gets only 2% performance hit while running on ddr2. Does anyone know the figures for X6?
This article tells me that the 1090T performs very well if you overclock it even a little; and that it has to be overclocked to do well. Great; if I buy one there's no way now that I won't overclock it. Now, please take an equivalently-priced Intel CPU+motherboard+RAM combo and overclock it to the same [non-extreme] degree. Then compare the performance and the value. Any possible fanboy differences aside, that will tell me which CPU to buy. Thank you.