Benchmark Results: Multitasking
In order to test multitasking capabilities, we run the Crysis benchmark during a WinRAR archive operation. Here are the results:
We can see that multitasking hits dual-core CPUs the hardest, as we would expect, But the Phenom II X4 and X6 models lose a surprising amount of traction compared to their quad-core Intel counterparts. In the case of the Phenom II X6 1075T, we expect that the extra CPU load is preventing Turbo CORE from engaging.
75
Comments
Related Stories :
- AMD Phenom II X6 1100T Review: The New Six-Core Flagship
- Six-Core Analysis: AMD’s Phenom II X6 Gets Scaled Down
- Report: AMD Phenom II X6 CPUs in Short Supply
- Efficiency: Optimizing The Clock Rate Of AMD's Phenom II X6
- AMD Phenom II X6 1090T 'Black Ops' Overclocking
- AMD Phenom II X6 1090T And 890FX Platform Review: Hello, Leo
- Phenom II X6: First Details Of ‘Thuban’ Design Emerge
- Asus M4 Motherboards Do AMD Phenom II X6
- Meet Zosma: AMD's Quad-Core Phenom II X4 960T Gets Unlocked
- AMD Phenom II X4 965 BE: Same Speed, Less Power
Do I hear comeback from AMD? Hopefully the Bulldozer shows results with the AM3+/AM3r2 in benchs.
Good article and the 1075T is a good addition to the 6-Core line...
And most of all, thanks for confirming that all the current socket will be replaced next year including AMD.
I'd love to see these new chips pitted against the T1000 processor.
Do I hear comeback from AMD? Hopefully the Bulldozer shows results with the AM3+/AM3r2 in benchs.
this is hardly a comeback, they simply filled in segments on the price range with not-so-new products. a little bump in speed, probably better binned, and a few more bucks. seems like the logical thing to do at this point, until bulldozer anyhow
I'd rather it was a 970T at 3.6 ghz with turbo up to 4.1ghz.
Then again, who wouldn't?
I'm still waiting for Bulldozer, I hope that Bulldozer makes AMD king again. If so I'll buy another AMD system. I've been waiting since the early Dualcore Windsor cores.
nothing new here good on AMD if they keep the prices the same
the 645 and 450 are really crazy good deals
Our 6 or their 4... Yeah, I'll still take i7 4 cores over these crappy 6cores. Not to mention, the i7 920 can be pushed another 50% in speed, 1075T can not, and it's more expensive than i7 920.
...1075T can not, and it's more expensive than i7 920.
At $145, he 1075T is $40 cheaper than any Core i7 I can find online.
Yay!
are these temps with stock cooler? they seem to be a big off...
)
oh sorry, missed the minus ambient part...
wow, thats kinda hot.... (30C ambient in here
At $145, he 1075T is $40 cheaper than any Core i7 I can find online.
I think you meant $245, Don.
I find it great to see the Phenom II 970 still capable of Cool'n'Quiet idle mode while overclocked. C'n'Q doesn't work on my 720BE at any speed over 3.2GHz. Is that something common to the C3-Stepping models?
Holy shit, 3.5 Ghz stock. I know it really doesn't mean much, but I still like the sound of that.
Sandra is very bad synthetic benchmark. It clearly favors Intel architecture and the differences are not that dramatic in real world applications. With enough bribes you seemingly can get nice optimizations.
A very well written article. It covered all the bases and was very informative. Damn good work, it's why people check in at Tom's Hardware.
I'm happy that my Core i5 750 stands up to 2 updates (speed bumps) of the Phenom II 955 (the 965 and 970). It even beats the 1075T!
I think the 750 is still the better CPU in it's price range.
Yeah there should hve been at least a core i3 fo good measure against the AMD 2's...
Very cheap tactic to lure the uneducated masses who will think that clock speed is king.
As far as gaming goes, an i5-750 at stock speed still craps all over these chips...and guess what? The i5 can also be easily overclocked! By yourself!!! OMGWTFBBQ1!1!
How are the StarCraft 2 benchmarks possible? I NEVER drop below 55 fps and I'm using an Athlon II X3 445 with an HD 5750 and 4 GB of RAM. I don't get it.