AMD Phenom II X6 1100T Review: The New Six-Core Flagship

By Don Woligroski
published

Benchmark Results: Applications

iTunes shows less than a ten second delta between processors. The Core i5-750 scores a win here, but the new Phenom II X6 1100T is only a few seconds behind.

HandBrake and its MP4 encoder makes great use of multiple processing threads. As a result, the hexa-core AMD products score a huge win in this benchmark.

The DivX and MainConcept encoding routines show a massive performance advantage with the Phenom II X6’s extra processing cores, but the Xvid encoder favors Intel architecture and higher clock speeds.

The Autodesk 3ds Max benchmark results in a close playing field with a slight advantage for the Phenom II X6 and Core i7-920, but with slightly lower results for the quad-core i5-750 and Phenom II X4.

Photoshop performance ends in a virtual tie with the exception of the Phenom II X4 970, a CPU that struggles in this benchmark.

The AVG results show a curious tie between these quad- to six-core processors.

WinRAR shows an indisputable preference for Intel architecture, but 7-Zip makes good use of threading, and the Phenom II X6 processors gain an advantage here.

Don Woligroski
99 Comments Comment from the forums
  • Mark Heath
    I wish Intel would do something like this for all (or at least most) of their processors.(the speed bumps with same price model)
    Reply
  • fstrthnu
    A pretty good effort from AMD, but Sandy Bridge is only 2 or 3 months away by now. Of course, this is just a stopgap measure till Bulldozer comes; still, when AMD is only just catching up to Intel in terms of stock performance NOW (even though it has slightly better value)...
    Reply
  • sideshowbob32
    Great article I just ordered a 1090T for m old am2+ set up, I look forward to it and this article makes me want it more!! Glad to see amd is doing great.
    Reply
  • tacoslave
    im gonna wait for bulldozer
    Reply
  • stingstang
    AMD is most certainly not doing great if they have to rerelease all their chips. Here's what happens: They make a batch of chips and sell them all as 4 core processors at X speed. The ones they don't sell or are returned go into stress testing. Those batches are divided in to x2 or x3 piles depending on how stable they are with which cores enabled. The winners of the tests get promoted and branded as new, faster chips with x+100 MHz. The process then repeats.
    Now if you'll look, their third iteration of this process still doesn't match intel's entry-level i7 processors. It's just embarrassing is what that is.
    Reply
  • Could this be any more unremarkable or unnecessary a product? Might as well grab an i5, or one of the existing X6s, or wait for SB, or Bulldozer... this is just pointless.
    Reply
  • buzznut
    I'm waiting as well I think. I'd have to upgrade my mobo to run a X6 anyway since Biostar chose not to support it with my current board. I think the 1090T is a great value at $230 though. Pretty sweet.
    Reply
  • sudeshc
    thats more like it, increase those stock speeds and the we will have more chance to to get even more performance by overclocking :D
    Reply
  • FunSurfer
    It would be nice to see in the gaming benchmark games that have intensive use of all the CPU's cores like GTA4, BFBC2, RFG (@ large building destruction).
    Reply
  • dEAne
    With this data Sandy Bridge will not put pressure on AMD it will kill it. I think the only thing left for AMD is to lower the price much further.
    Reply