Skip to main content

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

Benchmark Results: Synthetics

The blue bars represent CPU performance and the green bars represent the aggregate 3DMark score. Note that the blue CPU results continue to rise with the more capable processors, while the 3DMark score tapers off when the graphics card caps out. This gaming benchmark appears to favor Intel architecture. Nevertheless, the new Phenom II X6 1100T performs similarly as the Core i7-920.

The PCMark system and memories benchmarks also favor Intel CPUs, but the productivity benchmark takes good advantage of the Phenom II X6 1100T's extra execution cores and high clock speed.

While the Sandra CPU arithmetic benchmark favors Intel processors, the Whetstone iSSE3 tests perform better on similarly-priced AMD products. Once again the new Phenom II X6 1100T performs close to the Core i7-920. The Sandra CPU multimedia results are notably higher on the AMD processors. Intel’s offerings demonstrate superior memory bandwidth in the Sandra memory benchmark, especially in the case of the Core i7-920—the only product in our review that boasts a triple-channel memory interface.

  • 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