Reviews - AMD Phenom II X6 1075T and Phenom II X4 970 Black Edition CPUs

[HEXUS]

AMD releases more chips to pressurise Intel's Core i7 CPUs.

Read more.

[snubby]

The 970 BE is going to be a hard sell against the 1055T. £10 extra gives you 6 cores instead of 4, a boosted clock speed almost as high as the 970. Is the fact that it's Black Edition enough?

[scaryjim]

Probably not. It only takes a 7.5% clock nudge (to 215MHz base clock) for the 1055T to become a 3.0GHz / 3.5GHz Turbo chip, just like the 1075T. I can see the 1075T being used by system integrators though: not everyone will be comfortable with even that small an overclock. Can't see any reason for an enthusiast to look anywhere else though (particularly if they can get hold of a 95W 1055T...)

[nibbler]

Which are currently on sale at OCUK I think for £165

[scaryjim]

And OEM from CCL for ~ £155ish. Shame I have no need to build a new computer at the minute, really

[will101]

Tarinder, a question if I may? How does a benchmark that is bottlenecked in each case by the GPU illustrate relative gaming performance across the compared CPUs in the review?

[jimbouk]

Scores seem a bit harsh, you've said far worse things about products and given them 4 stars. They may not be revolutionary but they seem to provide good bang-for-buck and beat the similarly priced Intel chips...

[scaryjim]

Tarinder, a question if I may? How does a benchmark that is bottlenecked in each case by the GPU illustrate relative gaming performance across the compared CPUs in the review?

I believe the point is to demonstrate that when you use resolution and image quality settings that are bottlenecked by the GPU it doesn't matter which CPU you choose - they're all about the same. As Tarinder says:

This rather boring graph shows that most games don't care how many CPU cores are in the socket. It's all about GPU power once the resolution is dialled up.

It strikes me that this is very useful information for someone who is buying a gaming PC...

Scores seem a bit harsh, you've said far worse things about products and given them 4 stars. ...

I guess a less capable product could be worth four stars if it was filling a market niche, while a more capable product could be worth less if it was entering a crowded market without really offering anything distinctive? There's no compelling reason to buy either of these products over the incumbent 965BE and 1055T...

[kingpotnoodle]

I believe the point is to demonstrate that when you use resolution and image quality settings that are bottlenecked by the GPU it doesn't matter which CPU you choose - they're all about the same. As Tarinder says:

It strikes me that this is very useful information for someone who is buying a gaming PC...

Outside forums like this it might not be, but it should be well known that for games past a certain CPU power point you are better off spending additional money on graphics than CPU.

[Tarinder]

Scores seem a bit harsh, you've said far worse things about products and given them 4 stars. They may not be revolutionary but they seem to provide good bang-for-buck and beat the similarly priced Intel chips...

As stated in the conclusion, it's the relative excellence of the surround AMD chips that make these new introductions seem positively average.

If it was my money, I'd buy an AMD Phenom II X6 1055T 95W or X6 1090T.

[Tarinder]

Tarinder, a question if I may? How does a benchmark that is bottlenecked in each case by the GPU illustrate relative gaming performance across the compared CPUs in the review?

Scaryjim kindly answered this, but it goes to show that informed users need to consider how allocating 'x' amount of resources will benefit their PC experience.

AMD's Phenom II X4 and X6 chips are good enough for most users' needs. Now if only Intel would drop the price on the 980X and 970 processors and make it interesting.

[redddraggon]

As stated in the conclusion, it's the relative excellent of the surround AMD chips that make these new introductions seem positively average.

If it was my money, I'd by an AMD Phenom II X6 1055T 95W or X6 1090T.

Over say an i7 930?

[Tarinder]

Over say an i7 930?

Right now, 1055T 95W is my recommendation as the best bang-for-buck chip. The 890FX platform's pretty solid too.

[zoomee]

BFBC2 uses all 6 cores well on my 1090T - why not use that as a gaming benchmark, that can make use of more than 3 cores like most games....

I still find negativity in these AMD CPU reviews from Hexus - what gives? or is it just me? hmmm

Also - Cat 10.2 drivers!?!

[Tarinder]

Looking on AMD with negativity?

Last review was the 1055T 95W - http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=26122&page=7

4.5 stars out of 5. Recommended award.

"Balancing pure performance, power-draw, and price in an enviable manner, the 1055T 95W becomes our favourite 'high-end' CPU, and we urge AMD to make it more widely available in the channel."

Previous review was the 1090T - http://www.hexus.net/content/item.ph...=24332&page=12

4/5 and recommended.

"Intel remains king with its Core i7 980X, but AMD's sudden hexa-core challenge has certainly spiced things up in the mid-to-high-end space."

We're not going to retest 12 CPUs for a launch of a new processor, unless it happens to be a brand-new architecture. This is why we keep a test platform at the ready, imaged up for processor reviews. All AMD chips are run with the same supporting components. The only difference a new driver may make is to the gaming test, which in this case is limited by the GPU.

[nibbler]

And OEM from CCL for ~ £155ish. Shame I have no need to build a new computer at the minute, really

Just cock up the watercooling and tell your wife that it was bound to happen. Then spend at least £800 on a new PC. izi.