Go Back   Rage3D » Rage3D Discussion Area » Gaming and Computing Forums » General Hardware
Rage3D Subscribe Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

General Hardware Talk about PCs/Macs, motherboards, CPUs, sound cards, RAM, hard drives, networking and everything else about computer hardware!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old Dec 7, 2010, 12:41 AM   #1
Advertisement (Guests Only)

Login or Register to remove this ad
Lupine
Administrator
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: United States Grants Pass, OR
Posts: 32,359
Lupine considers Jack Bauer an amateur at bestLupine considers Jack Bauer an amateur at bestLupine considers Jack Bauer an amateur at bestLupine considers Jack Bauer an amateur at bestLupine considers Jack Bauer an amateur at bestLupine considers Jack Bauer an amateur at bestLupine considers Jack Bauer an amateur at bestLupine considers Jack Bauer an amateur at bestLupine considers Jack Bauer an amateur at bestLupine considers Jack Bauer an amateur at bestLupine considers Jack Bauer an amateur at best


AMD AMD Phenom II X6 1100T Processor Review @ Rage3D.com

As Intel's X58 and Core i7 enter it's twilight years, AMD launches it's most serious assault yet, with the Phenom II X6 1100T. 3.3GHz hexcore with triple-core 3.7GHz turbo mode vs. 2.67GHz quad core with Hyper-Threading - overclocked past 4GHz, with a Sapphire Radeon HD 5970 OC. Game on!

AMD Phenom II X6 1100T Processor Review @ Rage3D.com
Lupine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2010, 12:44 AM   #2
demo
space cadet
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia Melbourne
Posts: 26,048
demo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bound


Default

Good review and glad I went i7, I was actually tempted to go with an AMD hex-core, lucky I didn't (for gaming that is)

Question though, why does the stock i7 have higher minimums and max than the overclocked i7 in BC2?
__________________
____________________
demo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2010, 02:46 AM   #3
VVanks
Gentlemen Please...
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,969
VVanks is still being judged by the masses


Default

AMD seriously needs to up its game. These benchmarks are pretty bad for AMD.
VVanks is offline   Reply With Quote
Advertisement (Guests Only)
Login or Register to remove this ad
Old Dec 7, 2010, 06:42 AM   #4
DaJMasta
Baffoonist
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: United States Silver Spring, Maryland
Posts: 14,015
DaJMasta doesn't need no stinkin' badgesDaJMasta doesn't need no stinkin' badgesDaJMasta doesn't need no stinkin' badgesDaJMasta doesn't need no stinkin' badgesDaJMasta doesn't need no stinkin' badgesDaJMasta doesn't need no stinkin' badgesDaJMasta doesn't need no stinkin' badgesDaJMasta doesn't need no stinkin' badges


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VVanks View Post
AMD seriously needs to up its game. These benchmarks are pretty bad for AMD.

I'm surprised you think so. I didn't really see anything out of the ordinary... some of the specific performance tests AMD actually did rather well in considering the performance of previous parts. I agree that it still isn't on the level of performance of the 920, but you can get the chip, memory, and motherboard for cheaper (at least, when you can find them for sale).

With the Phenom IIs performing about on par clock-for-clock with Core 2 Duos, having a chip based on that architecture win some rounds against the 920 is fairly good.
__________________
Desktop: Intel Core i7 7770k : 16GB EVGA DDR4 2400 : Gigabyte GTX 1070 Ti Windforce X2 : Gigabyte GA-H270-WIFI : AudioQuest DragonFly DAC : Samsung SM961 NVMe 1TB SSD : Corsair Builder 500W PSU : Samsung 1440p 32" Monitor : Klipsch Promedia 2.1 : Windows 10 Pro x64
Tablet: Microsoft Surface Pro 4 : Intel Core i5-6300U : 8GB DDR3 : Intel 520 Integrated : 256GB SSD : 12.3" 2736x1824 display : Windows 10 Pro x64

HTPC: Intel Core i3 3225 : HD 4000 integrated : 8GB Samsung DDR3 1600 : Gigabyte H77N-Wifi : 120GB Sandisk Extreme SSD : 80W power brick and picoPSU150 XT : Integrated HD Audio : Scepter 32" LCD TV : Logitech Z313 2.1 : Windows 7 Pro x64


DaJMasta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2010, 06:47 AM   #5
Crisler
SAPPHIRE PR REP
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: United States Carbondale, IL
Posts: 7,909
Crisler can beat 'Minesweeper' on any difficultyCrisler can beat 'Minesweeper' on any difficulty


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VVanks View Post
AMD seriously needs to up its game. These benchmarks are pretty bad for AMD.
Other than benchmarks is there realy any issue? I mean is there a game or peice of software out there that the AMD X6s cannot deliver a great experience in using?
__________________
Edward Crisler
SAPPHIRE NA PR Representative

#SapphireNation
Crisler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2010, 07:51 AM   #6
demo
space cadet
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia Melbourne
Posts: 26,048
demo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bound


Default

Chrisler, the AMD chip has lower scores in all gaming benchmarks, why on earth would you buy one for gaming over the competition? Obviously any reasonable person would want a CPU that gets better frame rates in current games and therefore in future games too.
__________________
____________________
demo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2010, 08:42 AM   #7
bittermann
I didn't do it
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: United States Earth
Posts: 9,299
bittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single bound


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by demowhc View Post
Chrisler, the AMD chip has lower scores in all gaming benchmarks, why on earth would you buy one for gaming over the competition? Obviously any reasonable person would want a CPU that gets better frame rates in current games and therefore in future games too.
Have you actually compared the prices of putting together a gaming box for each? Here on earth value vs. performance actually matters. Does gaming at 85 fps vs 95 fps really matter that much to you?
bittermann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2010, 08:46 AM   #8
erek
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,236
erek is still being judged by the masses


AMD AMD Introduces Phenom II X6 1100T BE, X2 565 BE, Athlon II X3 455

AMD Introduces Phenom II X6 1100T BE, X2 565 BE, Athlon II X3 455

AMD rolled out three new processors today, the six-core Phenom II X6 1100T Black Edition, Athlon II X3 455, and the Phenom II X2 565 Black Edition. The new flagship of AMD's processor lineup, the Phenom II X6 1100T, is based on the AM3 socket, supporting DDR3 and DDR2 memory on older AM2+ motherboards. It carries a nominal clock speed of 3.30 GHz, is based on the 45 nm "Thuban" silicon, features 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 6 MB of L3 between all six cores. It features the TurboCore technology, which bumps clock speed by a few hundred MHz when it senses high load. As a Black Edition chip, it features an unlocked bus multiplier. Despite its increased clock speed, the 1100T has a TDP of 125W. This chip goes for US $265.

Next up, is the Phenom II X2 565 Black Edition. Clocked at 3.40 GHz, the X2 565 is based on the Callisto silicon (which is Deneb with two cores locked), featuring 512 KB of cache per core, and 6 MB shared L3 cache. This one has a TDP of 80W, and is priced at US $115. Lastly, there's the Athlon II X3 455, a triple-core chip based on the "Rana" silicon (which is Propus with one core locked), it lacks an L3 cache, but features 512 KB L2 per core. With a TDP of 95W, this one goes for $87.


Source: techPowerUp!
erek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2010, 09:03 AM   #9
caveman-jim
Deposed King of Rage3D
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 48,926
caveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badges


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by demowhc View Post
Question though, why does the stock i7 have higher minimums and max than the overclocked i7 in BC2?
Because CPU doesn't make a lot of difference in that benchmark (the level and settings used). I wasn't looking to find 'worse-case' but to find a reasonable experience that was (a) reproducible, (b) taxing and (c) common enough to be regularly experienced by everyday gamers, so I used that level of the BC2 SP campaign. It features shelling, tanks, firefights, mcom use so covers most of the different scenarios you'll find in game.

If all you do is look at the numbers at say 'thats ones higher, it must be better' then you're missing the context. Additionally, there doesn't have to be a 'bad choice' and a 'good choice' - here both platforms are demonstrably good at computing and gaming.
caveman-jim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2010, 09:04 AM   #10
caveman-jim
Deposed King of Rage3D
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 48,926
caveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badges


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VVanks View Post
AMD seriously needs to up its game. These benchmarks are pretty bad for AMD.
Yeah, but not really. AMD offer value and performance, as well as already have published outlines of their new architectures and products coming next year. If you keep up with the Rage3D front page, we'll keep you informed.
caveman-jim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2010, 09:20 AM   #11
demo
space cadet
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia Melbourne
Posts: 26,048
demo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bound


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bittermann View Post
Have you actually compared the prices of putting together a gaming box for each? Here on earth value vs. performance actually matters. Does gaming at 85 fps vs 95 fps really matter that much to you?
If you are so concerned about value what are you doing buying a hex-core chip for a gaming machine in the first place?
Surely an i5 at 4GHz will offer near i7 at 4GHz performance for a lot cheaper?
__________________
____________________
demo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2010, 09:37 AM   #12
caveman-jim
Deposed King of Rage3D
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 48,926
caveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badges


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by demowhc View Post
If you are so concerned about value what are you doing buying a hex-core chip for a gaming machine in the first place?
Surely an i5 at 4GHz will offer near i7 at 4GHz performance for a lot cheaper?
Good point, but also consider that it might be more than a gaming box - if you want a multi-purpose PC then you might need a little more cores for video editing/transcoding, as well as other concurrent tasks.
caveman-jim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2010, 09:41 AM   #13
bittermann
I didn't do it
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: United States Earth
Posts: 9,299
bittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single bound


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by demowhc View Post
If you are so concerned about value what are you doing buying a hex-core chip for a gaming machine in the first place?
Surely an i5 at 4GHz will offer near i7 at 4GHz performance for a lot cheaper?
Now you want to compare strictly to value? Me thinks you want to hand pick your reasoning. We are talking about top performers here from AMD and Intel, specifically the new AMD chip vs one of Intel's best that can run any of today's games. Tell me will you see an actual difference in gaming other than one setup empties your wallet? I'm no fan of either chip but throwing away money is just plain stupid.
bittermann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2010, 10:13 AM   #14
caveman-jim
Deposed King of Rage3D
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 48,926
caveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badges


Default

Well to be fair we're comparing AMD's top proc with Intel's lowest enthusiast desktop/workstation part, but at 4.2GHz it's up there. The hexacores would be nice to compare against though, but you can build a whole AMD platform for the price of the CPU.
caveman-jim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2010, 11:01 AM   #15
wabbitslayer
Elmer J. Fudd, Esq.
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: United States Cahulawassee River
Posts: 8,689
wabbitslayer achieves Nirvana on Tuesdays at 4:00pmwabbitslayer achieves Nirvana on Tuesdays at 4:00pmwabbitslayer achieves Nirvana on Tuesdays at 4:00pmwabbitslayer achieves Nirvana on Tuesdays at 4:00pmwabbitslayer achieves Nirvana on Tuesdays at 4:00pmwabbitslayer achieves Nirvana on Tuesdays at 4:00pmwabbitslayer achieves Nirvana on Tuesdays at 4:00pmwabbitslayer achieves Nirvana on Tuesdays at 4:00pmwabbitslayer achieves Nirvana on Tuesdays at 4:00pmwabbitslayer achieves Nirvana on Tuesdays at 4:00pmwabbitslayer achieves Nirvana on Tuesdays at 4:00pm


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by demowhc View Post
Chrisler, the AMD chip has lower scores in all gaming benchmarks, why on earth would you buy one for gaming over the competition? Obviously any reasonable person would want a CPU that gets better frame rates in current games and therefore in future games too.
I totally agree.
For some dumb reason I purchased an AMD x4 965 instead of an i7 980x. What the hell was I thinking?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnEJohn View Post
It's at least worth a try man, I initially thought wtf to trying it a few years ago and once it entered my mouth it was honestly one of the best things I had ever tasted.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nunz View Post
Does it really matter that much to you? Holy ****. It's almost like some of you want to argue about the most mundane, irrelevant, insensible **** just to argue about something.
wabbitslayer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2010, 11:33 AM   #16
traitoR
Galactic Butterfly
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Canada .
Posts: 6,540
traitoR once held a door open for a complete strangertraitoR once held a door open for a complete strangertraitoR once held a door open for a complete strangertraitoR once held a door open for a complete stranger


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wabbitslayer View Post
I totally agree.
For some dumb reason I purchased an AMD x4 965 instead of an i7 980x. What the hell was I thinking?

Someone should of told me i can't game on anything but a high end Intel rig.
__________________
It is regrettable that many personal fortunes are made by people who simply manipulate money and contribute nothing to their society.

The dream of eternal life is far more compelling than living one.
traitoR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2010, 11:51 AM   #17
Qualitier
UltraRacer PC forever
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Spain Madrid
Posts: 1,911
Qualitier is still being judged by the masses


Default

Quote:
Ganged mode is equivalent to the old dual-channel mode, where both 64-bit memory buses are combined to make a single 128-bit bus for improved memory bandwidth. However, unganged mode offers simultaneous read/write operations to different banks - reducing latency for systems performing heavy multi-tasking. This requires all four memory slots to be populated.
Why? I'd never seen it stated like that, but I've never had 100% clear how does work the unganged mode either, and why as a consequence could it be better than the traditional setup (also I tried ganged once or twice a year ago and something went bad or at least worse and I returned to default unganged). So I've researched again and this time I found this:

http://www.ilsistemista.net/index.ph...n.html?start=1

So with four modules the MCQ/MCT has more chances to hide latencies interleaving DIMM's, but it can also do it with two, doesn't it?
__________________

Windows XP 32 pro + Windows Vista 32 Ultimate, CCC + ATi Tray Tools
Club3D HD4890 Superclocked Edition (950/1050·4) with Accelero S1 rev2 + Turbo Module (2 80mm low-profile fans w/o frame)
LCD Samsung SyncMaster T260 (26", 1920x1200)
Gigabyte GA-MA790FXT-UD5P (socket AM3, chipset AMD-790FX)
Phenom II X4 955-BE @ stock
4x2GB Geil DDR3-1333 7-7-7-24-33 1.5V @ 1333MHz 7-7-7-24-33-1T 1.6V; dual channel enabled; unganged mode
Sound Blaster Live! 5.1 with gameport, AverMedia AVerTV Hybrid Super007
2x WD 640GB Caviar Blue (SATA) in RAID 0, DVD reader (IDE), 2 DVD recorders (SATA+IDE), floppy drive, card reader
Corsair VX-550W, one +12V x 41A rail, 81-85% efficiency



Windows XP 32 pro, no CCC, ATi Tray Tools
Sapphire X1950pro 512MB AGP (580/702·2 MHz) with Accelero X2
CRT Nokia 446Xpro (19", 107 kHz) @ 1600x1200x75Hz (desktop) or 1280x1024x85Hz (games)
Asrock AM2NF3-VSTA (nForce3 250); [email protected] MHz (motherboard limitation, 3216MB/s up + 3216MB/s down)
Athlon64 X2 5000+ Brisbane (@13*201=2613MHz)
2x2GB Buffalo 2.1V + 2x1GB Kingston 2.0V, both DDR2-800 [email protected] 2*373MHz (2613/7) 4-4-4-12-2T 2.0V; dual channel enabled
56k modem, drives etc
Corsair VX-450W, one +12V x 33A rail, 81-85% efficiency
190W maximum consumption from the wall (monitor apart)
Qualitier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2010, 12:10 PM   #18
caveman-jim
Deposed King of Rage3D
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 48,926
caveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badges


Default

Two perform simultaneous read and write, you have to use both memory controllers, and ungang them so that it's in 64-bit more and not 128-bit mode. This only works when both slots of each channel are populated.

In 4-stick, unganged mode; Bank A, DIMM's 1 & 2 are used together; Bank B, DIMM's 1 & 2 are used together; both memory controllers are in 64-bit mode and read and write independently of each other.

In 2-stick, unganged mode, Bank A, DIMM 1 and Bank B, DIMM 1, only one memory controller is used. In ganged mode both memory controllers are used, for 128-bit operation (dual channel).

All four slots must be populated to enable both memory controllers to operate simultaneously.
caveman-jim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2010, 12:22 PM   #19
aviphysics
Atari 800 FTW
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: United States Livermore Ca
Posts: 7,959
aviphysics knows why the caged bird singsaviphysics knows why the caged bird singsaviphysics knows why the caged bird singsaviphysics knows why the caged bird singsaviphysics knows why the caged bird singsaviphysics knows why the caged bird sings


Default

How valid is the i7 920 comparison. Is it even part of Intel's current lineup?
__________________
THG is to computer hardware what MTV is to music.
aviphysics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2010, 12:42 PM   #20
caveman-jim
Deposed King of Rage3D
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 48,926
caveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badges


Default

It's completely valid, there are tens of thousands of them out there. By what criterion do you invalidate it?
caveman-jim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2010, 01:22 PM   #21
demo
space cadet
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia Melbourne
Posts: 26,048
demo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bound


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bittermann View Post
Now you want to compare strictly to value? Me thinks you want to hand pick your reasoning. We are talking about top performers here from AMD and Intel, specifically the new AMD chip vs one of Intel's best that can run any of today's games. Tell me will you see an actual difference in gaming other than one setup empties your wallet? I'm no fan of either chip but throwing away money is just plain stupid.
Quote:
Originally Posted by caveman-jim View Post
Well to be fair we're comparing AMD's top proc with Intel's lowest enthusiast desktop/workstation part.
what he said ^

Quote:
Originally Posted by wabbitslayer View Post
I totally agree.
For some dumb reason I purchased an AMD x4 965 instead of an i7 980x. What the hell was I thinking?
who said anything about an AMD x4 965 and an Intel i7 980x??
__________________
____________________
demo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2010, 01:45 PM   #22
nycdarkness
ಠ_ಠ
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: China NYC
Posts: 8,308
nycdarkness once won a refrigerator on 'The Price is Right'nycdarkness once won a refrigerator on 'The Price is Right'nycdarkness once won a refrigerator on 'The Price is Right'nycdarkness once won a refrigerator on 'The Price is Right'nycdarkness once won a refrigerator on 'The Price is Right'nycdarkness once won a refrigerator on 'The Price is Right'


Default

To everyone who says stuff about a x6 system being cheaper to assemble then an i7 seriously go look at prices. It's about the same. The i7s being cheaper alone makes up for the ram difference. Also if your comparing pricing of triple vs dual ch are you forgetting that your getting more ram as well 4gb vs 6gb. High end boards for both chips aren't cheap either way. That entire amd is cheaper to build when it comes to phenom iix6 is an ass load of crock. I've put together over 10 systems these past 2 months for friends and family AMD or Intel and the pricing is no different. Only time that I found going AMD has been worth it is with the x4s.
__________________
Under construction


nycdarkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2010, 02:35 PM   #23
aviphysics
Atari 800 FTW
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: United States Livermore Ca
Posts: 7,959
aviphysics knows why the caged bird singsaviphysics knows why the caged bird singsaviphysics knows why the caged bird singsaviphysics knows why the caged bird singsaviphysics knows why the caged bird singsaviphysics knows why the caged bird sings


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caveman-jim View Post
It's completely valid, there are tens of thousands of them out there. By what criterion do you invalidate it?
Often high end CPUs hold there price even after they are replaced by higher performing lower end parts.

I was curious if a relative value comparison using the 920 made sense given what other options are currently available from Intel.

I would not say I am invalidating it but merely questioning whether it is an objectively a relevant comparison for someone trying to decide between Intel and AMD chips. If it is does not represent the price to performance possible from Intel CPUs in that price range it would probably not be by my definition.

If the 920 was simply used as a relative benchmark vs Intel's current architecture I would not ask that question but the article takes the additional step of comparing the value of the two platforms in a way that may not be relevant to someone shopping for a new PC.

P.S. In general I do consider AMD a good value option and last I looked the difference in system cost for a similarly featured and performing low end desktop was about $100 so don't get the wrong impression. The post was not an attack but merely a question from a person to lazy to find out the current state of Intel CPUs for himself. Also regularly posting on Rage has really increased my touch typing speed.
__________________
THG is to computer hardware what MTV is to music.

Last edited by aviphysics : Dec 7, 2010 at 02:50 PM.
aviphysics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2010, 02:55 PM   #24
Lupine
Administrator
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: United States Grants Pass, OR
Posts: 32,359
Lupine considers Jack Bauer an amateur at bestLupine considers Jack Bauer an amateur at bestLupine considers Jack Bauer an amateur at bestLupine considers Jack Bauer an amateur at bestLupine considers Jack Bauer an amateur at bestLupine considers Jack Bauer an amateur at bestLupine considers Jack Bauer an amateur at bestLupine considers Jack Bauer an amateur at bestLupine considers Jack Bauer an amateur at bestLupine considers Jack Bauer an amateur at bestLupine considers Jack Bauer an amateur at best


Default

What processor would you use? Several of the reviews I've read today include an i7-950 for comparative analysis, which hits a similar price point as AMD's new 1100T. Is that a reasonable comparison? I think so.

Two points there. First, if we had one available for this review, we probably would have opted to use an i7-950 in our article. Second, being a Bloomfield, the i7-950 is architecturally identical to the the i7-920 used in our review. The only difference is MHz, and our tests included the i7-920 @ 4.2GHz - which is far faster than any i7 currently available. So, other than the i7-920 no longer being available in the retail channel, what exactly invalidates the comparison?
Lupine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2010, 03:25 PM   #25
VVanks
Gentlemen Please...
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,969
VVanks is still being judged by the masses


Default

The reason why I said AMD needs to up its game is because all its chips are the same:



There is absolutely no compelling reason to get a x6 over an x4, in fact x4 perform better than x6's.

It shows the phenom2 architecture has pretty much met its limit. AMD's business strategy is starting to look really poor. How can you justify a .1ghz boost on a chip and sell it as a new one? That to me is just cheap business tactics that realistically don't produce a single shred of performance.

Compared to Intel's business practices, just look at the difference between Core i5 and Core i7. There is a clear case decision to make. Whereas AMD customers are hard bitten to see which CPU is best bang for the buck. Their framerates are leaps and bounds faster than AMD's best offerings (6 core no doubt).

I'll wait to see what Bulldozer gets but I'm about to get off the AMD bandwagon. Bulldozer requires me to get a completely new motherboard which again, to me feels like poor business tactics unless Bulldozer offers vastly superior performance (I'm talking about vastly faster than Sandy Bridge, not the current gen Core i7's)
VVanks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2010, 03:31 PM   #26
caveman-jim
Deposed King of Rage3D
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 48,926
caveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badgescaveman-jim doesn't need no stinkin' badges


Default

your argument is based on quake wars and crysis at 800x600? wow, that's realistic.
caveman-jim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2010, 03:43 PM   #27
demo
space cadet
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia Melbourne
Posts: 26,048
demo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bounddemo can leap small-ish buildings in a single bound


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caveman-jim View Post
your argument is based on quake wars and crysis at 800x600? wow, that's realistic.
While I understand where you are coming from it's more accurate for pure CPU performance comparisons.. but yeh 800x600 is a bit extreme lol.

Would be interesting to see maybe a Total War bench with 20,000 soldiers or some other game that pushes the CPU while still using realistic resolutions. I mean realisticaly the Crysis CPU bench is almost double the frame rate, that's got to say something..
__________________
____________________
demo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2010, 03:53 PM   #28
Tizen
Custom User Title
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: North Korea Close by.
Posts: 5,005
Tizen is still being judged by the masses


Default

I'd like to see how FPS scales as you increase the resolution. For both parties.
__________________
Don't panic
Tizen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2010, 03:54 PM   #29
bittermann
I didn't do it
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: United States Earth
Posts: 9,299
bittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single boundbittermann can leap small-ish buildings in a single bound


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nycdarkness View Post
To everyone who says stuff about a x6 system being cheaper to assemble then an i7 seriously go look at prices. It's about the same. The i7s being cheaper alone makes up for the ram difference. Also if your comparing pricing of triple vs dual ch are you forgetting that your getting more ram as well 4gb vs 6gb. High end boards for both chips aren't cheap either way. That entire amd is cheaper to build when it comes to phenom iix6 is an ass load of crock. I've put together over 10 systems these past 2 months for friends and family AMD or Intel and the pricing is no different. Only time that I found going AMD has been worth it is with the x4s.
I'll bite...where do you find cheaper i7' 9xx series cpu's vs the AMD 6 core series? Not on Newegg! And it doesn't matter if you get more ram, you still have to pay more. Show me where 4GB vs. 6Gb makes a difference in gaming??? Plus they don't give those 1366 socket motherboards away. You can get a great AMD board for $80-$90...so maybe you should look a little deeper for AMD better prices.
bittermann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2010, 04:01 PM   #30
Treeckcold57
Good ol' ATI
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 16,994
Treeckcold57 knows why the caged bird singsTreeckcold57 knows why the caged bird singsTreeckcold57 knows why the caged bird singsTreeckcold57 knows why the caged bird singsTreeckcold57 knows why the caged bird sings


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bittermann View Post
Have you actually compared the prices of putting together a gaming box for each? Here on earth value vs. performance actually matters. Does gaming at 85 fps vs 95 fps really matter that much to you?
Did you notice how difference between X6 and i7 in those min fps on every games? An i7 CPUs deserves the gaming.
__________________

AMD Phenom II X2 555 @ stock clock
Xigamtek Knight cooler
ASUS M4A79XTD EVO
G.Skill 8GB DDR3 1333 (4x4GB)
Intel 530 240GB SSD
XFX ATI Radeon 4870 1GB
Antec Truepower 750W
NZXT Source 210
Windows 7 x64



AMD FX-8350 @ stock clock
Gigabyte GA-990FX-UD5 R5
G.Skill Sniper 16GB (8x2) DDR3 1866
Arctic Freezer 7 Pro 7 rev. 2
Gigabyte Windforce 7950 3GB Ghz Edition
Samsung 840 Pro 128GB SSD
EVGA SuperNova 650W
NZXT Source 210 w/ two Noctua F-12 fans
Ubuntu MATE 64-bit
Intel i5 3570K @ stock clock | G.Skill 16GB (8GBx2) DDR3 1866 | Silicon Power 60GB SSD | Win 10 Pro x64 | NZXT Source 210
Treeckcold57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AMD Drops Phenom Processor Prices, Including newly launched Phenom II X4 980 caveman-jim Front Page News 5 May 4, 2011 07:42 AM
Phenom II 1100t dmanna General Hardware 9 Feb 16, 2011 04:57 PM
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T Processor Reviews Lupine Front Page News 0 Dec 7, 2010 01:12 PM
AMD Readies “Black Edition” Phenom Processor, Phenom FX May Face Further Delay Android1 Front Page News 0 Nov 29, 2007 01:18 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:21 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All trademarks used are properties of their respective owners. Copyright ©1998-2011 Rage3D.com
Links monetized by VigLink