Featured Articles

IHS teardown reveals Galaxy S5 BOM

IHS teardown reveals Galaxy S5 BOM

Research firm IHS got hold of Samsung’s new flagship smartphone and took it apart to the last bolt to figure out…

More...
Galaxy S5, HTC One M8 available selling well

Galaxy S5, HTC One M8 available selling well

Samsung’s Galaxy S5 has finally gone on sale and it can be yours for €699, which is quite a lot of…

More...
Intel lists Haswell refresh parts

Intel lists Haswell refresh parts

Intel has added a load of Haswell refresh parts to its official price list and there really aren’t any surprises to…

More...
Respawn confirms Titanfall DLC for May

Respawn confirms Titanfall DLC for May

During his appearance at PAX East panel and confirmed on Twitter, Titanfall developer Respawn confirmed that the first DLC pack for…

More...
KFA2 GTX 780 Ti Hall Of Fame reviewed

KFA2 GTX 780 Ti Hall Of Fame reviewed

KFA2 gained a lot of overclocking experience with the GTX 780 Hall of Fame (HOF), which we had a chance to…

More...
Frontpage Slideshow | Copyright © 2006-2010 orks, a business unit of Nuevvo Webware Ltd.
Tuesday, 07 December 2010 12:53

AMD ships two new speedy Phenoms

Written by Fudzilla staff


3.3GHz six-core and 3.4GHz BE dual-core
We talked about AMD’s new Phenom II X6 1100T and Phenom II X2 565 Black Edition processors several weeks ago, but now have finally started shipping just in time for holiday shoppers.

The Callisto-based Phenom II X2 565 BE is a dual-core part with an unlocked multiplier. It’s clocked at 3.4GHz and aimed at users looking for an affordable and overlockable processor. It should retail at about €110, so it’s offers relatively good value.

However, the Thuban-based Phenom II X6 1100T is quite a bit more interesting. This 125W part is clocked at 3.3GHz, but it can overclock to 3.7GHz via Turbo Core. The rest of the spec was unchanged from the 1090T and it’s available in Germany for as little as €241. All things considered, this is nothing short of a bargain, as Intel’s quad-core 2.6GHz Core i7 920 costs about the same.

blog comments powered by Disqus

Comments  

 
+38 #1 AndreiD 2010-12-07 13:02
The 1100T is a beast.
I have the 1055T and this thing is a monster, it can handle anything I'm throwing at it.
Atm the AMD 6 cores I think are a better future investment if you don't want to change your platform in the next 2-3 years.
 
 
-32 #2 trek554 2010-12-07 13:23
Quoting AndreiD:
The 1100T is a beast.
I have the 1055T and this thing is a monster, it can handle anything I'm throwing at it.
Atm the AMD 6 cores I think are a better future investment if you don't want to change your platform in the next 2-3 years.

for gaming even the i5 760 is still a better overall cpu though. even in games that use more than 4 cores the X6 is slower. http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/cpu-benchmark-highend_6.html#sect1
 
 
+20 #3 AndreiD 2010-12-07 14:09
In this review the Thurbans are better than an i7.
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1481/9/
Still, a couple of FPS is barely a noticeable difference.
In properly multithreaded programs it's faster than the i5-760 and future games will also properly use 6 cores (Source games use all 6 cores)
 
 
-22 #4 trek554 2010-12-07 14:34
Quoting AndreiD:
In this review the Thurbans are better than an i7.
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1481/9/
Still, a couple of FPS is barely a noticeable difference.
In properly multithreaded programs it's faster than the i5-760 and future games will also properly use 6 cores (Source games use all 6 cores)
Source cant even get running on 4 threads done properly. and again 4 cores from Intel already beat X6 in games that use 6 cores. the i5 is faster clock for clock, scales better, and has way more overclocking headroom. in other words the i5 760 is faster overall for games now AND in the future.

I am not saying the X6 is a bad chip but for gaming don't fool yourself by thinking that just because it has 6 cores it will be better for future gaming.
 
 
+27 #5 AndreiD 2010-12-07 15:19
The difference is usually 5 to 10 fps, what are we talking about here? Can you notice 5 or 10 fps when you already have 80+ ? No.
And I gave you a link where the Thurbans outperform the i7 930 in Dirt2 so I presume there's a video game version difference between the two reviews.
Sure, if you're a hardcore gamer you can go with an i5/i7, but you're repeating the same things people said when the first Quad Cores appeared and were outperformed by the Dual Cores. It took the video game industry 1-2 years before the first properly multithreaded titles appeared.
 
 
-23 #6 Jurassic1024 2010-12-07 16:34
Quoting AndreiD:
The 1100T is a beast.
I have the 1055T and this thing is a monster, it can handle anything I'm throwing at it.
Atm the AMD 6 cores I think are a better future investment if you don't want to change your platform in the next 2-3 years.



except in those 2-3 years, the i5 760 @ 4GHz will continue to stomp that chip.
 
 
-17 #7 Jurassic1024 2010-12-07 16:36
Quoting AndreiD:
The difference is usually 5 to 10 fps, what are we talking about here? Can you notice 5 or 10 fps when you already have 80+ ? No.
And I gave you a link where the Thurbans outperform the i7 930 in Dirt2 so I presume there's a video game version difference between the two reviews.
Sure, if you're a hardcore gamer you can go with an i5/i7, but you're repeating the same things people said when the first Quad Cores appeared and were outperformed by the Dual Cores. It took the video game industry 1-2 years before the first properly multithreaded titles appeared.



But instantly you could megatask like nobodies business. And dont forget multi GPU setups.
 
 
+20 #8 JAB Creations 2010-12-07 17:36
i5 760? hahaha

First both sockets 1156 and 1155 were/are dead before they shipped, neither will ever get more then four actual cores.

Secondly all AM3 chips will plug in to AM3+ motherboards (not vice versa though) which is actually the best way, replace your AM3 with an AM3+ mobo & wait a few months for a new stepping 12 core Bulldozer beast and your upgrade costs will be much smoother.

Also to go to an FX chipset you don't have to throw out your perfectly good AMD chip.

Plus it's about playable FPS, anything beyond 60 (60Hz) is a waste of money.
 
 
+22 #9 nECrO 2010-12-07 18:26
Quoting AndreiD:
The difference is usually 5 to 10 fps, what are we talking about here? Can you notice 5 or 10 fps when you already have 80+ ? ...SNIP




Exactly. The human eye can't tell the difference beyond 60 FPS, so you need a machine to tell you the difference because you can't see it! Well if I can't see something, I'm not paying for it.

I will be rebuilding late next year, but for now I have a Phenom 8750 triple core and a new HD6870. My games look good and my rig is fast enough that I am competitive and have a good time playing.

Lets see. My games look good and my rig is fast enough that I have a good time. Why do I want to spend extra $ on an Intel rig? To brag on some forum that my rig is faster than yours and "pwns"?
 
 
+10 #10 yasin 2010-12-07 23:30
for most games, by the time the cpu's are this good, the gpu or another component becomes the limiting factor.i would go for a 2/3 fps slower amd if it costs a fraction of the price of an intel equivalent, and so would most people.
 

To be able to post comments please log-in with Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments