[XS]Just got Phenom II x6 1055T (Retail)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeepBeep2

How much do I have to dumb this down

---

hey, we all learn at some point. i'm sure he gets it now tho.

HMM, wow how things get out of control :p:

Any Who, any new test coming?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Apokalipse

Snip~.

---

Thanks, see below.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by daseto

@OhNoes~.

---

I appreciate your explanation.

I am aware that a leaky chip would require more voltage to operate at the same clock or frequency, but that is not what my argument is. My argument is about efficiency at utilizing a given power (let's say set in bios) and the resultant heat.

Take 1 board, put a highly leaky chip in there, set voltage to 1.20v. Stress it. Take the chip out, put another less leaky chip in there, repeat the process by setting voltage to 1.20v and stressing that chip also.

My argument is that because of the energy that is being lost through leakage, the leaky, less efficient chip ends up using less power = less heat. The energy that is lost through leakage usually accounts for less heat than if it was actually utilized in the case of the less leaky chip.

In the real world, this translates into less leaky and highly efficient chips with low vids, but hotter temps, and high vid to highly leaky chips that need more voltage same clocks but run cooler at the same voltage. I may be wrong, but in my experience this has always been the norm.

@ Informal: No need to be sour grapes because I called you out in the News Section. Somehow, you always manage to turn forum arguments into a shouting match. You really need to grow up! The two guys I quoted above are examples of good forum etiquette and respect of other members and their opinions, even if they're perceived to be wrong. Some of you guys can learn a thing or two from them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhNoes!

Thanks, see below.

I appreciate your explanation.

I am aware that a leaky chip would require more voltage to operate at the same clock or frequency, but that is not what my argument is. My argument is about efficiency at utilizing a given power (let's say set in bios) and the resultant heat.

Take 1 board, put a highly leaky chip in there, set voltage to 1.20v. Stress it. Take the chip out, put another less leaky chip in there, repeat the process by setting voltage to 1.20v and stressing that chip also.

My argument is that because of the energy that is being lost through leakage, the leaky, less efficient chip ends up using less power = less heat. The energy that is lost through leakage usually accounts for less heat than if it was actually utilized in the case of the less leaky chip.

In the real world, this translates into less leaky and highly efficient chips with low vids, but hotter temps, and high vid to highly leaky chips that need more voltage same clocks but run cooler at the same voltage. I may be wrong, but in my experience this has always been the norm.

@ Informal: No need to be sour grapes because I called you out in the News Section. Somehow, you always manage to turn forum arguments into a shouting match. You really need to grow up! The two guys I quoted above are examples of good forum etiquette and respect of other members and their opinions, even if they're perceived to be wrong. Some of you guys can learn a thing or two from them.

---

you could learn some by staying out of the amd section where you decided to come troll around in cause the intel section was boring today.

.... hyper pi 32m?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhNoes!

My argument is that because of the energy that is being lost through leakage, the leaky, less efficient chip ends up using less power = less heat. The energy that is lost through leakage usually accounts for less heat than if it was actually utilized in the case of the less leaky chip.

---

Your argument is flawed. Who else needs to explain this to you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrMojoZ

Quote:

---

because of the energy that is being lost through leakage, the leaky, less efficient chip ends up using less power = less heat.

---

Your argument is flawed. Who else needs to explain this to you?

---

Wow, I don't know Jack-sht about chips but even I am astounded!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MattiasNYC

Wow, I don't know Jack-sht about chips but even I am astounded!!!

---

yeah this doesnt take a super genious to figure out..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhNoes!

Thanks, see below.


My argument is that because of the energy that is being lost through leakage, the leaky, less efficient chip ends up using less power = less heat. The energy that is lost through leakage usually accounts for less heat than if it was actually utilized in the case of the less leaky chip.

.

---

using a 140w example lets say a leaky cpu can use up to 100w out of the 140 thats going in, 40w is escaping.

The leakage is similar to resistance........like a lightbulb or toaster that heats up red hot...... this is the left over power that the cpu is not using because it cant. its seeping out and that turns into heat, it doesnt just vanish.

From your perspective, where exactly do you think this energy that the cpu doesnt use go?? What reaction is taking place that gives you the idea that a cpu that cant utilize a certain amount of power is going to be cooler than a cpu that can utilize that same power?

Just because the cpu cant use the power doesnt mean that same power is not causing a reaction in the cpu........the result is heat.

Have a nice day!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crazydiamond

dont waste your time Opteron146, this is the same guy that said these chips would be better off with no turbo

---

i tried to give warning :p:

This is how i look at it.
A CPU is made out of silicon which is an insulator. Which means it resists electrons. When you have current leakage its leaking into the the insulator. So its going to act as a resistor. More current means more watts which is more heat. So the more leaked current the higher the temperature will be.

If a CPU consumes 125W of power, irrespective of whether it's being used more efficiently by the CPU, it doesn't just vanish. It becomes heat.
In some electronic devices, some of it will be converted to light or sound. but in the case of a CPU it will really just be heat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lagg Master

This is how i look at it.
A CPU is made out of silicon which is an insulator. Which means it resists electrons. When you have current leakage its leaking into the the insulator. So its going to act as a resistor. More current means more watts which is more heat. So the more leaked current the higher the temperature will be.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Apokalipse

If a CPU consumes 125W of power, irrespective of whether it's being used more efficiently by the CPU, it doesn't just vanish. It becomes heat.
In some electronic devices, some of it will be converted to light or sound. but in the case of a CPU it will really just be heat.

---

Ummm didnt I say that in my post?:shrug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Titan7171

Ummm didnt I say that in my post?:shrug:

---

Well yes; but we're trying to explain it so that OhNoes! understands.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Titan7171

Ummm didnt I say that in my post?:shrug:

---

Yes, it means i am agreeing with you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Apokalipse

Well yes; but we're trying to explain it so that OhNoes! understands.

---

:rofl:.....Maybe a popup book of some kind:ROTF:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lagg Master

Yes, it means i am agreeing with you.

---

:up::p:

Ok guys please stop, i feel like i just took a college class on integrated circuits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhNoes!

It's actually the other way around.

Some impressive numbers indeed. I still think low end bloomfield aka i7 930 would edge it out though. I'm on the fence about building a dedicated media encoding rig and it's between the x6 or the i7 930. It'll all boil down to whichever of these is $200 or lower and how well it competes against the bloomfield. I have a Microcenter near me so I'll be factoring in the fact that I could pick up a i7 930 for $199.99.

---

The price of an x58 board + i7 930 vs. the price of a 890 board + X6 will probably favor AMD.

That all depends on your Intel board choice though.

I'm definitely picking up a 1090T and 4gb kit of hypers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrMojoZ

Your argument is flawed. Who else needs to explain this to you?

---

One thing that is for sure is that he is a very very confused man when it comes to a thing or two about physics and nobody here has any more patience with him. He sounds a lot like user zucker a while back(now banned),a striking resemblance :eek:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhNoes!

Thanks, see below.

I appreciate your explanation.

I am aware that a leaky chip would require more voltage to operate at the same clock or frequency, but that is not what my argument is. My argument is about efficiency at utilizing a given power (let's say set in bios) and the resultant heat.

Take 1 board, put a highly leaky chip in there, set voltage to 1.20v. Stress it. Take the chip out, put another less leaky chip in there, repeat the process by setting voltage to 1.20v and stressing that chip also.

My argument is that because of the energy that is being lost through leakage, the leaky, less efficient chip ends up using less power = less heat. The energy that is lost through leakage usually accounts for less heat than if it was actually utilized in the case of the less leaky chip.

In the real world, this translates into less leaky and highly efficient chips with low vids, but hotter temps, and high vid to highly leaky chips that need more voltage same clocks but run cooler at the same voltage. I may be wrong, but in my experience this has always been the norm.

---

Efficiency and heat output are not really comparable. And when you say energy lost through leakage, there is no such thing as lost energy, energy doesnt disappear, it changes state. Current leakage turns into either 3 things, heat, light or sound. So you have your real world stuff backwards. A higher leakage chip is less efficient due to the fact that it uses more current to operate at the same cpu vcore voltage, where a low leakage chip is more efficient in the use of current and therefore has less excess heat created.

Think of a trough filled 3/4ths of the way with water, and this will be your low leakage chip. The small plastic boat will be the current. Now when you move the water without touching the boat to get it from one side to the other, you dont spill much water out of the trough, but likely a little. Do the same thing to a high leakage chip with the trough this time full to the brim. The same force used to move the boat makes alot of water spill out. Now each chip no mater what produces some heat, and lets call that a constant to make things simple, 48 ounces. Now all the water on the floor next to the tough is the leakage. The more leakage on the floor, the more heat that chip is going to produce as that water didnt help move the little boats to their destination. Now the low leakage chip doesnt have a lot of water on the floor, lets call it 12 ounces, so the constant heat the chip makes plus the leakage equals 60 ounces. Now the high leakage chip has 36 ounces on the floor, plus the constant 48 ounces is 84 ounces. The more ounces, means more heat.

You got to remember that voltage is only one part of the power equation. What causes leakage is the current that is produced. How do you think a toaster works? It runs on 120volts, yet it draws like 15 amps to produce some near 1000watts of power. You see the wires in the toaster glow red and get damn hot. You run lots of equipment at 120volts, but most run at less amperage. The less amps, the less heat, and the less watts. A 60 watt lightbulb runs at 120volts, but it only draws 1/2 an amp. Compare any light bulb, the lower the watts, the less amps they draw all at the same voltage, 120v. The more amps a lightbulb draws, the brighter the light and the more heat the bulb produces. Just as with light bulbs at a certain point it is hard to determine the diff between light produced, but you can damn sure feel the heat difference.

I dont know how i could be more clearer here. Your argument defys the principles of Physics. High leakage chips leak energy, and that leaked energy is heat. The more energy leaked the hotter that chip will be period.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by informal

One thing that is for sure is that he is a very very confused man when it comes to a thing or two about physics and nobody here has any more patience with him. He sounds a lot like user zucker a while back(now banned),a striking resemblance :eek:

---

lol zucker was a hoot anyways i really loved how OhNoes! defined low k... :ROTF:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accord99

Benches that show greater improvements from HT are also the same ones that show greater improvements from extra cores.

---

But the level of improvement in HT varies a lot and same cant be said with real core. The truth of the matter is share of resources is not always the right way to go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ajaidev

But the level of improvement in HT varies a lot and same cant be said with real core. The truth of the matter is share of resources is not always the right way to go.

---

You're not going to get 50% throughput improvement from 2 extra cores from more than a fraction of real world applications either. And Nehalem is not just HT, it also has extremely powerful individual cores.

Hold up guys, don't just call him stupid.

I have once owned an E8600 that had a very low Vid and was able to make 4.5GHz stable at a rediculous low voltage. On top of this, the chip was very intolerant to voltage and simply froze or bluescreened once give too much.

To me these are signs this chip was very low leakage, no?

Compared to other E8600 chips mine ran rediculously hot, at least 10ºC hotter than any other E8600 with even less cooling and more Vcore applied.

Although i do not have an explanation for it, it was something i experienced myself and i've seen more of this in the Wolfdale thread. I have not seen this behaviour with AMD chips (yet).

I think what applies to AMD chips does not always apply to Intel chips and vice versa.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accord99

You're not going to get 50% throughput improvement from 2 extra cores from more than a fraction of real world applications either. And Nehalem is not just HT, it also has extremely powerful individual cores.

---

Yep extremely powerful individual cores is correct but HT is what is used to inflate bench scores and also used in some real heavy app's like video encoding.

But if you compare a OCed i5 750 to a i7 860 one can notice how well HT does. It does not behave like real cores the added performance varies a lot, in some case HT can boost pretty high numbers and in others the added performance is little or even negative.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zeus

Hold up guys, don't just call him stupid.

I have once owned an E8600 that had a very low Vid and was able to make 4.5GHz stable at a rediculous low voltage. On top of this, the chip was very intolerant to voltage and simply froze or bluescreened once give too much.

To me these are signs this chip was very low leakage, no?

Compared to other E8600 chips mine ran rediculously hot, at least 10ºC hotter than any other E8600 with even less cooling and more Vcore applied.

Although i do not have an explanation for it, it was something i experienced myself and i've seen more of this in the Wolfdale thread. I have not seen this behaviour with AMD chips (yet).

I think what applies to AMD chips does not always apply to Intel chips and vice versa.

---

That maybe a low leakage chip but low leakage does not mean it will be hot. Low leakage means better efficiency, suppose 1v is coming and your chip is rated for 1Ghz on 1v but you could do 1.5Ghz at 1v means that your chip has lower leakage and thus better utilization of voltage than what is required by normal chips.

It could be hotter because of some part of Intels manufacturing process or something but it does not compute from a normal point of view.

EDIT: Also high leakage chips are just that they need to dissipate what they take in. High voltage is dissipated from the chip it self and when this happens the environment within the chip gets hot.

Is there a Thuban 1055T in here somewhere? It was interesting for awhile.
No offense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ajaidev

But if you compare a OCed i5 750 to a i7 860 one can notice how well HT does. It does not behave like real cores the added performance varies a lot, in some case HT can boost pretty high numbers and in others the added performance is little or even negative.

---

But without a 6-core Nehalem not running HT to compare, how can you be sure the performance variations are not simply due to the software? And given that HT in general only benefits between 10-25% in well multi-threaded applications; whose to say it won't be Thuban that suffers more in real world desktop applications which in general aren't that well multi-threaded.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by daseto

Efficiency and heat output are not really comparable.

---

But they are.
A product with the same performance and lower efficiency has higher heat output.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by daseto

And when you say energy lost through leakage, there is no such thing as lost energy, energy doesnt disappear, it changes state.

---

We never said it disappeared. we said it is lost as heat (i.e. transformed from electrical energy to heat energy)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accord99

But without a 6-core Nehalem not running HT to compare, how can you be sure the performance variations are not simply due to the software?

---

We have 980X which is 6-core.
But it's also at a way higher price point. And that's what's appealing about Thuban.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accord99

And given that HT in general only benefits between 10-25% in well multi-threaded applications;

---

Yes, HT is less efficient than actually having more cores.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accord99

whose to say it won't be Thuban that suffers more in real world desktop applications which in general aren't that well multi-threaded.

---

Saying that more cores or HT won't benefit single threaded programs is just stating the obvious. People won't be buying 6 core CPU's expecting higher single threaded performance.

In programs that are well threaded, Thuban can close the gap or beat 4 core i7. In single threaded programs, Phenom II was already close enough anyway (except for things like SuperPi)

Seriously why is there so much Intel talk here?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by audioave10

Is there a Thuban 1055T in here somewhere? It was interesting for awhile.
No offense.

---

now look at what happened to your thread imamage :ROTF:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accord99

But without a 6-core Nehalem not running HT to compare, how can you be sure the performance variations are not simply due to the software? And given that HT in general only benefits between 10-25% in well multi-threaded applications; whose to say it won't be Thuban that suffers more in real world desktop applications which in general aren't that well multi-threaded.

---

A 6-core Nehalem would totally break Thubans back even if its not running HT, that comparison is well brutal :D

As of now it seems that Thuban is a equal or bit better than a equally clocked bloomfield with HT on.

As per a measure of scale i think that AMD needs 1.5 cores for 1 of Intel's and if we use this scale you will notice that in Turbo mode AMD has 3 cores at 3.3Ghz that means it can rival 2 nehalem class cores.

But the weak point for AMD's Thuban is single thread execution i expect it to lag behind bloomfields in app's that use just a single thread. Lets hope AMD's turbo mode does good enough for a single core at 3.6Ghz beating a nehalem class single core at 3Ghz "1090T vs i7 930"

Thubans strongest point is three thread execution...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhNoes!

You're talking about two different things. A high leakage chip (leaks power) and therefore runs cooler, whereas the opposite is true for a low leakage chip. It is about efficiency.

Also, low heat dissipation = means a hotter chip; no? The heat generated from current has to go somewhere.

Edit: Did you realize I highlighted a particular portion of your post? Don't try to throw blinds here.

---

no... a high leakage chips loses current.... so it needs more volt to stabilise it ... so it gets it hotter... lower leakage = less heat because they need less voltage to stabilise thus running cooler .....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeepBeep2

High leakage means more power is turned into heat.

High leakage chips are more suited for LN2 because they are leaky transistors and like to use more voltage.

Low leakage is more efficient but less tolerant to voltage and puts out less heat in general.





Will you guys stop argueing and babbling like idiots and acting like you know everything now? I mean everyone.

---

high leakage or low leakage dont matter when you use LN2 or LHE



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconductivity low leakage or high leakage wont matter ..... they all have the same resistance ... well if you reach that extreme cold point from what i could understand ....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhNoes!

Contradictions galore! Since you insist on me spelling it out in layman terms, let me oblige.

A high leakage chip is very inefficient at utilizing power (because of the leaks) so at say 1.20v, a high leakage chip will generally run cooler (than the more efficient, low-leakage chip). The low-leakage chip, because it utilizes power more efficiently also generates more heat because you have to realize that: input power = output heat. What you're describing is a process improvement, not a high leakage chip characteristic. The reason why high lekage chips are suitable for ln2 is simply because they can take more voltage; more voltage=more power=more heat <- needs to be cooled by ln2. Makes sense?

---

so fermi should dissipate less heat???? its an extreme high leakage chip.....


btw this doesnt compute.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Titan7171

Seriously why is there so much Intel talk here?

---

maybe they want to steal amd's 15min of fame for the week....

Shame this thread has lost its way, enough has been said now should really just move on :up:

@ajaidev I agree with what you're saying, when the Core i3 2C/4T vs. Athlon II X3 benchmarks showed up it was clear 4C/8T i7 would be matched by Phenom II X6 :)

For some friend I need a test with mental ray or a 3dmax v-ray bench.

Okay folks
Back from work and trying to hit 4GHz
4GHz done
4.2GHz is the current max ( managed to run wPrime 32M and SuperPI 1M)
I guess it's good enough for today :)

I will get the screencap up ASAP, sorry for waiting

P.S. : for other poster asking me to run different bench / chess game with the rig
Please reply after this post
Thanks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by audioave10

Is there a Thuban 1055T in here somewhere? It was interesting for awhile.
No offense.

---

Sorry
I wish I can post more bench but my work don't allow me to stay up all night
(I wish I can !)

4.2 is very nice, how much Vcore for that? And how does CPU-NB overclock? We've seen Mad222 pushing the CPU-NB to 3150MHz, is yours as good?

No need to apologize, i'm sure everybody will understand you have to go to work, like me and most members here. ;)

imamage: Cinebench 4 GHz please :) and maybe some test stability (LINX or prime???)

Thanks imamage seems 4Ghz air should be achievable by most since 4.2Ghz is max stable :D

This is indeed good news waiting for the screen's F5 getting pressed evey few secs :P

Thanks imamage seems 4Ghz air should be achievable by most since 4.2Ghz is max stable :D

This is indeed good news waiting for the screen's F5 getting pressed evey few secs :P

Eagerly waiting for ur benchmark screenshot:)

2.6ghz 12 opteron cores = 7.95
4.2ghz thunban cores =7.38

difference 0.57 speed does make up for less cores now lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by demonkevy666

2.6ghz 12 opteron cores = 7.95
4.2ghz thunban cores =7.38

difference 0.57 speed does make up for less cores now lol

---

More Cheaper too !!!!!

I didn't have much time
Only did these test
4GHz Fritz
http://www.hkepc.com/forum/attachmen...f0bb59e663.jpg

4GHz wPRIME 32M
http://www.hkepc.com/forum/attachmen...f6a605926b.jpg

4.22GHz SuperPI 1M
http://www.hkepc.com/forum/attachmen...0686a3162a.jpg

http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=1134111
4.22GHz CPU-Z Validated

I lost one screencap with 4.2GHz wPrime 32M
The VCore is 1.58V

This CPU surely can replaced my 955BE in my rig :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by audioave10

Is there a Thuban 1055T in here somewhere? It was interesting for awhile.
No offense.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ajaidev

Thanks imamage seems 4Ghz air should be achievable by most since 4.2Ghz is max stable :D

This is indeed good news waiting for the screen's F5 getting pressed evey few secs :P

---

3.9GHz is quite stable for daily usage
But personally I don't like running my rig at 1.5V+ Vcore daily :(

Up the on chip north bridge, wonder how much it would help in cinebench?

uffff, nicw winrar bench
http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/9548/winrar3593.jpg

Yes, waiting for that NB to be pushed higher ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RaV[666]

IMAMAGE, VERY important question for you.
Can u use higher than stock multipliers up to the end of the turbo range , or just x14 ?
Try setting it manually with and without turbo, use base 200mhz HTT in this test please :).Its very important question for all the peeps that wont buy BE version of this :-)

Try,bios and software like K10stat and AMD Overdrive.
Oh, and second thing, is your bios officialy certified with X6 ? Im wondering because there is high probablity that even the not certified ones could work with X6 no problem, just maybe without turbo feature.

---

I have tried , Max out Ratio in BIOS is x14 , I can't choose X16.5
Haven't try K10Stat / AMD OverDrive yet

Quote:

---

I have tried , Max out Ratio in BIOS is x14 , I can't choose X16.5
Haven't try K10Stat / AMD OverDrive yet

---

Thats sad to hear.However all will be lost when you will try with k10stat with both turbo ON and OFF in the bios.Thx for info!

1055T is no black edition chip , so it's normal that the multiplier is locked at 14 . No ?

the 1055T is a locked chip, so no Multi changes by user will be permitted, this is afaik.

Edit: CrimInalA Ninja posted me

when will these be available in retail store(newegg)?what day

2.6 HTT,3GHZ NB and 4ghz cpu prime or linx please.;)

ht is not good for real apliacations and not much for benchmarks...(u can try it at Cinebench, wprime, superpi etc...)

Crossfire performance increases w/ faster bus speed and APP loading time's Decreases.

Quote:

---

1055T is no black edition chip , so it's normal that the multiplier is locked at 14 . No ?

---

Yes, and,no.Turbo feature obviously has access to higher multipliers(not unlimited like BE).So there is a possibility that turbo mutiplier can be set.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by imamage

Okay folks
Back from work and trying to hit 4GHz
4GHz done
4.2GHz is the current max ( managed to run wPrime 32M and SuperPI 1M)
I guess it's good enough for today :)

I will get the screencap up ASAP, sorry for waiting

P.S. : for other poster asking me to run different bench / chess game with the rig
Please reply after this post
Thanks

---

:)

This is a different one!! video encoding benchmark

http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=520

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PetNorth

:)

This is a different one!! video encoding benchmark

http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=520

---

I will get it tested at the weekend
Too much OT lately :(

I hope you get your chip back as soon as possible imamage :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PetNorth

:)

This is a different one!! video encoding benchmark

http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=520

---

Found a mini review including x264 in this thread

http://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/sh...php?p=45087688

Thanks nettmd!!

The important one is the second pass, where final encoding is done (first pass is, let's say, a "pre-pass", it takes a lot less time than second pass, and doesn't use more than three-four threads).

The second pass average (stock 2.8mhz) is 26,82. Very good! (slighty faster than PHII x4 at 4.1mhz and basically tying with i7 9xx at ~2,93-2,94mhz).

Overcloked @3,5mhz, 33,11. Thats on pair with i7 9xx @3.6.

This is an AMD comeback to the high end. Good for all :up:

A comparison:

x264 HD benchmark 3.0

Average 2nd pass
Phenom II X2 555 3.2Ghz
10.55

Average 2nd pass
C2D E8500 3.16Ghz
10.96

Average 2nd pass
Athlon II X4 620 2.6Ghz
16.27

Average 2nd pass
C2Q Q9450 2.66Ghz
17.94

Average 2nd pass
i5 750 2.66Ghz
20.22

Average 2nd pass
X4 955 3.2Ghz
23.94

Average 2nd pass
i7 920 2.66Ghz
24.94

Average 2nd pass
i7 860 2.8Ghz
25.89

Average 2nd pass
i7 920 2.8Ghz
26.02

Average 2nd pass
X4 965 4.1Ghz
26.75

Average 2nd pass
X6 1055T 2.8Ghz
26.82

Average 2nd pass
i5 750 4.33Ghz
32.88

Average 2nd pass
X6 1055T 3.5Ghz
33.11

Average 2nd pass
i7 920 3.6Ghz
33.16

http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.a...tno=669&pgno=2

From those benchmarks, the 1055T needs to gun for the i7-920@ 4GHz --- 37.12

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by charged3800z24

the 1055T is a locked chip, so no Multi changes by user will be permitted, this is afaik.

Edit: CrimInalA Ninja posted me

---

We need 890GX/FX board that can scale HTT>400:)

will get my 1055T in 3 days, can't hardly wait :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by andy_satriani

will get my 1055T in 3 days, can't hardly wait :)

---

:up: Don't forget to overclock that beast and upload screenshots!!

for sure man, i will OC that beast and post some screenies :)

Anyone want to preorder from Amazon? 1055T for $222.29, or 1090T BE for $324.65.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by richierich

Anyone want to preorder from Amazon? 1055T for $222.29, or 1090T BE for $324.65.

---

The prices are a $20 more than they should have been :rolleyes:

Anyway now i am really interested in the 1035T i hope its much cheaper to 1055T and compatible with my old AM2+ mobo.

Might just pick it up instead of buying a whole new system for the time being. That way i can save up money for either a Sandy bridge or a Bulldozer with a whole new setup.

So exactly which processors are going to be released here on the 27th? Only the 1055T and 1090T?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by richierich

So exactly which processors are going to be released here on the 27th? Only the 1055T and 1090T?

---

http://www.techpowerup.com/img/10-03-11/71a.jpg
1035T and 1075T should be there too. 1035T is six cores of 2.6Ghz goodness and cheap :) . 1075T is 3Ghz (last digit denotes the Turbo CORE freq. boost potential : 5 is 500Mhz ,0 is 400Mhz).
There is one quad based on Thuban(2 cores disabled,unlocking frenzy to follow), 960T. Its should be the fastest X4 to date,3.3Ghz stock clock BUT 400Mhz boost in dual core mode :).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dumo

we need 890gx/fx board that can scale htt>400:)

---

450 would be better :D

x4 unlocked into x6 :O


http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=249761 no pics to prove said claims... but it might be a good option for those who want an affordable x6

there's always scrapped X6 turn in to X4, and with a bit of luck, maybe got full fledged X6 for the price of X4 :D

now, where's imamage?

X6 1055T sells in Indonesia for Rp.1.895.000 (US$208.7). much cheaper than amazon :p

i dont believe the 1035 & 1075 are coming out q2 now, thought they got pushed to q3 :shrug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crazydiamond

i dont believe the 1035 & 1075 are coming out q2 now, thought they got pushed to q3 :shrug:

---

i think that also means the 95W 1055T too?

I'm thinking about getting a 1055T and giving my Fiance my PII 965BE. She'd get and upgrade to a Quad Core, and I'd get my hands on one of the first Hex Core processors! :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Manicdan

i think that also means the 95W 1055T too?

---

right i think that is coming out w/ 1035 & 1075..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crazydiamond

i dont believe the 1035 & 1075 are coming out q2 now, thought they got pushed to q3 :shrug:

---

http://prohardver.hu/dl/upc/2010-03/13063_slide1.jpg

ooh in this case i like being wrong :D

Thanks for the map, Oliverda.
Has the 95w 955 launched and was the 940T only a rumor?
It's been absolute torture for me being patient on a cpu upgrade. Now I don't know whether to buy someone's used C3 Deneb or a new Zosma??? :p:

zosma for sure w/ the chance of unlocking x6!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crazydiamond

zosma for sure w/ the chance of unlocking x6!

---

Gigabyte BIOS Team may be deciding for me. :up:

ok and another stupid question. Will Thuban be released on the 26th or 27th? I'm reading conflicting reports.

http://prohardver.hu/dl/upc/2010-03/13063_slide1.jpg

Is there a reason why the 1055T has a 125W and 95W version that both release at the same time?

^^Binning. Some fall in former some in later TDP bracket (different VIDs).

And i believe, later coming 1095T (higher turbo)

960T is great

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PatRaceTin

960T is great

---

I agree! specially if it can unlock :ROTF:

sorry if oot
if i want to push my fsb, which voltage should i raise?
sorry noob question :D

what cpu/mobo barong?

I just want to get a 1090 and be done with it. Hopefully there will be good availability on the 26th. :) I'll pass my quadcore down to my son and go for 6 cores at 4ghz....

for my amd 1055T & asrock 890 gx extreme 3

oww I went to shopping mall today
The price listed as HKD $1680 ( $100 dollar increase ?)

The store sales told me they can't sell 1055T "early"
as someone from AMD Hong Kong complaint to Local dealer
For AMD Phenom II x6 buyers ( Hong Kong ) ,
Bad news for you
looks like you may have to wait for official launch date :(

^ yikeS! no wonder many shops have them listed but they don't have them
imamage if your tried of yours let me know :D lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by imamage

oww I went to shopping mall today
The price listed as HKD $1680 ( $100 dollar increase ?)

The store sales told me they can't sell 1055T "early"
as someone from AMD Hong Kong complaint to Local dealer
For AMD Phenom II x6 buyers ( Hong Kong ) ,
Bad news for you
looks like you may have to wait for official launch date :(

---

Seems like AMD recalled all stock from the stores in Singapore:D

Sent to retailers by mistake

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oliverda

http://prohardver.hu/dl/upc/2010-03/13063_slide1.jpg

---

Am i the only one that noticed the date?:ROTF:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheGreenFoX

Am i the only one that noticed the date?:ROTF:

---

March 2009? Is that what you mean?

^ i guess it's a year in the Making :D