Phenom X6 1090T Black Edition:
125W TDP/3.2G/Turbo 3.6G/Locked multiplier
1055T:
125W TDP/2.8G/Turbo 3.3G
2.6g 1035T and 3.0G 1075T will launch later.
Source:http://bbs.chiphell.com/viewthread.p...extra=page%3D1
Printable View
Phenom X6 1090T Black Edition:
125W TDP/3.2G/Turbo 3.6G/Locked multiplier
1055T:
125W TDP/2.8G/Turbo 3.3G
2.6g 1035T and 3.0G 1075T will launch later.
Source:http://bbs.chiphell.com/viewthread.p...extra=page%3D1
Black Edition is unlocked multiplier, right?
1090T multiplier is locked according to the source.Quote:
Originally Posted by massman
I don't understand, all of AMD's CPU's that are called "Black Edition" comes with an unlocked multiplier, why call it a Black Edition if it comes with a locked multiplier?
Yeah right.:D:D:DQuote:
Originally Posted by mindfury
Black edition is unlocked of course.;)
I dont understand the 1090T codename??
1035-1055-1075 and then 1090 ?? why shouldn't it have been 1095T
The 1095T will be a higher-clocked and higher-priced super model.Quote:
Originally Posted by ajaidev
Using 1090T gives AMD the room to squeeze in a higher-end model later on.
So it should be 1030T - 1050T - 1070T then instead of 1035T, 1055T and 1075T??Quote:
Originally Posted by massman
Certainly a valid point.Quote:
Originally Posted by ajaidev
I guess there's some methodology behind it. Keep in mind that this is just the first batch of Thuban, be sure there will be products coming like:
- 1095T
- 1085T
- 1080T
- 1060T
- etc ...
Now these are serious clock speeds,both stock and Turbo. The 3.2Ghz model and its 125W TDP was a bit unexpected ,but I guess its AMD's CTI program at work. With 3.6Ghz Turbo,the 1090T will be faster than 965BE by a good deal in single-thread workloads and totally will blow it away in MT ones. Same goes for 1055T with 3.3Ghz Turbo and 6 cores @ 2.8Ghz.
EDIT:
Oh my oh my,courtesy of planet3dnow forum and user Opteron ;) :
http://www.planet3dnow.de/vbulletin/...postcount=3102
Initial price is 286e for 1090T model :).
http://www.abload.de/img/1090tp3n5.pngQuote:
HDT90ZFBGRBOX
AMD Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition
3.2GHz/3.6GHz Turbo Core
9MB cache
Socket AM3
125W TDP
http://www.abload.de/img/1090t214pm.png
http://www.abload.de/img/1090t31fwd.png
1055T model initial price=213e
I'd pay max $350 or so for the Black considering the TDP. DDR2 support is just so awesome, these 4 sticks will be having a really long life methinks.
Even the 1055T seems pretty awesome for most users, but again not sure if power consumption is justified vs Lynnfield in that case (still 125W and all).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macadamia
€286 is about USD$387
pretty close to your target price
after a month it would be around that price point. good luck
Cost of CPU i found. Micrplex is from Norway, where there is 25% vat on top.
Most likly cost less in some country.
AMD Phenom II X6 1090T = 230€/308$
AMD Phenom II X6 1055T = 160€/216$
Meh, not counting on it. Damn Singaporean retailers will inflate the price for 2 months as it's an "enthusiast" product. And watch those people HUAT AR.Quote:
Originally Posted by haylui
Might be better off buying in Malaysia this time, probably close/less than MSRP.
i will be the first to say im not happy with how their numbering is all kinds of wtf. first it was a 940 which "copied" intels i7, but they have like 30 chips all using a theme that makes easy conversion and i was happy with it, then they do this. with the turbo chips, its like the model is based on the turbo speed and not the default speed.
however these prices are seeming horribly fair, almost too good actually, and i cants wait.
In naming scheme i am happy with AMD. Intel really broke my heart by naming the hex core as i7 980x "dam you Intel" i would have liked a i9 or at least a i7 1xxx...
Damn im happy, 1050T will be around 200E mark for me (20%VAT included), thats shweeet! But i probably will wait dor 1035T model probably 180E which is my sweet spot for cpus for last few years.Great news.Now, somebody leak overclockability!
Awesome. I am glad the 1090T is 125w. I was really expecting a 140w part. I wonder how these will oc.
Well, taking into consideration that 965 C3 is 125W also, it seems reasonable to think it will overclock up to 4ghz on highest end air.
Its tweaked deneb, so only wall would be heat.
once the 1090t is a be
once it reaches sub $300, it'll be my next upgrade
I'll buy this CPU the first day regardless of the cost. IT IS MINE!
Well, it looks like it will be 300$ ,is that really a big difference ?
286E is with 25% vat.
Wow , if true very impressed with power consumption , curios as to how they tweaked 45nm process to get it .
it is very nice to see the change. the jump from 65nm to 45nm seems less of a jump than the first 45nm to current. a 940 was 4x3.0ghz for 140w, now we have 6x3.2ghz for 125W.Quote:
Originally Posted by ~CS~
im betting its the reduced voltages, 1.225v i think is what we saw on the CPUid thread. and it might be possible all chips are running that for stock volts
940 was 4x3.0ghz for 125w. Now we have 945 with 95W TDP and will have 955 with 95W TDP soon.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
Q7: How does AMD determine when to transition to a new process technology generation?
A7: AMD transitions to a new process technology generation when it is right for our customers and right for the company.
A common misconception is that being first to a new process technology generation is the fundamental determinant of performance and energy efficiency leadership. AMD has
proven this to be false.
Rather than the more costly and higher-risk method of making a full technology transition every two years, AMD uses a unique and highly efficient method called Continuous Technology Improvement (CTI).
CTI allows us to maximize the benefits and increase the return on investment of a single process technology generation for as long as possible by evolving and improving the transistor designs within that generation. This is why at many points in our history our processors and platforms have remained competitive, even when compared against those from our competitors based on the next process technology generation.
AMD 45nm Process Technology Generation - Fact Sheet/FAQ/Q&A
If its a BE and the multi is locked AMD made a bad choice but if its not a BE and has locked multi its good then.
I do think the tread i made about the Mass production being the key for AMD is of central relevance. Its not very easy to imagine how AMD will compete against Intel with huge hex cores unless you take the mass production and low defect rate into account.
As for the 3.2Ghz with 400mhz turbo on 125W bravo AMD.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliverda
Nice. I've always been impressed by the engineers at AMD being able to effectively do what the pundits and marketing FUD says they cannot.
The 6400+ Black Edition was locked ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrono Detector
What is the point of labeling it a black edition than? There is nothing gained in comparison to a non black edition model.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oj101
Either way it's going to be a good chip.
It was unlocked. I had one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oj101
Black Edition = unlocked multi
The first were unlocked, the later ones weren't. My unlocked one was RMAd with a locked one, the only thing 'special' about it was it didn't come with a fan.
Then it wasn't a black edition anymore.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oj101
All BE's are unlocked, always have been. Just like FX.
Soo how many cores are active when running att max turbo speed?
Even though it came in a BE box without a heatsink?
Even more so, that sounds like you got a refurb chip. Or am I just misunderstanding what your saying?Quote:
Originally Posted by Oj101
No, you're getting me correctly. I had an unlocked 6400+ which died, I received a locked 6400+ in a Black Edition box (without heatsink) that was still sealed :confused: I don't really mind as I never clocked either of them, it's just strange.
As I remember 90nm x2 6400+ was locked at x16.
There was a 6400+ BE which was unlocked and later they released a locked 6400+. That was probably a mixup on the RMA.
Link to the box.
amd is full of win lately
ati and now amd pricing these at a decent price ....
hmmm, x6 1090T? really, someone can it confirmed? I want one :)
3,2 Ghz and 3,6 Ghz Turbo seem impressive.Quote:
Originally Posted by FlanK3r
Who needs overpriced Intel crap? :p:
If most of your applications are multithreaded, with that price/perfomance/power consumption these are THE processors you want to buy for sure.
Not only only well multithreaded apps.I really enjoy doing multiple things at once since i got 4 cores.Encoding a movie, ripping a movie and playing dragon age at the same time is really where its at ;-).Or declare 4 cores to crunching and play on another two.Damn i think i will be needing 8 cores.Theres all this plus watching 1080P x264 movies :P.
All in all every power user wants more cores.Not only workstation users.
My box was black :/Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuroimaho
Hey Microplex is my local dealer. Shall I order one? It is so cheap (compared to Intel's six-core) that i could order it just for fun.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Indeed, you can consider multitasking as a big multithreaded app. However, this processor still lacks per core perfomance like all other PhenomII processors compared to Intel's. You'll still get lower framerates when you game, or slower fps in x264 for the same number of cores, etc. That's why it's "only" good for multithreaded workloads.Quote:
Originally Posted by RaV[666]
Which OPN was it ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Oj101
Black Editions always have a "Z" in the OPN compared to an ordinary one.
You can see that "Z" also in the 1090's OPN:
compared to the 1055's OPN:Quote:
HDT90ZFBGRBOX
@informal:Quote:
HDT55TFBGRBOX
You are welcome ;-)
cheers
Opteron
http://www.legionhardware.com/articl...hd_5970,2.htmlQuote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
I think is has something to do with 'only' 400MHz turbo compared to 500MHz for 1035-1055-1075 models maybe?Quote:
Originally Posted by ajaidev
Just a guess ...
Also I must say I'm really surprised by 125W TDP of this chip (if true)!
Even if it will be 140W I'm doing same as Mechromancer :yepp:
I dont play games at 800x600 low detail settings ;-), and no i dont own or plan to have crossfired 5970 ;-).So FPS is gonna be pretty much the same across PH2/Core2/i5/i7 or a dual x58 with two westmere 980x on them ;-).Quote:
Indeed, you can consider multitasking as a big multithreaded app. However, this processor still lacks per core perfomance like all other PhenomII processors compared to Intel's. You'll still get lower framerates when you game, or slower fps in x264 for the same number of cores, etc. That's why it's "only" good for multithreaded workloads.
Its been established LONG ago that for good game experience you need enough ram, fast IO subsystem a DECENT cpu and the faster the better GFX.
I dont see myself with a timerclock staring at the screen showing me encoding passes in x264, it rarely matters to me if encode is done 10, or 20, or 30% faster, it matters tho that i can fireup many concurrent workloads and while theyre being done in the background i could do some other stuff smoothly too.
Of course if someone has a render farm, or some tough computational workload with a steady input of data ,it matters A LOT how quickly it can be done, but thats 99% of time server grade stuff.
And comparing it to 980x isnt sensible.Look at the price, 3-4x times less, platform backwards compatibility (again less costs).
We all know and agree that 980x is faster, and i7 4 cores are faster per core.But in the real world 980x can afford select few, i7 4c are great but still costs more and come with a high cost platform.And turbo function is a nice and welcomed upgrade too.
And remember that i will be putting it on a 2 year old mainboard on ddr2, to have that option is just F-ing nice ;-D
Hehehe, we're going back a while now, before I had my 6000+ which held the WR for a while. It doesn't matter anymore, I just thought there were a few that were locked.Quote:
Originally Posted by Opteron146
You need a 4GHz PhenomII to reach a 2,8GHz Core i7 in MW2. 3GHz vs 2,4GHz in Left4Dead and Crysis Warhead. And this is with insane settings, one would think you'll be GPU limited. I don't get your point at all, that article just confirms what I'm saying. Too bad they don't test minFPS, you'd see bigger differences.Quote:
Originally Posted by demonkevy666
As above, minFPS (and avg, but whatever) aren't quite the same here with a single 5850 between 3 and 4 GHz with my Core i5, and I bet they won't be the same in your machine too. I don't play at 800x600 low settings ;). Most games only use 2 or 3 threads, not to mention any "old" game only uses 1. Intel owns here, end of the story, and if you have a 120Hz monitor or you just want high framerates you don't want AMD unless you can't afford a midrange Intel i5/i7.Quote:
Originally Posted by RaV[666]
Who's talking 980X here? That's only for benchers and some crazy chunchers with deep pockets. As long as you use heavy multithreading this processor has 0 rivals at this price range. It's not even funny. Heck, I think with these Thuban CPUs PhenomII X4 has no reason to exist at all. Same or better clocks, more cores, more or less the same price, turbo...
I find this an interesting comment. These really do look like great chips for the price (if those quoted here hold true after launch), but after reading this comment I'm not sure which sales of the x6 is going to effect the most, Intel's i5/i7 or AMD own PhenomII x4 chips. As noted, for a very similar price you get more of everything, seems to makes the x2's obsolete and may relegate the x3/x4's to the bargin bin... :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
Or the etailers will just gouge you like mad until they sold off the remaining x4.
3ghz,and difference between 3ghz and 4ghz be it i7 or PH2, is ~15FPS with a base FPS of MORE THAN 100FPS ;-).Thats 0 real difference betweeen i7 3ghz or 4ghz and Ph2 and i7.Quote:
ou need a 4GHz PhenomII to reach a 2,8GHz Core i7 in MW2
Yes, THERE IS a difference ,but after you reach certain point (~2.8ghz for i7 and 3.2 for Ph2) difference is neglible.whats 3 or 4 fps at 100fps ?
Maybe it makes you feel warm inside ;-), but most people dont care.I play the game ,not observe fps counter.
And in that legionhardware test they used 5970 and they got hardly any difference above certain threshold.And thats a fast card ;-).
You say that, but i tested few games with my 4850, and there is hardly any difference above 3.0ghz, single digit percents if any. In my favourite game of recent times, dragon age, i get same fps 2.5ghz or 3.5ghz.yea, i set AAx4 and AFx8 but it hovers at the same 50-80fps, ive alttabbed few times and changed multiplier, no diff :-/.In crysis benchmark i gained like half of fps between 3 and 3.6.Quote:
As above, minFPS (and avg, but whatever) aren't quite the same here with a single 5850 between 3 and 4 GHz with my Core i5, and I bet they won't be the same in your machine too.
Thats right,thats why i can do many things at once.And game.Quote:
Most games only use 2 or 3 threads, not to mention any "old" game only uses 1
Old games, are well, old.They are FAST on that weak single PH2 core, and 100fps and 200fps doesnt make any diff.
A bit newer games that use 2 threads, are fast also, because again, main factor that hampers them is GFX, crysis is a good example.
And pretty much most games nowadays, have small system requierements considering theyre mostly console ports, that get hampered only in insane resolutions with high AA/Aniso settings, but again only thing that will help i gfx performance...
Well ,no.Intel WINS here, but i think to OWN it would have to have been DRAMATICALLY faster at the settings that people PLAY.Quote:
Intel owns here, end of the story, and if you have a 120Hz monitor or you just want high framerates you don't want AMD unless you can't afford a midrange Intel i5/i7.
And i dont get 120hz monitor reference at all, it aint possible on AMD or somethin ?You just need a FAST CARD/or lower IQ settings for GFX card to be able to render quickly enough.If anything it would be more sensible to buy faster GFX, with money saved on i7 ;-).
Sorry, i havent seen any high quality real world tests that would indicate any drastic differences in gaming performance between core2quad / Ph2 / i5 /i7 .And no, 120fps vs lets say 140fps doesnt mean squat, and 35 vs 37 neither ;-).
Most dramatic rise in gaming performance in recent years i saw installing system and game on a ssd :P
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/a...5043/19696.png
Seems like Ph2 is capable of smooth gameplay with L4D ;-), and if they used AA and aniso ,whole lineup would get squashed much closer.
scr*w you AMD, locked multiplier :(
Scr*w AMD for unconfirmed rumor?? Wait for the launch and then scr*w them all you want.Quote:
Originally Posted by leo2046
What a great first post "scr*w you AMD"Quote:
Originally Posted by leo2046
Unless you are going to run LN2/LHe this means nothing....unless you have problems clocking with the HTT/Bus Speed.
I'm gonna bet its unlocked anyway, AMD would have no reason to release a locked "Black Edition".
EDIT:
And to everyone else, notice how the other CPUs dont say locked or unlocked...it's most likely a typo.
You're ignoring that we don't want the same thing. I don't want a processor that allows me to play games "smooth". I want a processor that allows me to play at 120fps constant with all the eye candy turned on. PhenomII is unable to do that at sane frequencies. It's freaking hard for an AMD CPU to do that, specially in "old" games that only use 1 core because of the low perfomance per core. With a 120Hz each single fps until you reach 120 is noticeable, plain and simple. 40 vs 60, 60 vs 80 is a huge difference. If PhenomII is enough for you then good for you and good for AMD, but here it just doesn't cut it. I will give you an example: playing TF2 with C2Q and i5, both at 4GHz. The C2Q is unable to provide constant 120fps, with minFPS in the 80-90's. The i5 is playing at 120fps constant. Big difference in gameplay, in a CPU limited game. There are loads of them out there if you use a fast GPU, and for 1680x1050 with AA the 5850 is a fast GPU. Is TF2 an old game? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by RaV[666]
Of course you won't notice this with a 60Hz monitor, but I do notice it. I don't buy the the typical "(insert low random number of fps here) is enough for smooth gameplay" BS, sorry.
In your Anand link you can see it clearly: AMD CPUs need a much higher frequency to reach Intel.
@STaRGaZeR
How about you test it personally and report (honestly) your findings here. I suppose you will use high end GFX (5870+). Thanks.
any official announcement from AMD? somehow i doubt referencing other forum being any credible at all ...
Send me all the hardware you want me to test for free and I'll do everything you want ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Seriously, I can't believe I have to prove that Intel CPUs are faster in CPU limited scenarios...
NB Frequency NB Frequency NB Frequency Memory Bandwidth Memory Bandwidth Memory BandwidthQuote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
Seriously, go test it yourself. Or did you? You're really unclear. Phenom II's do 4.2-4.3 Ghz just fine on water and I've got mine at 4.1 on air. Core 2 Quad's do 4.2-4.4 Ghz on air/water.
Phenom II = Core 2 Quad in performance and Phenom II > Core 2 Quad when the NB (That is Uncore in untel-i-speak) is jacked up (Which no review shows).
Seriously, go test it. I'd love to see results and if you're right then w00t because the next chance I get I'll be switching to Core i5.
EDIT:
What CPU do you currently have? Nobody's going to send you hardware for free, please don't be a smart***?
Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
CPU limited scenarios? You game @ 1024 x 768 wit high end GFX? K,thnx,bye(if I have to use kidos terms :) )
PS I can't and wont send you the hw. I trust my own findings and I tested both! Both behave almost the same with high end GFX(min fps varies by a few % ).
Thanks for confirming that PhenomII is slower than i5/i7 at the same clocks. I think I've been perfectly clear: at the same frequency, AMD CPUs are slower per core than Intel's current lineup (i5/i7).Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
I have not tested a PhenomII, but I have tested C2Q, i5 and i7. Since PhenomII is sometimes faster, sometimes slower than C2Q at the same frequency I have a pretty good start point, and you have just confirmed it. Not to mention that all the reviews out there agree with me. Of course you can always find a corner case, or a situation where a better CPU does nothing because the bottleneck is elsewhere, but I can do that too. Let's be honest here.
I have an i5 750. And I'm not going to spend a single € just because you want me to test something that has already been tested and confirmed hundreds of times by a lot of reviewers and end users. I don't think you have to call me a smartass for that :down:
And now I have to thank you too for confirming that you only want to defend AMD instead of your argument (do you know what are you talking about? I doubt it) without reading my previous posts, where there are examples and perfectly defined cases. That's actually what we were discussing before the AMD drones stepped in. Thanks for ruining another thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
You have an i7 and you haven't tested an AMD 10h CPU in similar config AND you call other people drones? Riiight.
neither you have an i7Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
A guy who assembles PCs has an i7(s),trust me...
I guess all reviews, all the tests, all the user reports, even a hardcore AMD user confirming what I say, everything is meaningless for you. Go troll somewhere else please, we were having a nice conversation before you stepped in.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
You were having a nice convo with yourself but I don't care. You are talking from biased perspective,I've at least tested both.
Look this thread is about the 6 core upcomming phenom and not the quad core phenom. SInce intel think end user must pay a grand to have a 6 core cpu. I say amd have done something very good here by bringing to the masses a 6 core cpu. SOmething Intel wont do for maybe a year still. So in anyways you look at it. Amd have the performance/price crown here. Also from what i have learned, biggest thing needed for games in a cpu is high frequency ( which mean also nb frequency and uncore frequency from both side) and a high amount of l3 cache. Frequency problem can be solved with better cooling solution and 4ghz is reachable on both side. Heck, even 4.5ghz can be reachable on both side if you have a good cooling systems. For l3 cache yes intel wins there but they also charge you 600-700$ more for 6 thread, 32nm process and 6mb more l3 cache thats quite alot of money for not so much stuff. For some that 700$ diff is nothing and they will get the i7 980x but not everybody can pay that diff.
Also stargazer go read back 1 or 2 time more beepbeep2 post. You missed quite an important points, none of those review said they jacked up the nb frequency which can help if i read well some stuff in the amd section the gpu performance and also cpu performance as well ( not sure on that). while every i7 or i5 review all have the uncore jacked up by default when overclocking if they use some high frequency memory kit.
And yeah for the moment, i am a core i5 user.
Could you please explain to me what a CPU limited game is these days?Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
You must be an exception to the norm as far as game play goes. If I don't have a FPS counter on the screen, I can't tell the difference between 80 or 100 or 120 FPS.
i am only want 6 core with unlock multi
How do you think 1055T will rank up vs. i7 860 in perf/$ and perf/watt in a highly multi-threaded benchmark like cinebench?
1055T: 6c/6t, 6x512kb L2, 6mb L3, 2.8G, 3.3G turbo, 125W TDP, $216?
i7 860: 4c/8t, 4x256kb L2, 8mb L3, 2.8G, 3.46G turbo, 95W TDP, $200 @ MC
I hope the idle power consumption of 800-series chipset and this are good.
i7 860 cost much more than $200....nearly $300
Not at Microcenter: http://microcenter.com/single_produc...uct_id=0317378Quote:
Originally Posted by mindfury
:shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Firestrider
It is just temporary sales promotion,doesn't make any sense.
All other sites list i7 860 more than $250
Not happening regardless of who makes your CPU. There is no game that a Phenom II at 3.5Ghz+ will not be able to feed a graphics setup it's frames, the graphics will bottleneck well before the Phenom II. Intel's i5's and i7's are better processors absolutely, but being 50% or 500% above the graphics system bottleneck is a tie in terms of your goal.Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
While my i5 doesn't give me that in the games I play, it's still much closer than a C2Q at 4GHz, and since PhII is at best a little faster than a C2Q at the same clocks results are similar. Read my previous posts. A 5850 is not the bottleneck at 1680x1050+AA in most games except some uber new, bad optimized console ports. FEAR, TF2, Trackmania, Assassin's Creed, GRID to name a few, they all suffer the same issue: the CPU dictates minFPS. All of them improved a lot with the C2Q-->i5 change, same clocks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom128
BTW, there are dozens out there but in this very thread users have posted reviews with 5970s and such, and the CPU played a big role until you reach a certain frequency where the bottleneck is again the GPU. PhII still needs a lot more MHz to be competitive.
Read above, and also the 120Hz monitor part in the post you quoted :PQuote:
Originally Posted by freeloader
I didn't miss them, I know PhII is faster than C2Q with the NB jacked up, but still i5/i7 are far ahead in per core perfomance unfortunately, and that's what matters today if you game.Quote:
Originally Posted by snoro
Back on topic, if AMD releases a lower clocked Thuban, at what price? PhII X4 965 is at ~145€ :eek:
eh...bro don't know you're come from SGQuote:
Originally Posted by Macadamia
me is in SG now
ya
you're right, SG retailers are slower even slower than Malaysia
quick question.... how much faster is i5/i7 clock-for-clock than core2quad?
Do we have any official info about the supported motherboards?
Check here: http://www.hwbox.gr/reviews/3253-qua...ock-clock.htmlQuote:
Originally Posted by natty
I think it is around 15% with HT off
http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=16214Quote:
Originally Posted by Bahrain based etailer, Advanti
1090T in my next build
And is the Phenom X6 supposed to have the same performance as an Opteron 6 cores at the same frequency? If so I might buy a 2X 8 cores Opterons...
Aaa thats good prices right there.... very good indeeeedQuote:
Originally Posted by onethreehill
Thanks adrianlee :up:
Good price indeed. Think I might get one.
omg $300 launch price would be sick,, the price/performance will be crazy. definately need dual cpu enthusiast board!
+350Quote:
Originally Posted by crazydiamond
If the prices are true 1055T for $199, you could get 5 * 6 cores = 30 cores from AMD or get 1 * 6 cores = 6 cores from Intel "i7 980x" lol
A question, are the black editions only sensible for those shooting for extremely high OCs?
Its useful for all, by changing the multi you can stress the cpu more but if you change the system freq the whole system will be stressed.Quote:
Originally Posted by insurgent
anyone ?Quote:
Originally Posted by insurgent
6 cores at $199 = cheap workstation CPU
at $199 the 1055T is definitely going to beat the i5 750... I hope these prices are true
Yeah! Dual AM3 board will be nice.:DQuote:
Originally Posted by crazydiamond
@ajaidev
thanks, but the 1055T looks very promising if it's 200, i'll have to browse on amd overclocking :)
The prices are true, they fit to the European prices posted on page 1.Quote:
Originally Posted by ajaidev
However, you may have to add your local VAT.
Any AM2(+) Board with updated BIOS ... ask your mainboard manufacturer for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Miksu
Gigabyte already updated several BIOSes.