Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Core i7 5960X and i7 8700K vs Phenom II X6 1090T BE

  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    5

    Lightbulb Core i7 5960X and i7 8700K vs Phenom II X6 1090T BE

    Hi, I havent yet wrote anything to here even this account is quite old. I just thought that how would you describe the difference between AMD Phenom II X6 1090T @ 3,85Ghz vs Intel Core i7 5960X @ 4Ghz and the another case AMD Phenom II X6 1090T @ 3,7Ghz vs Intel Core i7 8700K @ 4,8Ghz?

    First case was my pc uprage and the another my brother. In my case the biggest change was games - in Napoleon Total War 40-50 FPS -> avg. 100 FPS. And in the lastest Tomb Raider, the change was that there wasnt anymore some lagpeaks even the FPS was acceptable almost all of the time on Phenom. Maybe the memorychanel and its capacity was just near the surface on water, usually on top of surface but sometimes drop below the surface (lagpeaks)... Newest Deus Ex and Mirros Edge worked fine on Phenom but used 80-90% of its power. Same high usage happened on Assasins Creed Unity and Syndicate (works but use +90% CPU).

    In my brothers case, the reason for change was BF1 and BF5. We were disappointed and surprised when we realized that changing GPU from GTX660 -> GTX1060 didnt help FPS much on BF1. And when the BF5 came Origin the problem was bigger, the cpu was all the time 100% in game. Avg Fps was 45, without Phenoms overclocks it was nearer 30-35 :/.

    When we changed the Phenom to Core i7 8700K, the avg Fps in BF5 was 100. That is very huge difference and it seems that we need more GPU power if we wants more fps. In Dota 2 the difference was smaller but in that game all is very smooth on 144Hz screen.

    So can I believe the Cinebench, that Core i7 8700K is 100% faster in single core (100 vs 200pts CineR15) and 200% faster in multicore (1500pts vs 500pts). And same on my pc, that i7 5960X is 65% faster in single core (165 vs 100) and 200% faster in multicore (1500 vs 500pts)?

    It is hard to find reviews with Phenom 1090T and 5960X and 8700K.

  2. #2
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Chicago,Illinois
    Posts
    1,179
    Well 3.7 is like stock, so stock vs ball to the walls clock (8700k)= no contest

    BUT if properly clocked, I get min 80fps in Quake champions 145 max @ 5760x 1080



    Don't forget cpu isn't everything 32gb @ cas 8 def has some pull

    W/M.2 there really isn't a bottleneck, and if your getting 50fps @ 1080p you will get 50 @ 4k

    Ryzen gave us 30% perf gain in games(1800x=5960x) so 50 vs 65

    Here is 1100t stock getting 50 to 70 fps w/gtx 970 lolol so 30 % would be 65/90 frames




    The 8700 would gives us 100 frames

    But 10yrs to get 50% gains, Gpu is where its at



  3. #3
    I am Xtreme FlanK3r's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Czech republic
    Posts
    6,792
    Phenom II c6 and i7-8700K in many test eg there: https://www.sweclockers.com/test/244...lake/8#content
    ROG Power PCs - Intel and AMD
    CPUs:i9-7900X, i9-9900K, i7-6950X, i7-5960X, i7-8086K, i7-8700K, 4x i7-7700K, i3-7350K, 2x i7-6700K, i5-6600K, R7-2700X, 4x R5 2600X, R5 2400G, R3 1200, R7-1800X, R7-1700X, 3x AMD FX-9590, 1x AMD FX-9370, 4x AMD FX-8350,1x AMD FX-8320,1x AMD FX-8300, 2x AMD FX-6300,2x AMD FX-4300, 3x AMD FX-8150, 2x AMD FX-8120 125 and 95W, AMD X2 555 BE, AMD x4 965 BE C2 and C3, AMD X4 970 BE, AMD x4 975 BE, AMD x4 980 BE, AMD X6 1090T BE, AMD X6 1100T BE, A10-7870K, Athlon 845, Athlon 860K,AMD A10-7850K, AMD A10-6800K, A8-6600K, 2x AMD A10-5800K, AMD A10-5600K, AMD A8-3850, AMD A8-3870K, 2x AMD A64 3000+, AMD 64+ X2 4600+ EE, Intel i7-980X, Intel i7-2600K, Intel i7-3770K,2x i7-4770K, Intel i7-3930KAMD Cinebench R10 challenge AMD Cinebench R15 thread Intel Cinebench R15 thread

  4. #4
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Chicago,Illinois
    Posts
    1,179
    Still @ Stock though



  5. #5
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by FlanK3r View Post
    Phenom II c6 and i7-8700K in many test eg there: https://www.sweclockers.com/test/244...lake/8#content
    Thanks for that link. It is nice that someone has tested old processors and also compared to Coffee Lake. It seems that 8700K is 2-3x faster than Phenom II X6 1090T BE (usually 3x). In Battlefield 1 the difference is big - 82 FPS on Phenom avg and 225 FPS on 8700K. I could say that the uprage from AMD Leo to Coffee Lake is great So the GTX1060 was bottleneckled on my Phenom II X6 1090T. Also in Total War Warhammer we have big difference Phenoms avg 98 and 8700K 258. These are big difference in games, usually many thinks that GPU matter only but... But yea, CPU is very important also.

    But still, AMD Thuban has always place on my heart. Easy chip to get 4Ghz and has OK multicore performance. Great chip and awesome cpu for AM2+ board.

    There was 6900K = 5960X also in some test.

    So maybe we can say that 8700K is something like 3x faster in multicore and in singlecore +2x.

  6. #6
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Chicago,Illinois
    Posts
    1,179
    Quote Originally Posted by Wintoosa View Post
    Thanks for that link. It is nice that someone has tested old processors and also compared to Coffee Lake. It seems that 8700K is 2-3x faster than Phenom II X6 1090T BE (usually 3x). In Battlefield 1 the difference is big - 82 FPS on Phenom avg and 225 FPS on 8700K. So the GTX1060 was bottleneckled on my Phenom II X6 1090T.

    That dropped @ 1080p to 130(8700) to 65(1100T), Most of the test dropped down @ 1080 to 100% @ best

    The 1100T pushes 1080ti to 100% usage,

    Frames don't drop until you go past 4K

    Look @ these

    Fallout 4



    Ac Unity - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-qm0IoMRe8

    Hitman 2016 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSod_IKOsDo

    Titanfall 2 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2opQzeP5Fk

    Doom 2016 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-MHB0Bt4D4



  7. #7
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Chicago,Illinois
    Posts
    1,179
    With G-sync,Free sync

    35- 165(G-sync) - 45-120(Free-sync) is all you need




  8. #8
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Chicago,Illinois
    Posts
    1,179
    Quote Originally Posted by Wintoosa View Post

    AMD Thuban has always place on my heart. Easy chip to get 4Ghz and has OK multicore performance. Great chip and awesome cpu for AM2+ board.

    There was 6900K = 5960X also in some test.

    So maybe we can say that 8700K is something like 3x faster in multicore and in singlecore +2x.
    Don't forget there is not much headroom left in 8700 those scores wont move much but the 1100t will show you massive improvement 30 to 50% in some cases. Memory bandwidth doubles 9+ to 20.4Gbs latency is 47ns @ 1866c8 (Ryzen is 70/80ns)

    Intel X299 or Threadripper x399 is a proper upgrade, H.E.D.T to Mainstream is a side grade


    Once u go very high res your gonna spend 60% of bugdet on gpu and maybe 15% on cpu,

    990fx = 40 pcie lanes
    usb 3
    The R3.0 has native usb type c and 3.1
    Aswell as M.2

    115x has like half the lanes which equal to mostly the same bandwith (2x)2.0 16x vs (3x)3.0 8x lanes


    I have a 8086k still in the BOX




  9. #9
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Chicago,Illinois
    Posts
    1,179
    If we look @ the 7zip results we see stock 1100T= 6600K @ stock

    The 1100T is only using 1333c8 memory, the 6600k is using 2133c15

    Vishera is using 1866c9 and is only 20% behind 8600K



    Fire Strike physics score shows 1100T has 7% less clock & is 15% behind 6600K






    With 30-40% core and 50-60% uncore overclock + 1866c8-2000c7 ram the 1100T will Take off

    Here is a vid showing 1090T keeping pace w/ a 1700x 20-30% in Doom2016 and bf4 seems to perform better on the thuban rig.

    Last edited by Hell Hound; 08-03-2019 at 06:53 PM.



  10. #10
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    5
    Hell Hound, I know that AMD Thuban has great potential. When you overclock your six-cores NB-speed 2->3Ghz you will get nice impact on games. And yeah, Thuban can manage many games when you have overclocks around 4Ghz. We have two Thubans. My Brothers Thuban was changed to 8700K and the main reason was Battlefield 1 and 5. Both games utilized 100% Thuban CPU. The motherboard was M4A785TD-V EVO, which is nice and basic 100 euros motherboard but it has quite steep volt droppage. That was the reason why we kept the clocks on 3700Mhz with Thuban. Our experience was that his FPS doubled on BF1 and 5 when we changed the Thuban to 8700K. We havent measured PC with the energymeter, but the pc feels less hot with 8700K than Thuban. We think also that when we will uprage his GTX1060 something beter, we have great cpu to pair it. The lastest Gpu change from GTX660 to GTX1060 felt smaller uprage than we expected and one reason could be CPU.

    Mine reason to uprage Thuban to 5960X was Total War Games. In NTW, my FPS raised from about 40-50 -> 100 when i got the Core i7 5960X. I also has some games which needed the SSE4.1 support and Thuban cant run these games. Great example was Mafia III but it has got now the update which makes possible to run the game with cpus without SSE4.1. But if you want play newest Assasins Creeds like Odysseia or Origins, you cannot play these on Thuban. And yea, I know that Total Wars has Intel-optimized code. And maybe one reason to uprage was also that I needed some change almost 10 year usage of AMD.

    But yea, you are right, the GPU is the most important. We has nice evidence it from by second brothers PC. Its Xeon X5650 can manage many powerfull GPUs and we have not any need to uprage the CPU and X58. Thuban is nice CPU, but also hot when overclocked and lacking of SSE4.1 can make some problems in games.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •