Some benchmarks of Thuban X6 1090T

[ajaidev]

And the point is ? AMD needs a 2 cores and 200MHz advantage to match the 1 1/2 year old i7 tech 960 ?
No matter how I try to have a look at it, I can't see any "miracles" or progress from AMD.
Intel's closing in on faster clock-per-clock processors than Gulftown and going to 8 and 10 cores ( 16 & 20 threads ) in Nov/Dec or Jan-March 2011.
AMD's at 12 Cores / 12 threads, but unless their performance clock per clock and on a core to core basis is the same with these, those will barely compete with the 8c/16t Intel CPU.

They need to work harder.

Nice performance and good prices are always nice, but they need to step up the game before they get down below ( performance-wise ).

I'm all in for performance.
Can we have an Opteron 146 and DFI LP nF4 SLI-DR de-javu anytime soon AMD please ?

The point being that AMD has something that can perform on par with Intels best processors and that also with a $250 lower price tag.

i7 950 is around $560 or some thing and i7 960 is around $580, 1090T is suppose to be $300 jeez. For $300 Intel only offers you a i7 930 or a i7 860 this will force them to release a new 3Ghz+ model or lower the prices of i7 950/960

Other than i7 975/980x the 1090T is in a very good position, also the i7 950 was not launched in 2008 it was launched in Q4 2009.

1090T has the unlocked multi such as the i7 965 and has the same speed with a much lower price tag how is that a bad thing and the 8 and 10 cores you mentioned they are not coming out as soon as you think.

You will see dual cores and maybe quads, intel will again do a test phase with dual cores on a new process node.

[AbelJemka]

And the point is ? AMD needs a 2 cores and 200MHz advantage to match the 1 1/2 year old i7 tech 960 ?
No matter how I try to have a look at it, I can't see any "miracles" or progress from AMD.
Intel's closing in on faster clock-per-clock processors than Gulftown and going to 8 and 10 cores ( 16 & 20 threads ) in Nov/Dec or Jan-March 2011.
AMD's at 12 Cores / 12 threads, but unless their performance clock per clock and on a core to core basis is the same with these, those will barely compete with the 8c/16t Intel CPU.

They need to work harder.

Nice performance and good prices are always nice, but they need to step up the game before they get down below ( performance-wise ).

I'm all in for performance.
Can we have an Opteron 146 and DFI LP nF4 SLI-DR de-javu anytime soon AMD please ?

To argue you switch your comparaison from i7 950 vs PII 1090T to i7 960 vs PII 1090T only to say the later have a 2 cores and 200MHz advantage...I find this funny.

After you speak about 1 1/2 year old i7 tech 960 but you forget PII is 1 year old tech.

After you argument using core count and thread count at your advantage. I find it a litte hyprocite.

Ultimately to show you don't favour Intel over AMD you say 'I'm all in for performance', a way to say price/performance is irrelevant.

So i think you'd better save words and just post i7 980X.

[Sakray]

I think everyone should pay close attention to "Power/Performance" rather than clock frequency & count of cores.

[Titan7171]

I think everyone should pay close attention to "Power/Performance" rather than clock frequency & count of cores.

Why? 6 cores at 4.2ghz would be a good thing wouldnt it

[BenchZowner]

All I see is that the i7 950 had a clockspeed of 4ghz
..is that stock?

All I see is... that you need to clean your glasses or pay a visit to a doctor to have your eyesight checked, the only 4GHz thing in the screenshot is an overclocked i5 750

The point being that AMD has something that can perform on par with Intels best processors

Well...it's not exactly like that, isn't it ?
It can only battle the Bloomfields which are... well, introduced since late 2008.
Who needs an i7 950 or 960 when most of the 920's can do 4.2GHz 24/7 on air cooling ?
There goes the price tag difference when overclocking isn't "forbidden" or taken out of the question.

For $300 Intel only offers you a i7 930

Which can match/beat the Phenom II x6 in a lot ( if not most ) cases if you simply overclock it to 4GHz or so.
Unless AMD's x6 can clock 250MHz or so higher, granted that we'd overclock both CPUs.

Other than i7 975/980x the 1090T is in a very good position

I'm tired of "if you overlook this or that" when it comes to progress.
I want to see AMD surpassing Intel again, even if it's just 1% faster.

also the i7 950 was not launched in 2008 it was launched in Q4 2009.

You know what I meant. I meant that it's an i7 920 just with a higher default clock frequency, it's not like it's any faster clock per clock or a crazy overclock untouchable by a 2008 i7 920 C1.

and the 8 and 10 cores you mentioned they are not coming out as soon as you think.

I've got 2 birdies saying two different stories, I wouldn't disregard the possibility of getting released earlier

So i think you'd better save words and just post i7 980X.

All I'm going to post is:



That was the last time AMD was at least desktop-wise in front and VERY fun to overclock and bench with.

[informal]

Posting a super pi score in the era of multicore processors is like driving your Porsche on the narrow village road going 20Km/h... (I know yup posted it to prove how "fun" that Opty was,yet Super Pi is fail from perf. evaluation POV when you count multicore MPUs).
Also comparing Bloomfield and Istanbul is valid since Bloomfield is still very high end with only 1 Westmere hexa core being faster. Bloomfield design relies massively on added logic(SMT aka Hyperthreading) which adds ~20% on the die size while giving similar perf. increase on average in poorly coded multithread-capable applications .Each core inside Bloomfield is MASSIVELY larger than one in Deneb/Istanbul,thing 15.3mm2 Vs 24.5mm2,that's staggering 60% more added core logic area. Deneb is actually doing great compared how much smaller its cores are.So Istanbul/Thuban with 50% more cores actually levels the field in core logic area investment .The only real downside in AMD's Deneb is quite large sram cell size and this is why Deneb and Bloomfield take up similar die size in total(while very cores in Deneb are,like i previously said 60% smaller and bound to be slower in MT applications).

As for your wet dream of 6-10 cores on desktop let's see how that turns out.I heard not so soon.

[Manicdan]

@bench, im pretty sure this is the AMD section, and all "intel is better" flame baiting is bannable, so i wouldnt do it if i were you. the title for this thread is benchmarks for PII x6, yet all i see is bickering from the last day. not very enjoyable to read, this isnt the news section.

[Titan7171]

All I see is... that you need to clean your glasses or pay a visit to a doctor to have your eyesight checked, the only 4GHz thing in the screenshot is an overclocked i5 750



Well...it's not exactly like that, isn't it ?
It can only battle the Bloomfields which are... well, introduced since late 2008.
Who needs an i7 950 or 960 when most of the 920's can do 4.2GHz 24/7 on air cooling ?
There goes the price tag difference when overclocking isn't "forbidden" or taken out of the question.


Which can match/beat the Phenom II x6 in a lot ( if not most ) cases if you simply overclock it to 4GHz or so.
Unless AMD's x6 can clock 250MHz or so higher, granted that we'd overclock both CPUs.



I'm tired of "if you overlook this or that" when it comes to progress.
I want to see AMD surpassing Intel again, even if it's just 1% faster.



You know what I meant. I meant that it's an i7 920 just with a higher default clock frequency, it's not like it's any faster clock per clock or a crazy overclock untouchable by a 2008 i7 920 C1.



I've got 2 birdies saying two different stories, I wouldn't disregard the possibility of getting released earlier



All I'm going to post is:



That was the last time AMD was at least desktop-wise in front and VERY fun to overclock and bench with.

Really I dont see what your point is? We know the performance of intels cpu's already. We've all seen the numbers, and guess what? , we are not interested

This is a new release and here you are filling the thread with useless information no one wants to see or read about. You already stated you feel AMD needs to make more progress......ok, Thats not going to change the fact of what these cpu's can do. And arguing that the performance is not up to your standards compared to Intel In the AMD forums is not going to go down to well here either.

So what are you going to do? try to convince us that we should instead all change our systems over to Intel? I mean I dont understand if we havent already what makes you think we would want to now or even care about the performance Intels cpu give? we trying to see the performance of these cpu's. Now move on if you not interested In AMD's new offering. Dont spam the thread with Intel propaganda

[ownage]

Doesn't beat my old q6600 @ 3.7ghz

[ajaidev]

All I see is... that you need to clean your glasses or pay a visit to a doctor to have your eyesight checked, the only 4GHz thing in the screenshot is an overclocked i5 750

Well...it's not exactly like that, isn't it ?
It can only battle the Bloomfields which are... well, introduced since late 2008.
Who needs an i7 950 or 960 when most of the 920's can do 4.2GHz 24/7 on air cooling ?
There goes the price tag difference when overclocking isn't "forbidden" or taken out of the question.

Which can match/beat the Phenom II x6 in a lot ( if not most ) cases if you simply overclock it to 4GHz or so.
Unless AMD's x6 can clock 250MHz or so higher, granted that we'd overclock both CPUs.

Sandy Bridge will come in 2011 and so will bulldozer and llano. I have been told that dual/quad cores will be out of the gate first. As far as i have heard these will be better than nehalem but not by a huge degree, so a quad llano will murder a dual sandy bridge but not a quad sandy bridge.

Phenom II x6 can also overclock look in the other thread the Phenom II x6 already OCed to 3850Mhz

I'm tired of "if you overlook this or that" when it comes to progress.
I want to see AMD surpassing Intel again, even if it's just 1% faster.

2011 is the year they may do that with bulldozer, i have been told Intel is in process of tweaking the 6/8 core sandy bridge specially for bulldozer.

This is why 6/8 core sandy bridge will come later than the quad one.

You know what I meant. I meant that it's an i7 920 just with a higher default clock frequency, it's not like it's any faster clock per clock or a crazy overclock untouchable by a 2008 i7 920 C1.

Well the multi is different and as such so is the price. If we use your logic then the cheapest processor with a specific arc is same as the high end one.

Also what is the difference between extrema editions of intel and normal ones?

I've got 2 birdies saying two different stories, I wouldn't disregard the possibility of getting released earlier

There is no way the 6/8 cores sandy bridge will come in Q4 2010 or Q1 2011 i have been told that the high end sandy bridge is being tweaked to perform better.

All I'm going to post is:

[*mg]http://hwbot.org/signature.img?iid=351735&thumb=false&iehack=.jpg[/img]

That was the last time AMD was at least desktop-wise in front and VERY fun to overclock and bench with.

Doesn't beat my old q6600 @ 3.7ghz

Core 2 Q6600 @ 3.6Ghz on Win7 64bit does 4.00 in cinebench 11.5 what are you talking about?

[Titan7171]

Doesn't beat my old q6600 @ 3.7ghz

Just post the benchies.....we are all going to get Q6600's now thanks for the info

[ownage]

we are all going to get Q6600's now thanks for the info

No I'm just a bit dissapointed in the X6, especially because I hoped it would be something.

[Titan7171]

No I'm just a bit dissapointed in the X6, especially because I hoped it would be something.

What exactly disapoints you? its Phenom 2 technology only with 2 more cores and more cache.......as far as we know unless theres been some changes its a 6 core 965. So I guess only people who have not been following whats going on would have expected some miracle super speed cpu.

[MrMojoZ]

No I'm just a bit dissapointed in the X6, especially because I hoped it would be something.

Yeah it is a complete failure, good call.

[ridney]

No I'm just a bit dissapointed in the X6, especially because I hoped it would be something.

No son, you're disappointed coz you're stuck with your lame q6600 LOL it's a dead end for you!!! So just cry

[CrimInalA]

ok that's it !!

I preordered 1090T cpu and asus crosshair mobo .
Now can someone make the time go faster ?

[Manicdan]

ok that's it !!

I preordered 1090T cpu and asus crosshair mobo .
Now can someone make the time go faster ?

here take these...
dont ask what they are,
dont tell anyone where you got them,
and yes they are worth the price.

[..::G80::..]

http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/...=cpubenchmarks

[richierich]

http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/...=cpubenchmarks

[Zeus]

@CrimInalAid you pre order a Crosshair IV? Or did you just order a Crosshair III Formula?

How's this on a stock cooler?:



Source: http://hwbot.org/community/submissio...in_17sec_181ms

[Manicdan]

i wonder how hot it is?

[richierich]

Man his NB is stock though......ok ok looks good.

[[XC] Oj101]

All I'm going to post is:



That was the last time AMD was at least desktop-wise in front and VERY fun to overclock and bench with.

That was the last time I stayed up for 16 hours playing with SuperPi Overclocking has never been as much fun since, but you know I have to remove you now, right? I retired from overclocking for a year due to personal reasons but now I HAVE to have a session tonight

[Jowy Atreides]

Edit: server doubletoast glitch.

[Jowy Atreides]

All I see is... that you need to clean your glasses or pay a visit to a doctor to have your eyesight checked, the only 4GHz thing in the screenshot is an overclocked i5 750

All I see is you missing my satire on numberplay
The bench had a 960 in it, not a 950. The only 50 was a 750.

You need you number keys tested.