AMD Phenom II X6 1090T BE & Phenom II X6 1055T Review

By on April 26, 2010, 11:00 PM
If money is no object then the six-core Core i7 980X processor is as good as it gets right now. Conversely, today’s announcement from AMD is meant to follow the same trend as with recent Phenom CPU releases. AMD is hoping to offer a more attractive six-core processor by providing their Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition and Phenom II X6 1055T models at far more realistic prices.

The Phenom II X6 1090T BE is expected to hit shelves at just under $300, making it three times more affordable than the Core i7 980X. At this price point, this 3.2GHz hexa-core AMD processor will be sitting alongside the Core i7 930 and Core i7 860 from Intel. Let me remind you that this is a fully unlocked Black Edition chip that depending on how it overclocks could be a real bargain for those of you willing to tweak your hardware a bit.


Those looking for something even cheaper, today's AMD announcement will not disappoint. The Phenom II X6 1055T will be sold for just $220, a mere $20 more than the Core i7 750. This should make for an interesting shoot out.

Read the complete review.




User Comments: 45

Got something to say? Post a comment
dividebyzero dividebyzero, trainee n00b, said:

Nice bump in performance on the OC.

What was the power draw increase at 4GHz ?

Guest said:

Nice review Techspot but ugh those Phenom X6's are underwhelming. Im running a 955 with ddr3 atm but there is no way I will go anywhere near these things for an upgrade, though maybe if I was running a dual or tri core on an AM2+ board I would. Anyway if bulldozer is not AM3 compatible im going back to intel. That much is clear.

Sorry to say it and I know the fanbois will flame me for it but AMD's goose could be cooked after seeing that, these things have bearly made a dent on core I7 930.

I know they'll say "price this, performance that" but to AMD seriously guys you have got to get bulldozer out, your just flogging a dead horse now, no more mucking around get bulldozer going. Guess I have to keep on waiting for bulldozer news and pray for full AM3 compatibility.

PaulWuzHere PaulWuzHere said:

Nice read, The Hexa-core chip is a nice deal and will allow AMD to be more competitive in the multimedia market. I think I will hold onto my 940BE for a little while longer.

dividebyzero dividebyzero, trainee n00b, said:

Anyway if bulldozer is not AM3 compatible im going back to intel. That much is clear.

If Bulldozer is compatible with AM3 that implies that it will remain dual-channel memory, which will probably not be competitive with Intel's Sandy Bridge (the LGA2011 part especially).

As it stands it sounds like Bulldozer has a few (or more) problems. AMD seem quite enthusiastic regarding Llano (IGP) and Bobcat, but the silence is deafening regarding Bulldozer.

Guest said:

For a company that makes graphics cards as well as cpu's they haven't attempted at all to make the new 6 core even better than a old i5 at running games. Alot of budget gamer pc's usually go for Amd because they run exact same fps at half the price.

Amd will sell a lot of these for sure based on the fact that if you haven't bought an intel yet chances are you been waiting for the new amd chips and the idea of 6 cores vs 4 in marketing terms sounds better on paper (even if it's not better in testing or real world benchmarks).

Guest said:

WHAT A DISSAPOINTMENT . the price is right but it needs to be as it is struggling aginst quad cores which have lower clock speads. I think AMD knew this when they priced them up. We know that until we get more software that is optimised for Multicore we will not see the real performance of Hexacore. basically it was 4 men against 6 boyes. minor tweeking of archutecture will not do .

Bulldog and Bobcat need to deliver.

It's good to know that heat now isn't the big issue as it use to be for AMD and they can deliver turbo,

AMD will need to deliver soon. .

Hafiz Majid

Guest said:

So how is it that in games the difference between 1024x768 and 1920x1200 is only 10 fps....Seems fishy.

Guest said:

I just would like to point out that Intel Core i5 should be at 2.66 GHz not 2.80 GHz

http://www.techspot.com/articles-info/269/bench/Power.png

Staff
Steve Steve said:

Guest said:

I just would like to point out that Intel Core i5 should be at 2.66 GHz not 2.80 GHz

[link]

An obvious typo thanks it is now fixed.

Guest said:

So how is it that in games the difference between 1024x768 and 1920x1200 is only 10 fps....Seems fishy.

There is nothing fishy about the gaming results you just do not understand what is going on. What is going on is very simple, the CPU is creating a bottleneck and as a result the GPU performance is being limited. If the Radeon HD 5870 can easily average 200fps at 1920x1200 but you limit it with a processor that will only allow for 100fps at 1024x768 then you are going to see virtually the same amount of frames being rendered at higher resolutions as the GPU is capable of much more.

So based on that look at the Unreal Tournament 3 results. The Core i7 980 XE allowed for 323fps at 1024x768 and 218fps at 1920x1200 as this is the limit of this GPU setup at this resolution. This limit was also reached with the Core i7 975 EE and Core i7 930 processors.

Now the Phenom II X6 1090T was only able to render 187fps at 1024x768 and we already know that the Radeon HD 5870 is capable of much more at this resolution. Therefore increasing the resolution is not going to see much of a drop in performance until the GPU once again becomes slower than the CPU. Given we have seen an average of 218fps at 1920x1200 with the Core i7 processors the Radeon HD 5870 is not going to be maxed out by the Phenom II X6 1090T using the quality settings which we tested with.

ET3D, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Guest said:

Anyway if bulldozer is not AM3 compatible im going back to intel. That much is clear

Well, hopefully if Bulldozer is not AM3 compatible it will still be able to beat Intel on performance or significantly on price/performance so your above mentioned decision will be the stupid course to take.

I'd like to say that including core utilisation with the gaming benchmarks was really enlightening and a great feature of this review.

I agree that the new CPU's are underwhelming, though I might still consider buying one as an upgrade for my 710 when their prices come down.

yukka, TechSpot Paladin, said:

A quick check of the tables shows that my i7 920 still hasn't been matched for speed by AMD but the price looks to be the same. Not very exciting.

Yad Yad said:

These two cpu should sell and a lot considering their price.

People will look at 2.8 Ghz and 6 cores and will be like woooww.

Not all customers out there read benchmarks and reviews,only a little percent does.

On summer i am gonna upgrade my pc and i am thinking of getting a 890x board + the T 1055 version.

I have an old Intel 2.2Ghz C2D so upgrading should be some hell of change for me.

Staff
Per Hansson Per Hansson, TS Server Guru, said:

I'll second that I really liked the CPU utilization graphs in this review

Please include it with more games and apps in the future

Chazz said:

Guest said: Anyway if bulldozer is not AM3 compatible im going back to intel. That much is clear.

On one hand you want AMD to release a new architecture but, on the other hand you want them to release it on a old platform? And if they do not you will go to intel which seems to have no problems changing sockets with each processor release?

These processors are kinda underwhelming but, it seems you're venting your disappointment rather than making sense.

I've seen some good benchmarks for these processors here and there..but none provided such a complete picture as this site. AMD needs to lower the prices on these a little more..and they'll be a bargain. The benchmarks I've seen had these around the 920 and 980 in terms of performance so I didn't mind it's price point. That opinion has changed since seeing this.

Guest said:

I have a core i7-860, 4 core with hyper-threading, and based on real-world experience, only 2 cores (2 cores + hyper-threading = 4 total threads) were being used for 99% of the operations. When I used Adobe Premiere CS4 to test blue-ray encoding, it did finally use all cores and threads.

What this means is that most software is not written to take advantage of more than 4 cores at this time and thus the other two cores of a X6 are not going to be utilized for most people. If you are using it as a basic server used for virtualization purposes, then that is a different story...

Guest said:

Performance is kind of underwhelming, but the price (especially below) is excellent.

Just checked one of my favorite sites, FatWallet. One of the posters noticed that the CPU has a $50 rebate through Tiger Direct. If you use it in conjunction with Bing cashback of 12.3%, the price drops as low as $125 before taxes. Looks like shipping is included as well. Link to FW forums is:

http://www.fatwallet.com/forums/hot-deals/1002351/

KG363 KG363 said:

What was used to cool it on the overclock?

slh28 slh28, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Damn, those results are a little disappointing. Was hoping these would give Intel a run for their money but it seems the world isn't even ready for 4 cores let alone 6.

Only impressive things ware the power consumption and the decent overclocking ability.

dividebyzero dividebyzero, trainee n00b, said:

Only impressive things ware the power consumption and the decent overclocking ability.

But not together:

System (890FX, HD 5850) idle -balanced (stock) : 87w

System idle-high performance (stock) : 107w

System 100% CPU load (stock) : 187w

System w/ 4.1GHz OC (1.425v) : 273w

Source

Of course this is one CPU and is very much a case of YMMV

A little disappointing that this little nugget seems to have been overlooked by virtually every online review amid the hoop-la.

red1776 red1776, Omnipotent Ruler of the Universe, said:

But not together:

System (890FX, HD 5850) idle -balanced (stock) : 87w

System idle-high performance (stock) : 107w

System 100% CPU load (stock) : 187w

System w/ 4.1GHz OC (1.425v) : 273w

Source

Of course this is one CPU and is very much a case of YMMV

A little disappointing that this little nugget seems to have been overlooked by virtually every online review amid the hoop-la.

Holy moly rocky, I missed that as well.were these things binned as 'leaky'?

Guest said:

To Chazz

"On one hand you want AMD to release a new architecture"

Correct. I think Intel are the only ones who dont want them to do this, Intel are just loving AMD's inability to compete. It's pretty clear they need something new Chazz as these things are still effectively based on K8 and that was what 7 years ago.

"on the other hand you want them to release it on a old platform? "

Well it was actually their own plan to do this if you'll remember. They have stated it repeatedly in the past. Also they repeatedly tout the long term viability of their sockets.

I probably should have made it more clear in my first post but im lamenting the seeming lack of "drop in" upgradeablity to the AM3 platform, this platform looks like it wont be supported as well nor as long as AM2+. Clearly these thubans are no legit upgrade for a phenom 2 user. Unless your some sucker who likes to pay $300 for a 20% improvement.

So the question in regards to future upgrades then becomes, will bulldozer be AM3 compatible? If No we have (barring some miraculous shrink to 32nm phenom 2's and then this assumes motherboard manufacturers will offer bios updates, my gigabyte AM3 board doesn't even have a bios update for thuban!) no upgrade path other than the underwhemling thuban and this makes the AM3 platform no better than the Intel ones you deride. If Yes and even if they release some dual channel bulldozers and there is no real technical reson why they couldn't do this (according to various sources around the web), with say support for say ddr3 1866 or 2000 then at least all of us who (perhaps foolishly went AM3) will get a little more longevity out of the platform.

Look AMD are in real trouble here, bulldozer was supposed to be out last year, then it got put off till this year and now its supposed to be second half next year. Its becoming a joke, bulldozer is the duke nukem forever of processors! If I was framing a market on it being held back till 2012, I'd be offering 1.01 to 1!

Anyway for all interested look at this thread :

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=898409

Former AMD engineer Cliff Maier aka "cmaier" is giving them an informative pasting.

ET3D, TechSpot Paladin, said:

I understand your frustration with the potential lack of an upgrade path, but that's just the way it is with processors. Even when a socket is kept, there's no guarantee of compatibility with newer CPU's. Intel for example had the 775 socket on the market for a long time, yet older boards wouldn't support newer CPU's, and I ran into this problem myself.

Without compatibility it the viability of Bulldozer will depend on whether it's compelling enough. I think it's hard to tell at this point whether it will be. It's certainly possible that Intel will continue to win at the high end, but AMD will have the better solution at the low end and mid range. That's a fine way to survive, as AMD is proving in graphics.

Seraphim401 Seraphim401 said:

I am sticking to my Phenom II X4 965!

Can't believe these cpu's are not distroying the i5 750 wich does not have hyper threading.

Guest said:

This is the first review where AMD is in the last place, Tomsharware and other places AMD was winning against i7 975 EE... Mmm this is very strange... Would Intel hace paid this review??? XD Only a joke but its strange that a quad core no HT can beat a 1090T

dividebyzero dividebyzero, trainee n00b, said:

C'mon troll you can do better than that.

SYSmark and Photoshop CS4 (Anand)

DivX, Xmpeg and x264 (Anand)

3dsmax 9, Cinebench R10 and POV-Ray (Anand)

WinRAR and 7-Zip (Anand)

Fallout 3, L4D, Crysis Warhead, Batman:AA, Dragons Age rigins, DoW 2 (Anand)

Adobe Lightroom 2 and TMPGEnc Xpress (Techgage)

ProShow Gold HD / DVD encode (Techgage)

Excel and Sandra CPU computation (Techgage and Neoseeker )

[link] (OCC)

HD Tune (OCC)

SuperPi and wPrime (Hardware Canucks)

HyperPi (Tweaktown)

Lightwave 3D and AutoGK (Tweaktown)

[link] (PCPerspective)

Blender -also POV-Ray and Cinebench R10(PCPerspective)

Euler3D, MS Image Composite Engine, HyperPi (PCPerspective)

Sandra Multi-core efficiency (Techgage)

Strange?

Not in the least.

The comparison is between a 7-10 year old architecture with two cores tacked on being compared with a newer architecture that is steadily and surely distancing itself from the performance of the previous generation(s).

BTW: Your "XD only a joke" just sounds like a halfwits rendition of fanboy PR (jk....yeah,right). While the 1055 and 1090 aren't the pinnacle of CPU design, they still offer very good performance and a good upgrade for many, but throwing around ill-advised accusations doesn't help raise AMD's profile in the forum.

Guest said:

There's two errors in the review. One is the Phenom II X4 956, and the i7 750 xD. Anyway, nice processors from AMD ;). I might consider getting the X4 and unlocking it :D.

LinkedKube LinkedKube, TechSpot Project Baby, said:

Well, hopefully if Bulldozer is not AM3 compatible it will still be able to beat Intel on performance or significantly on price/performance so your above mentioned decision will be the stupid course to take.

I'd like to say that including core utilisation with the gaming benchmarks was really enlightening and a great feature of this review.

I agree that the new CPU's are underwhelming, though I might still consider buying one as an upgrade for my 710 when their prices come down.

Why do you think they keep pushing it back, its "hey, buldozer this quarter? oh sh*t intel 6 core, lets push it back a year, we need 50% more production out of this cpu."

Guest said:

The Bit-Tech review branded the Crossfire IV as a slow poke on the SATA 6GB tests.

Is that impacting your tests? I have seen results all over the place for this board on SATA and USB.

I think the sweet spot for the X6 is in Adobe CS5 64 bit. You can demo the whole thing right now at Adobe.

An overclocked 1090T/890FX board with MAX ram, SATA 6GB drives and a GTX 285 should give the best bang for the buck with the Mercury Playback Engine in Adobe Premiere.

At least that is what I am hoping for.

Guest said:

How would they compare in virtual PC environments, since hyper-threading should be turned off does the six dedicated cores from AMD out perform the four from Intel if all cores are being utilized?

princeton princeton said:

Guest said:

How would they compare in virtual PC environments, since hyper-threading should be turned off does the six dedicated cores from AMD out perform the four from Intel if all cores are being utilized?

Why should hyperthreading be turned off? If your going to say parts of the I7 that make it better should be turned off then the X6 cpus should have 2 cores disabled because they also tested quad core cpus.

Guest said:

Okay I am not trying to be rude but when gaming the eye cannot see the difference after 60fps so yes the i7 does perform better you can not see it so how does it help you? It really doesn't. Think about it this way. You are showing off two things and one is doing way better than the other but there is no need for it when what you are trying to do is lowering the efficiency. This is the same thing with graphics and frames per second. Our eye and brain can only percieve 60fps so when people say they can get 300fps out of their card and CPU I just say so what. I get 120 fps and I know it does not matter to much when you go above the 60 mark. I am just throwing that out there to all the guys dissing the CPU because of the fps rating. It is a great CPU that just needs to be tinkered with and I am also just sayin 200 compared to 1000 for a CPU is quite a bit of difference. AMD keep it going!

P.S. Yes I personally own a Intel processor but I am switching over to an AMD for better support under linux.

Staff
Steve Steve said:

Okay I am not trying to be rude but when gaming the eye cannot see the difference after 60fps so yes the i7 does perform better you can not see it so how does it help you? It really doesn't. Think about it this way. You are showing off two things and one is doing way better than the other but there is no need for it when what you are trying to do is lowering the efficiency. This is the same thing with graphics and frames per second. Our eye and brain can only percieve 60fps so when people say they can get 300fps out of their card and CPU I just say so what. I get 120 fps and I know it does not matter to much when you go above the 60 mark. I am just throwing that out there to all the guys dissing the CPU because of the fps rating. It is a great CPU that just needs to be tinkered with and I am also just sayin 200 compared to 1000 for a CPU is quite a bit of difference. AMD keep it going!

P.S. Yes I personally own a Intel processor but I am switching over to an AMD for better support under linux.

A. Those were just sample games. So newer more demanding games will run better on the more powerful CPU.

B. You are completely wrong with your initial statement anyway. Well perhaps not completely wrong. Yes our eyes cannot tell the difference once going over 60fps but we can certainly feel the difference. Any experienced gamer will tell you that there is a massive difference in the way fast paced first person shooters feel when running at 60fps to say 100fps.

Guest said:

Things r pretty diff actually..Like current gen games uses only 4 cores..May b wen games start usin 6 cores,Phenom X6 might take d lead i guess....

Guest said:

Did the author plagiarize this: http://www.legionhardware.com/articles_pages/amd_phenom_ii_x
_1090t_be_1055t,8.html or vice versa?

red1776 red1776, Omnipotent Ruler of the Universe, said:

Did the author plagiarize this: [link] or vice versa?

Its the same Steve.

Staff
Steve Steve said:

Its the same Steve.

He always copies my work.

Staff
Matthew Matthew, TechSpot Staff, said:

We should really consult a lawyer about it.

dividebyzero dividebyzero, trainee n00b, said:

I hear Rambus' legal team are between cases at the moment......ka-ching!

Staff
Matthew Matthew, TechSpot Staff, said:

Haha. Perfect. Something really has to be done about this Steve guy...

Staff
Steve Steve said:

I hear Rambus' legal team are between cases at the moment......ka-ching!

hahahahah gold

Haha. Perfect. Something really has to be done about this Steve guy...

Yeah but the question is what?

To try and keep this on topic we are looking at the new AMD Phenom II X6 1075T processor next week

red1776 red1776, Omnipotent Ruler of the Universe, said:

Haha. Perfect. Something really has to be done about this Steve guy...

You mean the 'Steve's' don't you Matthew?

...but which Steve is the evil one ...the LH Steve , or the TS Steve?

Guest said:

i have my amd phenom 2 x6 1090t running on liquid clocked to 5.7ghz.......i wanna see anyone do that with their precious intel. i have always been a amd fan but i lost what respect i had for intel when they started putting their overpriced junk into apples,when they did that the statement they made was yuppies can now play on their apples while drinking their starbucks and be using intel.....how sweet

red1776 red1776, Omnipotent Ruler of the Universe, said:

i have my amd phenom 2 x6 1090t running on liquid clocked to 5.7ghz.

oh come now... Not unless the "liquid" is LN2, or you won the binning lottery of historic and freakish proportions. Cant wait for the PS'd screen shot though.

dividebyzero dividebyzero, trainee n00b, said:

i have my amd phenom 2 x6 1090t running on liquid clocked to 5.7ghz...

WOW!!! Not bad considering the world record for the 1090t on H2O is 4.9GHz ...oh, and here's the wPrime run....

i wanna see anyone do that with their precious intel....

You mean like 5.3GHz with a 980X on H2O? (hex-core) or 5.8GHz best stable OC on water for an Intel CPU ?

i have always been a ....

...a little man who must be quiet ?

amd fan

I bet AMD are thrilled

but i lost what respect i had for intel when they started putting their overpriced junk into apples

Because everyone knows IBM based PowerPC CPU's are the way of the future.

when they did that the statement they made was yuppies can now play on their apples while drinking their starbucks and be using intel.....how sweet

...while you stand outside fogging up the glass and obscuring the view whilst panhandling no doubt. What's your schtick?....

Guest said:

Very nice review. I also read the review on the 1100T BE and I've decided on holding off on upgrading. I'm running a Phenom II X4 955 BE currently and I've been able to overclock it to 3.4 GHz stably simply by bumping up the clock multiplier - no FSB bump or voltage increase needed. Since I use my system mainly for gaming the extra 2 cores in an X6 won't amount for much at this point in time - I pretty much figured that from the get-go since very few games seem to take advantage of multi-core so having 4 or 6 cores vs 2 makes little difference in most cases. Being able to potentially OC in the 4GHz range would be nice, but not at the price vs. performance factor at this point. When the CPU prices drop a bit more I will consider it.

The biggest advantage in my opinion to the AMD processors has been the ability to upgrade without having to change motherboards/platforms. I upgraded from an AMD X2 core to an X3 to my current CPU using the same motherboard, and I could upgrade to the lastest x6 core if I wanted to. The X2 processor was from another system where the MB bit the dust, but the AM2/AM2+/AM3 socket has allowed me to upgrade easily and rather inexpensively as prices have fallen over the past couple of years. And if I wanted to replace my current motherboard and be able upgrade to DDR3 memory, etc. I still could with another MB using the same chipset so I wouldn't have to install the OS from scratch - and generally those motherboards are less expensive than their Intel counterparts. Not so easily done with Intel CPU's and motherboards - your Core 2 Duo simply isn't going to fit into that i7 motherboard and allow you to upgrade the CPU later.

Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.