If you could get a Phenom X6 1100T for.....

[996GT2]

Since I was I had opted for the 1090T instead of the 1055T (hard to believe BD has been delayed so long it might actually launch under the price of the 1090T), yes.

Heck, I'm semi-considering hawking my 1055T on ebay and picking one up at the current price...

Just OC your 1055T...

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

Yes. It'd be great for compiling and encoding.

Not much different from the X6 1055T, though. Both seem to OC about the same on average, though you do get an unlocked multiplier.

 

[jvroig]

Yes. I have a board that supports it. At that price, it's a steal.

If I didn't have a board that could take it, and I'd have to buy a board for it, then no, because if I had to go around buying a complete system now, it wouldn't be AMD.

 

[exar333]

I would rather get a better-performing quad instead of a slower 6-core CPU, thats why I picked 'No'. A MC 2500k and a cheap MB would be a better for me.

If you need the muti-core number crunching, and already have an AM3 board, it could be a great buy.

 

[theAnimal]

I voted no because if I get a new CPU (or CPUs), I would want it to be an upgrade.

 

[podspi]

Just OC your 1055T...

I have, the highest stable OC I've been able to hit is 3.3ghz on all 6-cores. Wall is the same with only 1-core, so I'm guessing that I'm being held back by the locked multiplier. Oh well.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

I have, the highest stable OC I've been able to hit is 3.3ghz on all 6-cores. Wall is the same with only 1-core, so I'm guessing that I'm being held back by the locked multiplier. Oh well.

Um, wat. Use the base clock. You should get 3.8-4GHz provided you have a decent motherboard.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-phenom-ii-x6-1055t-overclocking_3.html#sect0

 

[Rhoxed]

Yes, OC it to 4ghz+ and replace my old x(4)720BE

 

[aigomorla]

WOW funny how all these x6 threads are poping out after i been tooting the x6 cpu for a while now..

:T


X6 is a great cpu.
I dont care who you are to say its not.

6 real cores.. translates on cinebench @ 1:1 for a cpu whose price tag is under 150 dollars @ stock freq.

That one hell of an efficiency point in price / performance ANY WAY U LOOK AT IT.

 

[podspi]

Um, wat. Use the base clock. You should get 3.8-4GHz provided you have a decent motherboard.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-phenom-ii-x6-1055t-overclocking_3.html#sect0

What did you think I was doing?

I have a Biostar TA890GXE. It was pretty cheap, so I doubt it falls under the category of "decent" motherboard. Not going to replace it until after BD drops, of course.

 

[mb103051]

i voted no as a big amd fan [even tho im on i7 920] due to the fact that id wait on BD next month..if you have a motherboard that will support BD it will run circles around phenom 2 chips...if you dont have a board that supports BD then id be looking in the forums next month for a used amd 6 core..ill bet alot of people will be selling them to upgrade to bulldozer...
ive been building computers since 1996 and always used amd untill 2 yrs ago i opted to try intel i7 and what a great experience its been...latest greatest thing out for a while..
simply awsome speed ...
but if i had to build again now the SB stuff is awsome and cheaper than i7 x58 and is faster slightly in some respects..im betting BD is going to be very impressive and speed wise matches or beats SB ....then ivy is out next march or so and that may be BD but not by alot id bet...if BD is awsome it would be a real hard decision weather to go with SB or BD...probubly would come down to price....hard decision now with BD not released and ivy bridge in the wings...
good lord tho the amd x6 has got to handle any apps out there with very acceptable speed for the type of use your using it for...even in benches with SB vs i7 x58 when i7 gets beat your talking about seconds in completing a bench..i can wait that long and still be very happy with my computer....

 

[inf64]

I voted yes. For 125$ it offers great perf./price ratio,especially in MT applications. You can OC it to 3.9-4Ghz on air fairly easily.

 

[OVerLoRDI]

I voted no largely because I don't have a use for it. For the money it is a pretty excellent CPU, but for what I do (gaming) it just isn't up to snuff.

 

[gmaster456]

Hell yes. I don't care who you are $125 is a great price for that CPU. Would be great for things like encoding, especially if your on a budget. I don't think anyone here can honestly say they won't pay more than $80 for an 1100t.

 

[lehtv]

Yes if I was building an affordable gaming PC. No if I had a bigger budget

 

[RussianSensation]

X6 is a great cpu.
I dont care who you are to say its not.

6 real cores.. translates on cinebench @ 1:1 for a cpu whose price tag is under 150 dollars @ stock freq.

That one hell of an efficiency point in price / performance ANY WAY U LOOK AT IT.

Ok but if you don't run Cinebench daily, then it's no better than an i3 @ 4.0ghz. It's also worse than 2 year old CPUs such as the i5 750/760/i7 860 etc. So why pay $150 for a CPU that can't even beat last generation Lynnfield/Nehalem chips?

Also, now you can get i5-2400 at around $190. At 3.9-4.0ghz the quad core SB walks all over the X6 in games, office apps, general apps, etc. You get at least 40% faster IPC. So that corresponds to at least a 5.6ghz X4 CPU.

$120-130 is a fair price for the X6 since it gives you great multi-threading performance vs. poor 1-4 threaded performance. It's a good trade off for people who run 6 threads most of the time.

Even at 4.0ghz, the X6 is way too far behind an overclocked $225 2500k to make sense at $150, esp. for those who can get a 2500k for $180 at MC or Fry's. Add to this horrendous power consumption in overclocked states and slow IPC that drags you down in role-laying and strategy games (2 genres that make up > 50% of all PC game sales!).

When you look at the overall system cost (at least $600-700) and the fact that a lot of us keep the CPU for 2+ years, by the time you buy GPUs, PSU, case, etc. even if the X6 was $99, I don't think would buy it because that $80 savings over the 2500k is still not enough in the context of the overall system performance vs. overall system price. It doesn't make sense to buy SSDs, $250-500 GPUs, and then save $50-80 on the CPU and lose 30%+ CPU performance, and on top of that get 100-150W higher power consumption!

OR you can just get the lower end X6 and overclock it. The 1100T is pointless imo.

 

[MentalIlness]

I'm an AMD fan but seriously, there's no way a 1100T would get that 33% cut. Aside that:

Actually the $125 isn't based on a price cut or anything like that. I just have a way to purchase it for that price if I decide to do so.

If bought, it will be in a PC that is 60% gaming / 40% everything else.

And I know alot of users say it isnt as good as Intel for gaming. While I do agree with that to an extent, after the last few days of extensive research, at 1920x1080 resolution, the AMD seems to be just fine and matches the Intels cpu's at that resolution. Of course, that is with no overclocking. No, the AMD does not OC as well as the Intel, and if both are overclocked, the Intel wins easily. But stock, at higher resolutions, it seems to be fine in games "I want to play"

Certain games that I have researched, the ones where Intel seriously outperforms the AMD counterpart is well....games I have no interest in.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

What did you think I was doing?

I have a Biostar TA890GXE. It was pretty cheap, so I doubt it falls under the category of "decent" motherboard. Not going to replace it until after BD drops, of course.

It has a 4+1 phase power design, but it's decent enough. A word of advise: don't think of going anything higher than 1.40-1.45V with it because of the VRMs. Still, at those voltages you should see from 3.5-4GHz. I'd recommend you shoot for a 3.6-3.8GHz OC at under 1.45V with it. If all you could see was 3.3GHz it's because you didn't raise voltage.

Remember to raise the CPU's bus speed and tweak the Memory, HT link, and CPU-NB when you do so. Try to aim for 2400MHz on the CPU-NB with no raise in voltage, and remember to turn off Turbo.

 

[Gigantopithecus]

At $125 it's matched against the i3-2100. An 1100T is either within the margin of error or blows the i3-2100 out of the water in every meaningful benchmark (imho SysMark is worthless). And that's at stock clocks - an 1100T is a lot easier to OC than an i3-2100. If the 1100T were $125, I would stop buying i3-2100s for system builds, except perhaps in ITX systems where the 1100T's substantially greater heat output would make it a poor choice.

 

[RussianSensation]

At $125 it's matched against the i3-2100. An 1100T is either within the margin of error or blows the i3-2100 out of the water in every meaningful benchmark (imho SysMark is worthless).

Ok but can you use a $125 CPU by itself?

X6 $125
Mobo $130
RAM $40
HDD $50
Case + PSU = $100
Budget GPU = $15
------------------
= $460

i5-2400 $190
Mobo $130
RAM $40
HDD $50
Case + PSU = $100
-------------------
= $510

Suddenly, the AMD system isn't looking so hot. In all fairness, I wouldn't buy the i3 either.

AMD has been selling X4 vs. i3 and X6 vs. i5 for a long time now. That strategy clearly isn't working for them - neither in terms of profits nor market share. People are willing to spend more $ on something that improves their user experience. Another $50-60 is not a lot of $ when you use something every day for a period of 1-2 years (unless you are absolutely on the tightest budget ever). AMD had no problems whatsoever selling expensive Athlon X2 processors in the past because they were good CPUs.

AMD's problem is NOT pricing, but performance. Many people would pay $200-300 for their CPUs if they were as good or better than Intel's. Lowering the price of X6 to $125 wouldn't do much for them. That's why they are releasing BD, which hopefully brings way more performance.

 

[Gigantopithecus]

Snip

How many systems have you built and sold in the last few years? What kind of systems were they? Or do you work with PCs professionally? I'm curious about what experiences lead you to your insights.

The majority of my customers are home users. They do not see any improvement in computing experience by going from an AIIX3 that's $75 to a $200 i5. They do, however, see an enormous improvement by going with an entry level SSD. These people do care about $50 differences, and they do not want to spend $50 on CPUs that won't load Facebook faster.

A fraction of my customers are scientists who run computationally-intense, multithreaded programs, and another fraction are prosumer photo and video editors. They aren't interested in budget chips.

I agree that AMD's problem isn't price, it's performance. But the problem isn't performance on the low end, where they beat Intel at $60, $75, $100, and $125 (again, these are such small budgets that the segmentation does matter). It's the fact that at $200, the 1100T is a hard sell when the i5-2500 is the same price unless you're a niche user, and they simply have no competitor at all for the 2600.

I had hoped that BD would give AMD something that came within a stone's throw of the 2600. It's clear to me at this point that they didn't achieve that goal. However, it's also clear to me that they'll have BD SKUs that are solid competition for the 2500. ...And I've sold far, far more 2500s than 2600s, so that's no small feat for AMD. It'll be nice selling $200 AMD CPUs again - something I've not done in a looong time.

 

[MentalIlness]

1100T X6 BE----------$125.00
Gigabyte UD3 990FX $149.99
8 GB G.Skill RAM-------$51.00

------------------
= $325.99

i5-2500K----------------$219.99
Gigabyte Z68 UD3P----$179.99
8 GB G.Skill RAM---------$51.00
-------------------
= $450.98

Roughly $125.00 difference.

All I need is a CPU / Motherboard / RAM.

These are the "only" two options I am considering. Both cpu's are unlocked.

What kind of performance upgrade can I expect with something like the 1100T ?

The 1100T and the 2500K, at higher resolutions and both cpu's stock....there is only a marginal difference.

I will be upgrading from a:

Intel E7200
4-GB G.Skill
Gigabyte UD3P P45

And I believe, the $125 for the AMD, is an unbeatable upgrade for the price. It almost seems to good to pass up. Hence the poll for your opinions.

Thoughts ?

I have posted before, and was going to upgrade....Even bought a P67 Sabertooth and returned it. I guess I kept putting off upgrading by sucking every bit of last performance out of the E7200 "Which oc's to 4.0 stable all day long. "

1100T vs. E7200 = http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/62?vs=203

 

[996GT2]

1100T X6 BE----------$125.00
Gigabyte UD3 990FX $149.99
8 GB G.Skill RAM-------$51.00

------------------
= $325.99

i5-2500K----------------$219.99
Gigabyte Z68 UD3P----$179.99
8 GB G.Skill RAM---------$51.00
-------------------
= $450.98

Roughly $125.00 difference.

All I need is a CPU / Motherboard / RAM.

These are the "only" two options I am considering. Both cpu's are unlocked.

What kind of performance upgrade can I expect with something like the 1100T ?

The 1100T and the 2500K, at higher resolutions and both cpu's stock....there is only a marginal difference.

I will be upgrading from a:

Intel E7200
4-GB G.Skill
Gigabyte UD3P P45

And I believe, the $125 for the AMD, is an unbeatable upgrade for the price. It almost seems to good to pass up. Hence the poll for your opinions.

Thoughts ?

I have posted before, and was going to upgrade....Even bought a P67 Sabertooth and returned it. I guess I kept putting off upgrading by sucking every bit of last performance out of the E7200 "Which oc's to 4.0 stable all day long. "

1100T vs. E7200 = http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/62?vs=203

If you have a Microcenter nearby you can get both a 2500K and a good Z68 board for around $280

 

[Fox5]

I currently own a 1090t. I bought it because I'm an AMD fanboy, and it was a final upgrade to a DDR2 system. Unless I end up buying more ram.

But if I was building from scratch, I might very well go with an i3-2100 at the same price. Way cooler running, and better performing in most things I care about.
But the 2xxx series of intel core processors was the first to really start to swing the value battle back in favor of intel, and I bought my 1090t before that (just a lil' bit).

 

[PreferLinux]

I voted no as I already have an i5 2500K...