Impressed with my 1090t

[lopri]

Well, not encoding or virus scanning but I have been folding on a secondary GPU while I game. I have a third GPU to throw in, need to max out these PCI-E lanes.

That's how I use my X6 as well, kind of. Manually assign 2 VMs in core 4/5, and play SC2 with core 0/1, while leaving the rest (browsers, office, encoding, and whatnot) for core 2/3. Something like that. I don't see any slowdown in games that way unless I do some other video-related stuff in core 2/3 (such as running another game or watching Blu-Ray, though I do that sometimes) I do have a 2500K on the side as well but I spend more time on X6 despite 2500K being snappier in general.

Anyhow, I see the forum hasn't changed much, with predictable regulars chiming in with their agenda if there is any way to get in. ^_^ Good to know, though I did expect as much.

 

[soccerballtux]

LOL you are right but i remember so many people recommending a e8400 over a q6600...the q6600 was slower then but ended up later on being the best choice cause it had more cores and still stands true today.

Kick in the ass for any e8000 series owner now but since no game "now" takes advantage of a hexacore the 2500k is the better option.

yeah so many people were like get the e8400 I was like "lol and be outdated just like the people who bought the athlon64 4000+ when Oblivion came out???" not me.

 

[skipsneeky2]

yeah so many people were like get the e8400 I was like "lol and be outdated just like the people who bought the athlon64 4000+ when Oblivion came out???" not me.

All my friends said i was stupid for purchasing a q6600 when they still rocked dual cores..i was like wait and see what happens.

When i ditched it for a i7 940 i had some of those same friends wanting to buy my q6600 and i was like well i thought buying a quad core for gaming was stupid?

That really took a bite out of them that comment :awe:

 

[toyota]

you guys are exaggerating the hell out of the Q6600 being a better purchase back then. AGAIN it was SLOWER in 99% of cases for years. by the time it was worth a crap over the E8400, we already had much better cpus. I am glad I bought an E8500 instead of the Q6600 as in the end I had a much better cpu for gaming during those 3 years. sure right now the Q6600 is still good if you oc the crap out of if but at stock speeds its still not that great even for games that do use more than 2 cores.

 

[skipsneeky2]

you guys are exaggerating the hell out of the Q6600 being a better purchase back then. AGAIN it was SLOWER in 99% of cases for years. by the time it was worth a crap over the E8400, we already had much better cpus. I am glad I bought an E8500 instead of the Q6600 as in the end I had a much better cpu for gaming during those 3 years. sure right now the Q6600 is still good if you oc the crap out of if but at stock speeds its still not that great even for games that do use more than 2 cores.

Still loved mine kept it at stock voltages and clocked it to 3ghzs and never even blinked a eye at the q9000 series.

Got a large settlement and was able to go all out with a i7 940 and a gtx295 or else i could have very well have waited it out till sandy.

Doubt i will ever go all out with a $1,800 build again .

 

[Dravic]

Anyone running a 1090t with BF3?

Heard with high end gpu set ups it could sometimes fully load a 2500k and hear it scales well with 6 cores.

Dealing with this dual core and the game is painful so would love some 6 core goodness.

cpu usage in game from those who are would be much helpful

I brought my 1055t an overclocked it when my kids old 939 dual core died last year. Grabbed a 880G board for them and stuck this x6 in my GD70 790fx. It replaced a 955.

BF3 loves it. scales across all 6 cores. My 4890's are holding up pretty well too. Waiting for 7000 series early next year to do the Crossfire upgrade.

 

[bradley]

The X6 is great, really perfect for an HTPC except that pesky TDP.

Undervolt it with k10stat. I multitask tons and the 1055T is an extremely impressive chip. In that regard, my 2600k rig almost seems sluggish by comparison. Eventually I want to upgrade to a solid AM3+ board with 16GB of DDR3. Though I can't see giving up this cpu for a long while.

 

[Dadofamunky]

Anyhow, I see the forum hasn't changed much, with predictable regulars chiming in with their agenda if there is any way to get in. ^_^ Good to know, though I did expect as much.

Agenda? Whatever could you be talking about? :whiste:

Looks like AMD is going to selling a lot more of those 6-cores for awhile. Somehow, I don't think that's what they had in mind.

 

[SlowSpyder]

yes I was joking. you seem to be under the impression that the Phenom X6 will be better because it has more cores. that is not true as the 2500k is easily the faster cpu overall when it comes to gaming. it also uses WAY less power especially if you plan to oc at all.

perhaps you need to see something like this. a Phenom 2 X6 at 4.0 is still slower than a stock 2500k in gaming. still the entire 2500k system is only using about 103 watts under cpu load while the Phenom 2 at 4.0 is using 305 watts. http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i7-2600k-990x_9.html#sect2

I didn't see anyone claim that the 1090T is a better processor for gaming overall or more energy efficient. I haven't seen too many benches that test the CPU in this game (the one I did see seemed to show all the tested CPU's pretty close from what I remember), and unless the Thuban had any kind of advantage in this game I wouldn't buy it over a 2500k if I were building a system from the ground up. But from reading your response I got the impression that you were arguing against points that were never made. A few posts above this one someone says that the game scales over six cores, so if the 2500k really is hitting 100% utilization (as mentioned by skipsneeky2) then it is possible the hex core Phenoms have some merit to them in this one instance.

 

[dennilfloss]

I'm waiting to see if Skyrim will use all 6 cores. Might upgrade my first-gen 955 to a 1100 then. I know my mainboard would take it with just a bios update.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

I'm waiting to see if Skyrim will use all 6 cores. Might upgrade my first-gen 955 to a 1100 then. I know my mainboard would take it with just a bios update.

Remember the 1090T is $20 cheaper and OCs the same on average. Unlocked multiplier, too.

 

[jacktesterson]

I had a 1090T that had a hard time getting to 4.0 on a MSI Board

I changed boards to a Crosshair IV board, and was able to get 4.0 but not higher.

All in all, an awesome processor.

I owned a 1035T OEM I got to 4.0....

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

I had a 1090T that had a hard time getting to 4.0 on a MSI Board

I changed boards to a Crosshair IV board, and was able to get 4.0 but not higher.

All in all, an awesome processor.

I owned a 1035T OEM I got to 4.0....

Yeah, that's why I said on average. A small amount of 1100Ts have problems with 4GHz, too. But pretty much every Phenom II X6 should get to 3.8GHz.

The only Phenom II CPUs AMD seems to actively bin for higher clock speeds are the Phenom II X4 975 and 980. Most samples seem to go to 4.2 or 4.3GHz, respectively.

 

[lavaheadache]

I'm waiting to see if Skyrim will use all 6 cores. Might upgrade my first-gen 955 to a 1100 then. I know my mainboard would take it with just a bios update.

Looks like it's stuck at 2 cores. Shame. Great game though!

 

[skipsneeky2]

I didn't see anyone claim that the 1090T is a better processor for gaming overall or more energy efficient. I haven't seen too many benches that test the CPU in this game (the one I did see seemed to show all the tested CPU's pretty close from what I remember), and unless the Thuban had any kind of advantage in this game I wouldn't buy it over a 2500k if I were building a system from the ground up. But from reading your response I got the impression that you were arguing against points that were never made. A few posts above this one someone says that the game scales over six cores, so if the 2500k really is hitting 100% utilization (as mentioned by skipsneeky2) then it is possible the hex core Phenoms have some merit to them in this one instance.

Well in game some people with crossfire cards mentioned their 2500k can hit 100% with ultra settings in BF3,i haven't ran ultra to be able to tell if there is truth in their claim,but iv'e heard it a few times..one guy said he was dumping his 2500k for a 2700k...:\

1090t still isn't gonna deliver a better framerate with the 2 cards but cpu usage will be down yes...

1090t as a whole in BF3 does deliver better framerate then any x4 would but the 2500k is clearly still the better processor .

 

[RavenSEAL]

Welcome to the family!

My baby works like a charm for everything, and only for $150 :awe:

 

[fourdegrees11]

Just got my 1090T up and running! Ordered from Amazon a few days ago when the price was $159. This thing is a beast compared to my old 720! My sig is updated with how it's running, I'm pretty confident I could push it much harder then this, but i dont see a need to. My system is running much faster overall, I'm a little surprised by this as I've been led to believe a moderate cpu upgrade shouldnt have this kind of effect.

Anyone looking for a cooler should definitely consider the Antec H20 620. I didnt go over 35.5 C with this OC running the full overdrive stability test.

 

[happy medium]

I had that performance 2 years ago for 150$, congrats. welcome to being the 4th fastest . 2 years late.
Mabe your next upgrade will be BD? oh wait thats slower than my 3 year old 150$ cpu also.

Good luck pulling each others chains.

2500k or settle for 4th best with me.

Relax J/K guys


Completely unnecessary.

So you have to crap on someone else's parade?

If you really were kidding you would have retracted the whole post


esquared
Anandtech Forum Director

 

[fourdegrees11]

I had that performance 2 years ago for 150$, congrats. welcome to being the 4th fastest . 2 years late.
Mabe your next upgrade will be BD? oh wait thats slower than my 3 year old 150$ cpu also.

Good luck pulling each others chains.

2500k or settle for 4th best with me.

Relax J/K guys

How is this post contributing to this thread? I dont see anyone on here claiming they have the best cpu...

 

[BD231]

Using max clock threshholds as barometers on power consumption, the most retarded sh t I've seen around here in a long time.

 

[lau808]

has any 1090/1100t owner disabled 2 cores and tried to see how much higher they could oc? if not is anyone willing to try for $hits and giggles and my curiousity?

 

[Gikaseixas]

happy the troll lol
1090T is faster than your Q9550

 

[fourdegrees11]

On top of that the Q9550 is $300 right now, it surely costed more then $150 2 years ago...

 

[Puppies04]

Undervolt it with k10stat. I multitask tons and the 1055T is an extremely impressive chip. In that regard, my 2600k rig almost seems sluggish by comparison.

Did you plug the 2600k rig in?

 

[SlowSpyder]

I had that performance 2 years ago for 150$, congrats. welcome to being the 4th fastest . 2 years late.
Mabe your next upgrade will be BD? oh wait thats slower than my 3 year old 150$ cpu also.

Good luck pulling each others chains.

2500k or settle for 4th best with me.

Relax J/K guys

It makes sense for us that have a motherboard that allows it to be a drop-in replacement. I wouldn't build a new rig around it unless I knew what I was doing would use all six cores. But regardless, I doubt you had the performance of my CPU two years ago. What'd you have, a C2Q?