Impressed with my 1090t

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
V

Vic Vega

Diamond Member
Sep 24, 2010
4,535
4
0
lau808 said:
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?
Click to expand...

I believe the latest X4 is actually a Thuban with two cores disabled... you might look for OC results for those units.

My plan was to upgrade to BD when released for BF3 and in fact BD does very well with BF3. Now though, after seeing BF3 on my "lowly" PII X4 I'll probably just keep it.

Playing BF3 at 1920x1200 maxed out on my system and my friend's i7 system sitting side by side there is absolutely no different in game play or feel whatsoever. We both spent several hours (with the machines in the same room) each gaming on both systems ans switching back and forth. Our conclusion? There is no difference in the gaming experience, I don't care what Anand says. YMMV.
 
Maximilian

Maximilian

Lifer
Feb 8, 2004
12,604
15
81
skipsneeky2 said:
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:)
Click to expand...

I saw some benchmarks earlier that shows when the GPU limit is lifted the X6 keeps up with the 2500k:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1151970/my-own-bf3-benchmark-hyperthreading-on-vs-off/10

Both get a thrashing from the 2600k and 975 as they have HT and BF3 can use the 8 threads available. Bulldozer performs adequately here although its 8 threadness dosent help it much vs the intel 8 thread CPU's.
 
Puppies04

Puppies04

Diamond Member
Apr 25, 2011
5,909
17
76
bradley said:
Are you feeding your puppies?
Click to expand...

Sorry was feeling a little juvenile earlier, I appologize... Just found it amusing someone called a 2600k rig "sluggish". I am aware there may be certain scenarios where having a 6 core AMD chip might be preferable to a 4c8t 2600k but they certainly are the exception and not the rule.
 
happy medium

happy medium

Lifer
Jun 8, 2003
14,387
480
126
happy medium said:
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
Click to expand...

I apologize, sorry guys, :'(
 
Obsoleet

Obsoleet

Platinum Member
Oct 2, 2007
2,181
1
0
I'm waiting for native Intel USB3.0/SATA6/PCIE 3.0 all on the same board before I upgrade..
to me, in this day and age, Intel is garbage until they get native USB 3.0. While this will all be available in Pantherpoint, Intel will still not have a native-Intel SATA6gb SSD ready by then.

but since AMD has most of this already I've considered moving from my Q9450 to a 1090t. I'm either going to do that or wait for Haswell when Intel should by that point long have their shit together.
 
Obsoleet

Obsoleet

Platinum Member
Oct 2, 2007
2,181
1
0
Vic Vega said:
I believe the latest X4 is actually a Thuban with two cores disabled... you might look for OC results for those units.

My plan was to upgrade to BD when released for BF3 and in fact BD does very well with BF3. Now though, after seeing BF3 on my "lowly" PII X4 I'll probably just keep it.

Playing BF3 at 1920x1200 maxed out on my system and my friend's i7 system sitting side by side there is absolutely no different in game play or feel whatsoever. We both spent several hours (with the machines in the same room) each gaming on both systems ans switching back and forth. Our conclusion? There is no difference in the gaming experience, I don't care what Anand says. YMMV.
Click to expand...

You are correct in this, and Anand is wrong. Most of the higher end AMD stuff games just fine.
 
Arg Clin

Arg Clin

Senior member
Oct 24, 2010
416
0
76
Playing BF3 at 1920x1200 maxed out on my system and my friend's i7 system sitting side by side there is absolutely no different in game play or feel whatsoever. We both spent several hours (with the machines in the same room) each gaming on both systems ans switching back and forth. Our conclusion? There is no difference in the gaming experience, I don't care what Anand says. YMMV.
Click to expand...
Apart from a few odd titles that are either complete CPU hogs for no good reason at all a "lowly X4" is more than adequate.

The problem is that may reviews (noone mentioned, noone forgotten) tends to run the gaming bechmarks under settings that task the CPU as much as possible, in order to explore the CPU performance. This however also typically means that the results produced are not showing the performance in actual gaming situations.
 
Puppies04

Puppies04

Diamond Member
Apr 25, 2011
5,909
17
76
Arg Clin said:
The problem is that may reviews (noone mentioned, noone forgotten) tends to run the gaming bechmarks under settings that task the CPU as much as possible, in order to explore the CPU performance. This however also typically means that the results produced are not showing the performance in actual gaming situations.
Click to expand...

I agree that the tests you talk about might not be showing the performance in your actual gaming situation but what would you like them to do? Maybe all test sites could limit tests to medium graphics settings with no 0xAA that way everybodys mid range/high range CPU would return the same results and we could all just buy whatever had the prettiest box in the store.

Head on over to the video cards and graphics forum and you will find people running settings that anand and other testers don't even get close to. These people need to know that the hardware they buy is up to the task otherwise what is the point of reading these reviews.
 
S

skipsneeky2

Diamond Member
May 21, 2011
5,035
1
71
Maximilian said:
I saw some benchmarks earlier that shows when the GPU limit is lifted the X6 keeps up with the 2500k:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1151970/my-own-bf3-benchmark-hyperthreading-on-vs-off/10

Both get a thrashing from the 2600k and 975 as they have HT and BF3 can use the 8 threads available. Bulldozer performs adequately here although its 8 threadness dosent help it much vs the intel 8 thread CPU's.
Click to expand...

Yeah my build is gonna have a 1090t for sure .

Reinstalled the game today cause i'm using a radeon card being a 6750 and maps like metro on team deathmatch forget it on a dual core i get raped cause it lags so much versus a slower paced conquest map like Caspian Border.

Tired of this dual core maxed out limiting my gameplay so much i'll take a 1090t knowing BF3 can't or won't max that out that cpu plus going with a 1090t over other options enables a gtx570 in my budget now :)
 
Last edited:
toyota

toyota

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
12,957
1
0
skipsneeky2 said:
Yeah my build is gonna have a 1090t for sure .

Reinstalled the game today cause i'm using a radeon card being a 6750 and maps like metro on team deathmatch forget it on a dual core i get raped cause it lags so much versus a slower paced conquest map like Caspian Border.

Tired of this dual core maxed out limiting my gameplay so much i'll take a 1090t knowing BF3 can't or won't max that out that cpu plus going with a 1090t over other options enables a gtx570 in my budget now :)
Click to expand...
lol, you have gone back and forth a hundred times. if you are getting an all new platform then why don't you just get the 2500k and be done with it? its the better cpu when all factors are considered.
 
S

skipsneeky2

Diamond Member
May 21, 2011
5,035
1
71
toyota said:
lol, you have gone back and forth a hundred times. if you are getting an all new platform then why don't you just get the 2500k and be done with it? its the better cpu when all factors are considered.
Click to expand...

Where i shop the desired motherboards and processors of choice for me can toss my budget technically around $110 more for the intel versus the amd platform.

I don't shop online and where i will purchase these items i have for years with nothing bad to report part wise minus a 6990 do to driver issues.

Choice of gpu for me is important and since the primary focus of the build is BF3 i honestly don't care how much faster your 2500k will render then a 1090t its not a race for me.

Budget with a intel will limit me to a gtx560ti 1gb versus if i went with a 1090t giving me choices of a gtx570 or possibly even a 6970 2gb....

Refuse to use a radeon card cause since i put this 6750 in here its been nothing but problems with software luck may vary from you to me .

Cheapest intel build will limit me to a h67 chipset and a i5 2400 that won't ever oc and only then could i get a gtx570 .
 
Last edited:
Arg Clin

Arg Clin

Senior member
Oct 24, 2010
416
0
76
Puppies04 said:
I agree that the tests you talk about might not be showing the performance in your actual gaming situation but what would you like them to do? Maybe all test sites could limit tests to medium graphics settings with no 0xAA that way everybodys mid range/high range CPU would return the same results and we could all just buy whatever had the prettiest box in the store.

Head on over to the video cards and graphics forum and you will find people running settings that anand and other testers don't even get close to. These people need to know that the hardware they buy is up to the task otherwise what is the point of reading these reviews.
Click to expand...
I like them to show benchmarks that represent realistic gaming situations - e.g. resolutions/settings that people would actually play.

what I don't care one bit about is if cpu A gets 200 fps in game X while cpu B only gets 180, in 1024x768 no AA, because that is quite frankly quite theoretical.

There's no point in trying to forcefully remove the GPU bottleneck, if the conclusions is in fact that this particular game is GPU bottleneced in most realistic scenarios.

Just to be clear I didn't mention Anandtech - I think this site actually does a good job in their reviews and almost stay away from 'synthetic gaming benchmarks'. Many others fail miseably and conclude wrong.

Another of my favorites are Aline Babel Tech - because they test both with and without CF in across multiplem platforms. Shows a very clear pciture of the fact that the money are usually better spent on going SLI/Cf instead of cpu upgrading.
 
Last edited:
Z

zlejedi

Senior member
Mar 23, 2009
303
0
0
Puppies04 said:
I agree that the tests you talk about might not be showing the performance in your actual gaming situation but what would you like them to do? Maybe all test sites could limit tests to medium graphics settings with no 0xAA that way everybodys mid range/high range CPU would return the same results and we could all just buy whatever had the prettiest box in the store.

Head on over to the video cards and graphics forum and you will find people running settings that anand and other testers don't even get close to. These people need to know that the hardware they buy is up to the task otherwise what is the point of reading these reviews.
Click to expand...

That is correct testing procedure for CPUs in games.
While most cpus can give you stable 60+ fps while walking alone in the corridor the real problems start together with big action and many objects on screen - if you have weak CPU your fps can and often will drop to fps ranges where you get visible slowdowns.

As as WoT player I can tell you there's a shitload of difference in slowdowns with i5 2500@4,5 vs X6 1055@3,7 vs 1055T at stock.
 
R

RavenSEAL

Diamond Member
Jan 4, 2010
8,661
3
0
skipsneeky2 said:
Where i shop the desired motherboards and processors of choice for me can toss my budget technically around $110 more for the intel versus the amd platform.

I don't shop online and where i will purchase these items i have for years with nothing bad to report part wise minus a 6990 do to driver issues.

Choice of gpu for me is important and since the primary focus of the build is BF3 i honestly don't care how much faster your 2500k will render then a 1090t its not a race for me.

Budget with a intel will limit me to a gtx560ti 1gb versus if i went with a 1090t giving me choices of a gtx570 or possibly even a 6970 2gb....

Refuse to use a radeon card cause since i put this 6750 in here its been nothing but problems with software luck may vary from you to me .

Cheapest intel build will limit me to a h67 chipset and a i5 2400 that won't ever oc and only then could i get a gtx570 .
Click to expand...

It's an HD 6570, I don't know what you're expecting...
 
S

skipsneeky2

Diamond Member
May 21, 2011
5,035
1
71
RavenSEAL said:
It's an HD 6570, I don't know what you're expecting...
Click to expand...

I was playing earlier this week on a hand me down gt 545 which for some reason performed way better then the 6750 at 1600x1200 medium despite the gt 545 being the underperformer of the two.

6750 in all my other games saw a massive improvement while BF3 saw a decrease in performance while the gt 545 gave me pretty smooth gameplay for the most part.

Oh well less then 2 weeks i will be sitting on a 1090t 8gb of ram and a gtx570:)
 
StrangerGuy

StrangerGuy

Diamond Member
May 9, 2004
8,443
124
106
RavenSEAL said:
Wanna hand over $1200 to Newegg while I run the game just as well for $1050 less?
Click to expand...

You are just like AMD marketing...If you can't beat the $200-300 chips just pretend you win by comparing to a $1k overpriced vanity chip that nobody really buys. Nice try.
 
StrangerGuy

StrangerGuy

Diamond Member
May 9, 2004
8,443
124
106
toyota said:
want to come back to reality where your cpu at 4.0 is using 200 watts MORE than my stock 2500k while still being slower in games? :D


http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i7-2600k-990x_9.html#sect2

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i7-2600k-990x_12.html#sect0
Click to expand...

Nah, he would just say Intel is overkill for games in "realistic settings", power consumption doesn't matter blah blah...Which also means OCed i7-920 owners are still giggling all the way back from 2008.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom