6 cores to vs. 4 cores?

Most prolly can match the performance of i7 920.

Let's see if this Phenom II X6 can match the power of Ci7 920.

Well, judging from certain benchmark of 965 BE at 3.8ghz and 3.4ghz, Phenom II has to be about x7~x10 to match out i7 920.

RM999 is so expensive and it is most probably correct as it is stated to cost about USD299?

I doubt the X6 will be anymore faster and X4's price should be quite stable already.

We shall see soon enough by the end of this month or early May.

According to the benchi done in XS forum, the X6 1055T @ 2.8ghz is about the performance of i7 920 @ 2.667ghz.

According to this benchmark in the spoiler, AMD Phenom II X6 1055T 2800mhz have to X8 to win a Core i7 920 @ 3267mhz.
From http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showth...t=249434&page=2.

This post has been edited by Silverfire: Apr 13 2010, 01:31 PM

I lol-ed at the result

My Core i7 920 @ 3267mhz 7zip result vs. Phenom II X6 1055T @ 2800mhz 7zip result:


This post has been edited by Silverfire: Apr 13 2010, 01:37 PM

Woah, so expensive yet so slow! It is only on par with an Intel Core i5 750

Judging from previos benchmark posted at xtreme, AMD Phenom II X6 1090T @ 4219mhz 6 true core just barely match the performance of Intel Core i7 920 @ 2667mhz.

Yeap, and that's before overclocking too. As far as I can see, overclocking those PII X6 doesn't yield much performance as compared to those Core i7s and Core i5s.

Unless those benchmark programmes are not fully optimised for 6 multi-core applications, then these P2 X6 might perform better with later version of benchmark programmes. Then 6 cores can be fully utilised, though I highly doubt the current benchmark programmes cannot utilise a processor with 6 threads when they can on a processor with 8 threads.

Programmes run on threads, not cores. Thus, above statements like not utilising all 6 cores are literally false as P2 X6 only have 6 threads.

This post has been edited by Silverfire: Apr 29 2010, 03:49 PM

Did you fully understood what I wrote?

As far as I know, ever since dual-cores are released, anti-virus scanning never proved taxing to the processors anymore, just the reading speed bottleneck by the harddisk.

Well, according to the benchmark and overlock, it showed lower performance compared to the Core i5 and Core i7. Also requires high voltage to overclock. Take note that the benchmark was made oversea, the temperature they obtained will absolutely not be the temperature you will get locally. Their ambient temperature is cooler, depending on where they stay.

Not the point now is it?

For some reason, I still see people saying progs/games not fulling utilising this 6C/6T processors when a 4C/8T or 6C/12T processor can.

This post has been edited by Silverfire: May 5 2010, 04:59 PM

Another misleading statement. If games like Crysis 2 couldn't take advantage of AMD P2 X6 which is of 6C/6T then it definitely wouldn't perform as well with Intel Ci7 4C/8T.

Multi-tasking and rendering?

So this is meant for HD5870 or GTX470?

Cannot utilise? Please read my previous post. This is getting ridiculous.

Read biased review, you mean?