What's new
  • Please do not post any links until you have 3 posts as they will automatically be rejected to prevent SPAM. Many words are also blocked due to being used in SPAM Messages. Thanks!

AMD Phenom II X6 1055T & 1090T Six-Core Processors Review

Status
Not open for further replies.

MAC

Associate Review Editor
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
1,086
Location
Montreal
Gaming Benchmarks: 3DMark06 / 3DMark Vantage

Gaming Benchmarks: 3DMark06 / 3DMark Vantage



Futuremark 3DMark06


3DMark06 v1.1.0
Graphic Settings: Default
Resolution: 1280X1024

Test: Specific CPU Score and Full Run 3Dmarks
Comparison: Generated Score

The Futuremark 3DMark series has been a part of the backbone in computer and hardware reviews since its conception. The trend continues today as 3DMark06 provides consumers with a solid synthetic benchmark geared for performance and comparison in the 3D gaming realm. This remains one of the most sought after statistics, as well as an excellent tool for accurate CPU comparison, and it will undoubtedly be used for years to come.


chart15.jpg



Futuremark 3DMark Vantage


3DMark Vantage v1.0.1
Graphic Settings: Performance Preset
Resolution: 1280X1024

Test: Specific CPU Score and Full Run 3Dmarks
Comparison: Generated Score

3DMark Vantage is the follow-up to the highly successful 3DMark06. It uses DirectX 10 exclusively so if you are running Windows XP, you can forget about this benchmark. Along with being a very capable graphics card testing application, it also has very heavily multi-threaded CPU tests, such Physics Simulation and Artificial Intelligence (AI), which makes it a good all-around gaming benchmark.


chart16.jpg
 

MAC

Associate Review Editor
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
1,086
Location
Montreal
Gaming Benchmarks: Crysis / Far Cry 2

Gaming Benchmarks: Crysis / Far Cry 2



Crysis


Crysis v1.21
Resolution: 1680x1050
Anti Aliasing: 0
Quality Settings: High
Global Settings: DX10 / 64-Bit

Test 1: Ice benchmark_CPU2 demo
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)

Still one of the most hardware intensive game on the market today, Crysis has been chosen for its obvious ability to be able to showcase the differences between platforms and to showcase just how far one will need to go in the quest for maximum performance. The game also features the renowned CryEngine, the power behind the incredible graphics, which is expected to be foundation of future titles.


chart17.jpg



Far Cry 2


Far Cry 2 1.02
Resolution: 1680x1050
Anti Aliasing: 0
Quality Settings: Very High
Global Settings: DX10 Enabled

Test 1: Ranch Long Demo
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)

Far Cry 2 is the hot new new first-person shooter from Ubisoft's Montreal studio, and the first game to utilize the new visually stunning Dunia Engine, which will undoubtedly be used by numerous future games. Using the included Benchmarking Tool, we ran the Long Ranch demo in DX10 mode at 1680x1050 with all settings set to very high.


chart18.jpg

Far Cry 2 has always been quite quirky in our experience. The Dunia engine performs exceptionally well on Phenom II processors. It also loves L2 cache, hence why the Core 2 Quad Q9550 and its 12MB L2 cache performs so well. For some reason, the Clarkdale processors are also a force to be reckoned with in this game, or at least the in-game benchmark. We might have to retire this particular benchmark.
 

MAC

Associate Review Editor
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
1,086
Location
Montreal
Gaming Benchmarks: Left 4 Dead / Particle Simulation

Gaming Benchmarks: Left 4 Dead / Particle Simulation



Left 4 Dead


Left 4 Dead (Latest Update)
Resolution: 1680x1050
Filtering: 4X MSAA / Anisotropic 8X
Graphic Settings: High
Shader Detail: Very High
Test 1: HWC Custom Timedemo
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)

Left 4 Dead is the latest disorienting, fast-paced zombie apocalypse mega-hit from Valve. L4D uses the latest version of the Source engine with enhancements such as multi-core processor support and physics-based animation. We test here at 1680x1050 with in-game details set to their highest levels, with MSAA 4X and AA 8X. For benching, we used a pre-recorded 20 minute timedemo taken on the No Mercy campaign during The Apartments mission.


chart19.jpg



Valve Particle Simulation Benchmark


Valve Particle Simulation Benchmark
Default
Comparison: Particle Performance Metric

Originally intended to demonstrate new processing effects added to Half Life 2: Episode 2 and future projects, the particle benchmark condenses what can be found throughout HL2:EP2 and combines it all into one small but deadly package. This test does not symbolize the performance scale for just Episode Two exclusively, but also for many other games and applications that utilize multi-core processing and particle effects. As you will see the benchmark does not score in FPS but rather in its own "Particle Performance Metric", which is useful for direct CPU comparisons.


chart20.jpg

Although more of a tech demo than anything else, VPSB demonstrates the type of performance gains that can be had in games that support 6+ threads.
 

MAC

Associate Review Editor
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
1,086
Location
Montreal
Gaming Benchmarks: Street Fighter 4 / World in Conflict

Gaming Benchmarks: Street Fighter 4 / World in Conflict



Street Fighter 4


Street Fighter 4 Demo
Resolution: 1680x1050
Anti-Aliasing: 0X
Graphic Settings: High
Test 1: Built-in Timedemo
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)

Street Fighter IV is a 2008 arcade game produced by famous developer Capcom, that has finally been released on the PC platform. This game has not been 'ported' since the Street Fighter IV arcade machines actually have PC internals, with circa 2005 components. As a result, the version of the game released on the PC is considered the definitive version. With a multi-threaded engine and an astounding hybrid 2D/3D graphics style, this game is sure to please all fans of the Street Fighter series.


chart21.jpg

Can anyone say "GPU bottleneck" ?



World in Conflict


World in Conflict v1.010
Resolution: 1680x1050
Anti-Aliasing: 4X
Anisotropic Filtering: 4X
Graphic Settings: Very High
Test 1: Built-in Benchmark
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)

One of the most visually stunning real-time strategy games in recent history, World in Conflict can really push systems to the brink, which is what we attempt by running the game in DirectX 10 mode at 1680x1050 with all settings maxed out. For this test we used the in-game benchmarking tool.


chart22.jpg
 

MAC

Associate Review Editor
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
1,086
Location
Montreal
Power Consumption / Temperature Testing

Power Consumption / Temperature Testing



Power Consumption



For this section, every energy saving feature was enabled in the respective BIOSes and the Windows Vista power plan was changed from High Performance to Balanced.

For our idle test, we let the system idle for 15 minutes and measured the peak wattage through our UPM EM100 power meter.

For our CPU load test, we ran Prime 95 In-place large FFTs on all available threads for 15 minutes, measuring the peak wattage via the UPM EM100 power meter.

For our overall system load test, we ran Prime 95 In-place large FFTs on all available threads for 15 minutes, while simultaneously loading the GPU with OCCT v3.1.0 GPU:OCCT stress test at 1680x1050@60Hz in full screen mode.

chart23.jpg

As you can see, AMD have done a remarkably good job of keeping power consumption in check.
Despite 50% more cores, and 50% more cache, the two Phenom II X6 chips utilize just a tiny bit more power than the Phenom II X4's in both idle and load conditions. As we stated previously, that is a testament to GlobalFoundries' manufacturing prowess, since they managed to fit six highly clocked cores under a very reasonable power envelope utilizing the 45nm process.

As impressed as we are with the power consumption, these new processors certainly don't take the performance-per-watt crown from the Lynnfield-based chips, much less the 32nm i7-980X über-processor.


Temperature Testing



For the temperature testing, we used both the stock AMD CPU cooler and a Thermalright Ultra-120 Extreme (TRUE). The system was left to idle for 15 minutes, and then we ran Prime 95 In-place large FFTs for 15 minutes. The ambient temperature was 23°C/73.4°F. Keep in mind that the thermal sensors in most modern processors are not really accurate at measuring idle temperatures, hence the very small delta between the room temp and the idle results.

chart24.jpg

First and foremost we have to restate the fact that it is difficult to get accurate temperature readings from AMD Phenom II X6 processors since their internal diodes are way off the mark. Using trusted programs like Core Temp or AMD's own OverDrive utility will gave us sub-ambient temps at idle and full load temps that never exceeded 32C. Having said that, A.O.D does have a 'CPU Temperature' reading in the 'Board Status' section that seems <i>slightly</i> more accurate than the individual core temperature readings in the 'CPU Status' section. In our opinion, the above temperatures are still probably 10-15C lower than actual. Nevertheless, these new six-core processors do appear to run very cool indeed, we really couldn't feel much heat radiating from the heatsinks.
 

MAC

Associate Review Editor
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
1,086
Location
Montreal
Overclocking Results

Overclocking Results



Due to severe time constraints we won't be wow'ing you with our extensive overclocking endeavours, but here is what we were able to achieve in a short period of time:


Click on image to enlarge

Admittedly, during this last second overclocking endeavour, the SuperPI run was done with only one core, but it was stable enough to run the across all cores (just didn't have the 20 minutes to spare). It is not stable enough to pass our rigorous stability suite though. What we want to leave you with though is that this result was done with the worst (barely though) of our three chips, so you can put to rest any worries that these new hexa-core processors wouldn't be excellent overclockers.
 

MAC

Associate Review Editor
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
1,086
Location
Montreal
Conclusion

Conclusion



25.gif

Frankly, AMD have done an ACE job with these new processors. The results really do speak for themselves. In applications that utilize more than four threads, the new Phenom II X6 is generally a phenomenal performer, leaving the Phenom II X4's in the dust and nearly always competitive with the mainstream Intel Core i5 & Core i7 LGA1156/LGA1366 processors. In single to triple-threaded workloads, where Intel chips have reigned for a long time due to their higher IPC, the Turbo CORE feature certainly makes its presence felt, providing significant performance gains. Having said that, we really wish that the Turbo feature was not only limited to 3 cores, since on 4 cores it would have really provided some noteworthy performance gains across a larger swathe of applications.

Anyone who already owns an AM2+/AM3 system and is looking for improved multi-threaded performance would be foolish not to consider jumping on the Phenom II X6 bandwagon. For $200, you can have a new six-core 1055T chip that can fairly easily hit about 4.0Ghz , what's not to love? It is a mainstream power user's dream. Having said that, make sure that your applications can harness this processor's capabilities. There are only a tiny handful of games that can make use of more than 4 threads, so don't bother upgrading your Phenom II X4 just yet since you likely won't be too impressed with the additional power.

Speaking of power, we were very pleased to see that these chips have roughly the same power consumption as the higher-end Phenom II X4 processors. This is an accomplishment for AMD and GlobalFoundries since they have managed to increase multi-threading performance by up to 50% without increasing power usage, and without having to resort to a new manufacturing process. They also run exceptionally cool too, which is a blessing compared to the usually scorching hot Intel Core i7 processors. This is a huge boon since it means you can overclock without worrying about having to spend a small fortune on cooling solutions. And you should overclock (at your own risk, of course) since many of these chips are capable reaching a stable 4.0Ghz with a minimal voltage increase which is actually a slight improvement over the latest C3 revision Phenom II's.

Again, we can only repeat that these new Thuban chips will absolutely appeal to those who take their multi-threading performance serious, those who don't have an unlimited budget, or those who do not want to upgrade their whole system. If either of those three categories applies to you, then you can't go wrong with Phenom II X6. Now having said that, if you are building a general purpose system from scratch then a Core i5-750 / Core i7-860 / Xeon X3440 processor combined with a dirt-cheap H55-based motherboard might be your best choice since it will have lower power consumption and more even performance across the board.

Nevertheless, we highly recommend that those who plan to run heavily threaded workloads take a solid look at AMD's new Thuban-based processors.

31.jpg

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top