AMD Phenom II X6 1055T 2.80 GHz

[Omega]

To read this review go to: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/A...m_II_X6_1055T/

[DanTheMan]

Great review Omega, looks like very little differences between the 1055 and 1090 when overclocked - yet $100 cheaper. Great for people who just want to get that extra little boost from a older setup. The review was very fair in terms of explaining what your main focus and applications are depends on the final CPU to buy. Thanks!

[WhiteLotus]

Damn, this is a good chip for $100 less!

[Melvis]

Originally Posted by WhiteLotus

Damn, this is a good chip for $100 less!

Thats why i got me one

[mechtech]

Nice review Omega.

Do you think you could so an under-volting test to see what is the lowest voltage it can run at stock speeds and what the power difference is under idle and load at that low voltage.

Thanks Omega!!

[Lionheart]

Very nice review, was expecting a better score TBH great processor though for the money

[newtekie1]

Originally Posted by Omega

many buyers could be easily mislead with Phenom II X6 965's magical 3.40 GHz speed, and opt for faster clock rather than more cores.

I think you mean X4 there.

[VulkanBros]

Yes nice review.....the 965 BE is still a better choice IMO

[Omega]

Originally Posted by mechtech

Nice review Omega.

Do you think you could so an under-volting test to see what is the lowest voltage it can run at stock speeds and what the power difference is under idle and load at that low voltage.

Thanks Omega!!

http://forums.techpowerup.com/showpo...4&postcount=68

It's the same chip so I think it's safe to say results would be pretty much the same. Maybe few mV lower due to lower stock speed, but that would have little effect on how much you can save in power consumption.

Thanks for comments guys.

[Formula350]

BTW Omega, the "FSB" on these is called HTT, not HT :P HT is the HyperTransport we all know and love, where as HTT (not to be confused with HyperThreading Tech) is the reference clock for the CPU, HT, CPU-NB, and memory as well actually.

Good review though, I still would like to nab me one at some point in the future

[crow1001]

Great review, will stick with Intel for gaming for now.

[Omega]

Originally Posted by Formula350

BTW Omega, the "FSB" on these is called HTT, not HT :P HT is the HyperTransport we all know and love, where as HTT (not to be confused with HyperThreading Tech) is the reference clock for the CPU, HT, CPU-NB, and memory as well actually.

You are correct, my mistake.

I was referring to HyperTransport Technology off-course when mentioning overclocking in article, not the HyperTransport Link

I'll keep in mind to use correct abbreviation's in future.

[PanzerIV]

Just received today my 1055T which I bought for 200$CAD. I'll try it out tonight and OC the **** out of it hehe. I currently have a E8400 that I've raised from 3.0 to 4.32Ghz but even thought it's a monstruous overclock on air cooling, I would still be better with a 6 cores in newer games. I seen more than 2 people with E8400/HD4870 like I have thought obviously not as much overclocked and they said it went from laggy to much more playable in Bad Company 2 so instead of wasting 300$+ on a new videocard I upgraded my cpu until the HD5000 price drop. I'll be happy if I reach at least 3.8Ghz on this 1055T.

Edit: Strange the 95w edition is still not out yet. I wonder if OC would had been better on it. Too late however even if it's out tomorow..

[Formula350]

Originally Posted by Omega

You are correct, my mistake.

I was referring to HyperTransport Technology off-course when mentioning overclocking in article, not the HyperTransport Link

I'll keep in mind to use correct abbreviation's in future.

And if I came across slightly like a jerk, it wasn't my intention heh

I suppose it would just be easier to call it FSB, since it seems (or from what I can tell) quite a few people don't even know it's called HTT My Gigabyte 890GX board labels it "CPU Base Clock", which is right to a degree. I actually think my S939 Gigabyte called it FSB still heh

Originally Posted by PanzerIV

Edit: Strange the 95w edition is still not out yet. I wonder if OC would had been better on it. Too late however even if it's out tomorow..

It was out a month or so ago when I noticed they had a new version on AMD's site. I even found it at a few etailers, because I had mentioned it to Kantastic which he was kinda bumming over since he had just got his

[Kantastic]

Originally Posted by Formula350

And if I came across slightly like a jerk, it wasn't my intention heh

I suppose it would just be easier to call it FSB, since it seems (or from what I can tell) quite a few people don't even know it's called HTT My Gigabyte 890GX board labels it "CPU Base Clock", which is right to a degree. I actually think my S939 Gigabyte called it FSB still heh




It was out a month or so ago when I noticed they had a new version on AMD's site. I even found it at a few etailers, because I had mentioned it to Kantastic which he was kinda bumming over since he had just got his

Hey I wasn't bumming out. I actually didn't care for it 'cause I see no benefits really.

[Gameslove]

AMD Phenom II X6 1055T 2.80 GHz is better choice for 5 years gaming and using for all task as well, including to change you graphics card only. I notice that X4 core will be not enough later.(We know Ubisoft company, they like to add more CPU cores support a new games) The price INTEL CORE I5-750 is higher then Phenom II X6 1055T 125W in Latvian stock, the cheapest prices 03.06.2010:
Phenom II X6 1055T - 231$
INTEL CORE I5-750 - 256$

---------------------
AMD:
Motherboard MSI 870A-G54 109$ (Support SATA III, USB 3.0, 2 GPU ATI Crossfire) + Phenom II X6 1055T 231$ = 340$

Intel:
Intel MATX H55 S1156 DDR3 GBLAN BULK 109$ (No Support SATA III, USB 3.0, 2 GPU ATI Crossfire) + INTEL CORE I5-750 256$ = 365$

AMD is better choise for 5 years here or the best of best choise will be Phenom X4 960T 3.0 GHz "Zosma" (4-core to 6-core CPU unlock). When it is planning to release?

[Formula350]

Originally Posted by Kantastic

Hey I wasn't bumming out. I actually didn't care for it 'cause I see no benefits really.

LIAR!!!!! I could see it in your keystrokes that you were bummed out :P

[TheLaughingMan]

6 cores will not be a requirement for games for a long time. Hell, even the latest games have trouble using more than 3 cores. This is why the old AMD 720 Triple core and several of the current gen. triple cores still hold their own when compared to their older brothers.

Hell I have seen reviews here and other places that show if you have the choice between a 4th core and the L3 cache, the L3 cache helps more in games.

While it is more future proof for possible trend in gaming becoming more threads, I don't think you need more than 4 cores for at least the next few years.

This is a great chip for the price and would be great for people on a budget who do a lot of Photoshop work, 3-D rendering, Virtualization, or a nice single processor home server that runs a lot of tasks at once.

[inmytaxi]

I ditched my old q9550 set up so I could crossfire my 4890, which is a better result dollar for dollar than the new cards, fps wise.

The main consideration for my new setup came down the availability of full 2x 2 PCIe x 16 lanes in the motherboard. The 930 x58 set up was too pricey, about to be replaced and without proper usb3 sata3 support ... I wanted to limit my new purchase to the net price or at least sale price of my old set up. ($390/$320).

With the i5 750 outta the running due to the limitations for crossfire of the p55 chipset's lanes, I ended up with a 890fx/2x 2gb 1333 ddr3 setup for $200 combo at the egg and will likely buy the 1055t to fill it -- though i may roll dice on a PII 550 black edition for the $80 PII 950 quad core.

Mostly this is for gaming the rest of my use doesn't stress the system at all.

Isn't the 1055t set up for nearly the same price a better way to go than i5 750 for people who want to xfire? given the narrow margins in fps in your results, isn't the advantage of full x16 lanes the difference maker here?

[TheLaughingMan]

Originally Posted by inmytaxi

I ditched my old q9550 set up so I could crossfire my 4890, which is a better result dollar for dollar than the new cards, fps wise.

The main consideration for my new setup came down the availability of full 2x 2 PCIe x 16 lanes in the motherboard. The 930 x58 set up was too pricey, about to be replaced and without proper usb3 sata3 support ... I wanted to limit my new purchase to the net price or at least sale price of my old set up. ($390/$320).

With the i5 750 outta the running due to the limitations for crossfire of the p55 chipset's lanes, I ended up with a 890fx/2x 2gb 1333 ddr3 setup for $200 combo at the egg and will likely buy the 1055t to fill it -- though i may roll dice on a PII 550 black edition for the $80 PII 950 quad core.

Mostly this is for gaming the rest of my use doesn't stress the system at all.

Isn't the 1055t set up for nearly the same price a better way to go than i5 750 for people who want to xfire? given the narrow margins in fps in your results, isn't the advantage of full x16 lanes the difference maker here?

Actually, no. There have been several reviews that show you don't take a realistic performance drop a card until you hit 4x on the PCIe lane. The difference between 8x and 16x for SLI/Crossfire is non-existant unless you have 2 $400 plus cards.

For gaming, i5 750, P II 955, i7 860 are all about the same in performance and your GPU's power is the primary deciding factor. I would not go with the P II 550. While it can hold its own, it will limit the Crossfire/SLI setup. If you are on a budget, get the Athlon X4 620 and OC it a bit or Phenom II X3 720. If you can spend a little more, the Phenom II 955 and i5 750 are the best bang for your buck offers for gaming hands down.

[Kantastic]

Originally Posted by Formula350

LIAR!!!!! I could see it in your keystrokes that you were bummed out :P

I still don't see what the benefits are.

[1Kurgan1]

Nice to finally see a review up on this, I'm loving my 1055t. I understand that you guys do reviews based on stock clocks, and while you do do a OC the rest of the review and conclusions are based on the stock clocks. But in the end, this thing is a 1090t. Even though it OC's through FSB, they clock exactly the same, it's a great proc for the cash, and even at stock clocks it will get 99% usage out of my 2x 5850's. I'm happy I spent the cash on it, it's great.

[TheMailMan78]

Well I got a 1090t. Kinda wish I didn't now. However I am running 3.9Ghz (19.5 multi) with 100% 24/7 stability. I'm willing to bet with a better mobo I could go much higher.

[1Kurgan1]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

Well I got a 1090t. Kinda wish I didn't now. However I am running 3.9Ghz (19.5 multi) with 100% 24/7 stability. I'm willing to bet with a better mobo I could go much higher.

The 1090t is a great chip too, even if you had to pay a bit more. With a better mobo 4ghz shouldn't be a problem, heck I had my 1055t at 4.2ghz on the stock AMD cooler, granted wasn't stable, but I have it stable and running 24/7 at 3.9ghz on the stock cooler, I need to get off my ass and finish my new waterloop, shouldn't have a problem running 4ghz+ all day then.

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by 1Kurgan1

The 1090t is a great chip too, even if you had to pay a bit more. With a better mobo 4ghz shouldn't be a problem, heck I had my 1055t at 4.2ghz on the stock AMD cooler, granted wasn't stable, but I have it stable and running 24/7 at 3.9ghz on the stock cooler, I need to get off my ass and finish my new waterloop, shouldn't have a problem running 4ghz+ all day then.

Mine is on an H50.