Featured Articles

IHS teardown reveals Galaxy S5 BOM

IHS teardown reveals Galaxy S5 BOM

Research firm IHS got hold of Samsung’s new flagship smartphone and took it apart to the last bolt to figure out…

Galaxy S5, HTC One M8 available selling well

Galaxy S5, HTC One M8 available selling well

Samsung’s Galaxy S5 has finally gone on sale and it can be yours for €699, which is quite a lot of…

Intel lists Haswell refresh parts

Intel lists Haswell refresh parts

Intel has added a load of Haswell refresh parts to its official price list and there really aren’t any surprises to…

Respawn confirms Titanfall DLC for May

Respawn confirms Titanfall DLC for May

During his appearance at PAX East panel and confirmed on Twitter, Titanfall developer Respawn confirmed that the first DLC pack for…

KFA2 GTX 780 Ti Hall Of Fame reviewed

KFA2 GTX 780 Ti Hall Of Fame reviewed

KFA2 gained a lot of overclocking experience with the GTX 780 Hall of Fame (HOF), which we had a chance to…

Frontpage Slideshow | Copyright © 2006-2010 orks, a business unit of Nuevvo Webware Ltd.
Friday, 20 August 2010 13:14

Phenom II X6 in the lab - 2 Overview & Turbo-Core

Written by Eliot Kucharik

amd_phenom_x6_front_small recommended08_75 
Review: Affordable Hexa-Cores

Overview and Turbo-Core:

The cheapest of AMD hexa-cores the 1055T clocks at 2.8GHz, the just released 1075T will clock at 3GHz and the flagship model starts with 3.2GHz.



The new CPU features Turbo Core, which means the CPU can overclock half its cores up to 400MHz on the 1090T and 500MHz on the 1055T. As long as three or more cores are idle, the CPU speeds up the working cores adding some performance increase especially with single and dual-threaded applications. Many older games will also benefit. We have a screenshot using lamemt, with the 1090T all worked as expected, but the 1055T disappointed. We think this is because our CPU is the new 95W version, so the Turbo can't go up that much otherwise it would exceed the 95W TDP.



(Page 2 of 6)
Last modified on Friday, 20 August 2010 12:30
blog comments powered by Disqus


+7 #1 anno 2010-08-20 20:42
Excellent review. :) It was very good to see the system cost and cost per performance graphs, when so many other review site ignore that aspect all together. And that while it's one of the key factors in deciding what to buy.

The conclusion was to be expected, and is in all honesty already fairly well known.

In some cases additional cores benefit games too though:


This will likely hold more and more true in the future - at least, when the graphics card isn't a bottleneck.
+6 #2 blandead 2010-08-20 21:06
"Would we use later software version of the x264 codec AMD would have beaten an Intel i7-975, but as you know to retest every platfrom and CPU takes lots time."

I hope people didn't overlook this comment. Just goes to show you when more programs are optimized to use all 6-cores, how much better these processors can be even compared to the i7-975
+9 #3 Bl0bb3r 2010-08-20 22:17
Nope blandead, it's not just about the programs themselves but the compiler.

This just shows that when using GNU C Compiler, both AMD and Intel platforms can perform good. But when using some intel compiler, it will actually reduce the performance of the competition. And guess what, most benchmarks are compiled exactly in that compiler.
+2 #4 blandead 2010-08-21 20:28
I'm sure there are other factors, but nonetheless if a program is optimized to use all 6 cores it brings huge improvements to these chips over any quad core. what i said was not wrong, if you wanna add more info go ahead, but my logic holds true.
0 #5 Peter Ong 2010-08-22 04:36
Does database server, Java EE apps benefited from 6 cores? Thanks in advance for anyone casting some light here.
+1 #6 blandead 2010-08-22 06:22
database server would surely benefit I do not know about Java EE
0 #7 Jaberwocky 2010-08-22 10:30
Err Chaps.It's all in the cache.I run a 1055T o/clocked to 3.4 Ghz.It's the 6MB cache that is limiting.A baseline for Rendering a scene with just 2 core enabled works out at 100%, so if you enable all 6 cores it should speed the rendering to 300%.IE 3X as fast.Wrong.It actually renders at around 230%.Implying that once the 6MB cache is distributed amongst all 6 cores ,it becomes the bottleneck.If AMD could work on this and double the amount of on board cache then they would have a performer on their hands.
+5 #8 anno 2010-08-22 12:09
Jaberwocky, it could be that you're right, but that's not necessarily true. There are more resources shared between the cores, for instance the memory interface and northbridge and hypertransport switch. Even with double the cache you will never see 100% scaling in chips, that's practically impossible. You don't see it with Gulftown either, which by the way has less cache per core too, seeing as Intel uses inclusive caches.

Of course I'm sure you understand that Thuban is already quite large and increasing its size would reduce yields, and so making it more expensive than you'd expect. It's all trade offs. :)
-1 #9 Bl0bb3r 2010-08-22 15:36
Quoting blandead:
I'm sure there are other factors, but nonetheless if a program is optimized to use all 6 cores it brings huge improvements to these chips over any quad core. what i said was not wrong, if you wanna add more info go ahead, but my logic holds true.

Yes, in theory.. but in reality things are quite different. You can optimize all you want, a rigged compiler will screw with those optimizations anyway.

To be able to post comments please log-in with Disqus


Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments