Tuesday, 08 February 2011 16:16

AMD Phenom X6 1100T and X4 840 tested

Written by Eliot Kucharik

phenomIIX6_logo topvalue75px

Review: Speed updates, one Phenom is an Athlon

After the X-Mas rush AMD was keen to introduce a few new CPUs. The flagship Phenom II X6 is now clocked at 3.3GHz, Turbo goes up to 3.7GHz, and it still has 64kB of L1 cache per dice for data and instructions, 512kB L2 cache per dice and 6MB shared 3rd Level Cache. The TDP stays at 125W and VCore runs at 1.3500V.

The second introduction was the Phenom II X4 840, which striked us oddly. While in the name suggests 3rd level cache, this one has none. It is in fact the successor to the Athlon II X4 645, with a 100MHz higher clock which now stands at 3.2GHz. Why it's called Phenom instead of Athlon II X4 650 is anyone's guess. The Vcore went up from 1.3500V to 1.4000V, still 64kB L1 cache per dice for data and instructions, 512kB L2 cache per dice and an TDP of 95W.



Testbed:
Motherboard:
ASRock 890GX Extreme 3 (provided byASRock)
AMD 890GX/SB850
MSI P55-GD65 (provided by MSI)
Intel P55
ASRock H55M Pro (provided by ASRock)
Intel H55


CPU:
Intel Pentium G6950, Core i3-530 (provided by Mindfactory)
Intel Core i5-750 (provided by Intel)
AMD Athlon II X4 620/645/X6 1090T (provided by AMD)
AMD Phenom II X6 1055T 95W (provided by ASRock)

CPU-Cooler:
Scythe Grand Kama Cross (provided by Scythe-Europe) for AMD and Intel 1156
Thermalright Ultra 120 eXtreme 1366 (provided by Thermalright) for Intel 1366

Memory:
G.Skill Eco 4GB Kit PC3-12800 (provided by G.Skill)
1067MHz CL7-7-7-20 CR1T 1.35V for Athlon II X2, Pentium G6950, i7-975
1333MHz CL7-7-7-20 CR1T 1.35V for Athlon II X4, Phenom II X4/X6, i3-530, i5-750

Graphics Card:
MSI R4850-2D1G-OC (provided byMSI)

Power supply:
PC Power & Cooling Silencer 500W (provided by PC Power & Cooling)

Hard disk:
Samsung F1 1000GB RAID-Edition (provided by Ditech)

Case fans:
SilenX iXtrema Pro 14dB(A) (provided by PC-Cooling.at)
Scythe DFS122512LS

Case:
Cooler Master Stacker 831 Lite (provided by Cooler Master)

OS:
All tests are performed with XP SP3. As 64-bit software is still not very common, we used the 32-bit version.

 

  • «
  •  Start 
  •  Prev 
  •  1 
  •  2 
  •  3 
  •  4 
  •  5 
  •  Next 
  •  End 
  • »
(Page 1 of 5)
Last modified on Wednesday, 09 February 2011 01:55
blog comments powered by Disqus

Comments  

 
+22 #1 milkod2001 2011-02-08 19:17
Conclusion:
don't be fool and better keep your €199,75,Bulldozer is coming very soon.

Those graphs are just awful, why not to put names of CPUs on left instead of that colour scale. It looks very noobish and takes ages to find what color stands for.
 
 
+5 #2 SlickR 2011-02-08 19:23
As always the CPU benchmarks always suck.
You can't recognize one cpu from another because there are 20 tested at one time and all have similar color.

Don't do these reviews fudzilla, because they suck.
 
 
+14 #3 The_Wolf88 2011-02-08 19:54
Crap !

Please change your diagrams design it makes me sick !!
 
 
+6 #4 neo222 2011-02-08 20:16
Seriously Fudo needs to learn ..atleast to use charts in excel..Pathetic Graphs!!
 
 
+8 #5 D31337Antics 2011-02-08 20:45
Why don't I see atleast the lowest end I7 on here?

I kind of wanted to see how it stacked up. :(

I have the 1055t in my system and I am still really happy with it but man... can't wait for the bulldozer! :)
 
 
+8 #6 Nerdmaster 2011-02-08 22:19
Test less cpus. Put names on graphs. Larger grapghs.
 
 
+4 #7 FlOw 2011-02-09 04:25
Yeah, those charts are a little hard to comprehend... would something like this be better?
http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/4590/benchmarkcharttemp.png

I made it with the "benchmark summary" data(top of page 4), so it should have the same info as that chart...
 
 
+5 #8 TechHog 2011-02-09 21:05
Wait, why are the tests performed on Windows XP? I can't think of a single logical reason for that...
 

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

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments