6 core cpu's

[FaTtY-mIc-FaTFaT]

so does anyone plan on getting any? will you go with intel or amd?

i just built my rig and pissed off that amd came with their 6 core. should have done some more searching XD even if its a little bit less better then intel, but hey, with 150 dollar price tag on it, not bad

so what do you guys think of them? even tho quad has been fully used up yet

 

[lordknight]

when the price goes down maybe dont have $1,000 laying around for one .. not sure which one .. i just build my rig too AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition cooler is annoying .. i should of got i5

 

[crazyrockets]

My q9400 quad core hasn't been close to maxed out yet. If anything, lots of the stuff I am doing is more graphics-intensive. I might eventually upgrade the processor to a 6 or 8 core, but I probably am going to get a new graphics card (or crossfire them) first.

 

[mad pistol]

when the price goes down maybe dont have $1,000 laying around for one .. not sure which one .. i just build my rig too AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition cooler is annoying .. i should of got i5

The i5 stock cooler is annoying too bud. I think nearly all of them are. There is nothing wrong with your Phenom II.

What you need is an aftermarket cooler with a large fan that's quiet. Better cooling efficiency and lower noise.

As for the 6 core processors, I'm thinking about upgrading my PII 965 to a 1055T 6-core. However, as of right now, there's nothing out there that uses that many cores, so it would simply be for future proofing and bragging rights.

 

[GBear]

If you have the extra money lying around, sure, go for it. It will just give you a bit of performance boost over the higher end i7s.

By the way, if you're thinking hexacore, go with Intel. Their technology is superior to AMDs as of now. Take a look at their architecture. 32nm channel width compared to the 45nm that AMD still uses in their CPUs. Smaller channel width = smaller transistors = densely packed CPUs = able to squeeze out more performance in the same space

 

[RoadHouseBum]

Since most programs only support 1 CPU and a few support 2, unless I am going to run a server with Linux, I will give it a pass.....

 

[mad pistol]

By the way, if you're thinking hexacore, go with Intel. Their technology is superior to AMDs as of now. Take a look at their architecture. 32nm channel width compared to the 45nm that AMD still uses in their CPUs. Smaller channel width = smaller transistors = densely packed CPUs = able to squeeze out more performance in the same space

So I guess that means you've got a cool $1000 to drop on Intel's hex core? AMD's top Hex Core is $300. For the money, AMD wins hands down.

 

[DragonD]

I built my current rig back in July. It's an AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition (not stock cooler btw).

About every 3 years, I do a total new build. Soo...I'm good for another couple years.

 

[Quagmire]

go intel it always fast

 

[NixJedi]

Well, my overclocked i7-930 is still getting the job done.

Plus, AMD is about 3 years behind Intel in the technology advancement stages.

 

[mattM_-]

Yeah I run virtual machines on my q9550 and it hasn't even been touched. Even with 4GB or RAM I am perfectly fine.

 

[GBear]

So I guess that means you've got a cool $1000 to drop on Intel's hex core? AMD's top Hex Core is $300. For the money, AMD wins hands down.

AMD has always won in performance for price. But if you want the best performance out there, you go to Intel. There IS a market out there for the Intel hexacore. Do I need one? No and I never said I needed one. Personally, I do nothing other than gaming, checking the news/forums, movies, and occasional Photoshopping so a quad core will suffice. But there are bigger companies or people who want to push the limits and will buy this. If they have the money and want the best performance out there, will they go AMD? No, they will go to Intel. Take a look at the i7 975s when they first came out. They were over $1000 and people were still buying them. There is a market out there, most aren't in it like you and I.

 

[Ph?bus]

Eh, Phenom II x6 is only okay.
It's just a Phenom II x4 with 2 added cores and 1 more MB of L2, along with Turbo Core.
Not worth it.
i7 is still better (clock for clock, at the same price point).

 

[Orange_Kun!!!]

I know that for me, a 1055t at 209$ or a i5-750 at 199$ or even possibly an Athlon II 630 at 99$ look to possibly be an excellent upgrade to replace my old Athlon x2 4800+.

If you have the extra money lying around, sure, go for it. It will just give you a bit of performance boost over the higher end i7s.

By the way, if you're thinking hexacore, go with Intel. Their technology is superior to AMDs as of now. Take a look at their architecture. 32nm channel width compared to the 45nm that AMD still uses in their CPUs.

Intel's hexa-core tech is superior, but if the price is so far out of 90% of consumer budgets, there's no point until it ultimately trickles down to an affordable processor.

AMD's tech is shoddy right now, but they needed to make this launch to make profits that they can use to go back and refine their tech and make the jump to 32nm w/ a newer, more sophisticated platform like "Bulldozer"

 

[reflex99]

:crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying:

^that is how sad i am. I was going to order one (an AMD 1055T) from TD before school, but i decided to wait and do it when i got home.

When i get home they are sold out..... WHY DON'T I LISTEN TO MYSELF!!!!!!

 

[Ph?bus]

:crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying:

^that is how sad i am. I was going to order one (an AMD 1055T) from TD before school, but i decided to wait and do it when i got home.

When i get home they are sold out..... WHY DON'T I LISTEN TO MYSELF!!!!!!

Why? You'd barely notice a difference in gaming.

 

[reflex99]

gaming<everything I do on PC

 

[GBear]

I know that for me, a 1055t at 209$ or a i5-750 at 199$ or even possibly an Athlon II 630 at 99$ look to possibly be an excellent upgrade to replace my old Athlon x2 4800+.



Intel's hexa-core tech is superior, but if the price is so far out of 90% of consumer budgets, there's no point until it ultimately trickles down to an affordable processor.

AMD's tech is shoddy right now, but they needed to make this launch to make profits that they can use to go back and refine their tech and make the jump to 32nm w/ a newer, more sophisticated platform like "Bulldozer"

I highly doubt Intel's trying to hit the market of the common household with this processor. Same goes with the high end i7s like the 975. Intel has other CPUs for that. This is for people/companies that have a lot of money and want to push the limits of the newest tech.

 

[Tricoro]

i have a AMD Athlon 5000 Dual-Core Processor at 2.1 and my cus ass a intell anfd i forgot the model but it a dual core at 3.2 and running crysis at fill res mines the fps is like 68 fps and his is like 20 to 15 spd and wre r running the same grafcard and 3g of ram and i dont know y im going with this but i thing amd is way better for gaming

 

[GBear]

i have a AMD Athlon 5000 Dual-Core Processor at 2.1 and my cus ass a intell anfd i forgot the model but it a dual core at 3.2 and running crysis at fill res mines the fps is like 68 fps and his is like 20 to 15 spd and wre r running the same grafcard and 3g of ram and i dont know y im going with this but i thing amd is way better for gaming

I think I understand. Interesting...