Prove a point: i5 750 or 1055T?

An OC'ed 4+ghz 965, being unlocked n all can ease the pain, will beat either of the other 2 easily in games, especially considering it may be quite a while before we see more than 4 cores used much.

 

An oc 4+ghz 1055t would beat the 965 in gaming no? judging from this review
http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/amd_1090t_six_core_review/6

 

^ that's a 1090T, not so sure the 1055T reaches 4Ghz so easily

 

well, I know that, but the 1055t oc to 4.0 is the same as a 1090t oc to 4.0

 

^ yes but are you absolutely sure it will get there? Phenom 720s are also stock 2.8Ghz but I haven't seen many above 3.6Ghz

 

1055 comes on 4ghz with a laugh

 

in that case the 1055T is the clear winner, I've toyed with the idea of going to a 1090T from my i7, but that's a sidegrade

 

Ok this is good because he doesnt game much!! going to show this thread to him tomorrow.

I definitely agree that AMD runs cooler. i know the 955/965 can run 36 degrees on idle with stock(since i owned both). While Q6600 i owned ran 45 degrees easily (i cannot really compare but looks like much hasn't changed?)

Only problem as mentioned is the voltage is higher. But apparently that doesn't matter?

 

nah the AMD chips are designed to use more voltage as far as i know, but apparently power consumption goes up a tonne after overclocking, look here http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Phenom_II_X6_1090T/12.html

 

The i7's are no different. Some review showed the difference in power consumption of a 920 shooting up to astronomical heights when you go from 3.8 to 4GHZ.

Edit:
It's not the 920, but the 950. Read and weep.

Also remember that the 1050 and 1090 are six cores and not four.

 

^ yeh on a C0 that's tru, that's y I'm at 3.8 because the voltage it takes to get the extra 200Mhz is what makes the power consumption escalate, I'm not sure bout voltages on the 1055T tho so cannot comment whether this is the case

 

As long as you're overclocking your system, you're going to induce more wattage being sucked by the CPU.

I thought this was basically a fact....

deltatux

 

^ I was talking about the amount that it increases, the 1055T load power consumption basically doubles and the i7 C0 gets a sudden spike after 3.8 which is not worth the net gain in computational power

 

wow, I just noticed you hit 4.2 ghz on your 1055t, is that on air and on what voltage?

I'm torn between the 1090t or the 1055t, I can't really decide right now

 

I like to know that too. I'm kind of in the same boat, 1055T/1090T or the i7 920.

 

The K7 Athlon Thunderbird was the only post-K6 AMD processor to actually run hotter than it's Intel counterpart. If you want to see which processor actually runs hotter...look at the heatsinks. Pentium-4 required a larger heatsink to maintain safe temperatures. Prescott Pentium-4 processors typically idle'd hotter than Barton core Athlon load temperatures. Below, I've listed the AMD processors that actually ran hotter than the Intel processors they competed against...

AMD 386SX
AMD 486DX4-100
AMD K6-3 (entire series)
AMD K7 Athlon Thunderbird core

Performance wise....real world performance differences are non-existant for the average user. In fact, they're only noticable for "power-users" and "extreme gamers"... Benchmarks really are pointless for comparing processors as they tend to highlight minor performance drawbacks that are never noticed during real-world usage...

 

the funny thing i know about tdp is that both intel and amd have completely different algorithms for determining it so just because the tdp of one processor is higher than the other doesn't exactly mean that one gets hotter the processor with the higher tdp might be getting that rating because the tdp was figured out differently than the one with the lower tdp that is running much hotter i have 2 rigs one intel one amd they were both clocked the same when i recently got the intel yes initaly the intel benchmarked better but even with a 45nm chip the intel e5300 still ran hotter than my 65nm amd 5050e this is at the same clock speed with diffrent cooler but both are aftermarket copper heatpiped with 120mm fans even heavily overclocked the amd runs cooler than the the intel at idle than my amd does the amd idles around 30c at 3.25 up from 2.6 running at almost 1.4 volts while my intel is running at about 1.2 and is idling around 32c these are both slow economy processors but even an aggressively over-clocked amd is cooler than an intel

 

When i read this thread, I remembered my sisters PC and how cool it ran

and thats load temps haha!

I dont know how you can complain about heat if you do nothing about it. Invest in a better heatsink.

 

Intel and AMD measure TDP differently.
Intel's TDP is a lot closer to AMD's ACP (used on Opterons)

Also, they use very different manufacturing processes; AMD CPU's have the same power consumption at higher volts generally.

In a typical DC circuit, P = VI
Higher volts and lower amps can mean the same power consumption.

Mind you, a circuit carrying more amps has an exponentially higher power loss.
Whereas with more volts, there's only linearly more power loss.

 

:3eyes: Ever heard of punctuations? This is like the writing of an eight year old and I couldn't read all of this because it hurt my eyes.