AMD six-core CPU prices and clock speeds unearthed
By Joseph L. Flatley 
posted March 22nd 2010 3:16PM
posted March 22nd 2010 3:16PM
The gang at DigiTimes have always struck us as processor obsessives -- constantly out on the streets, roughing up mobo manufacturers, getting them to spill their secrets (they probably look like Gene Hackman in Night Moves). And they've sure been busy, this time digging up some dirt on AMD's six-core Phenom II line. Hitting shelves as soon as the second quarter this year, the X6 1035T will clock in at 2.6GHz, the 1005T at 2.8GHz, and the 1075T at 3GHz. There is also a Phenom II X6 1095T possibly coming to fruition in the fourth quarter of the year, but we don't have any data on that one yet. According to Alien Babel Tech (where we did our undergrad, by the way) the 1055T is will retail for $199, while the as-of-yet unknown 1090T black edition will retail $295. As always, we recommend that in lieu of an official announcement you take all this with a grain of salt.
[Thanks, Blurib]
[Thanks, Blurib]
@fel:
I am no longer confuse; now, I am just disappoint.
The 1090T will be a 3.2Ghz (3.6Ghz during Turbo) with unlocked multiplier so that's the one to keep an eye on if you want to overclock! =)
@Schmich Just read that it will also have 9MB cache and 125W!!
AMD is the driving force of the CPU industry
Another suicide act from AMD that's doomed to fail... not to disrespect any AMD fanboys here, AMD had lost the war light years ago. Putting out a six core CPU meant nothing to the consumers unless u're a die hard AMD fan. If your wallet is fat enough to afford a six-core CPU, why hesistate to pay a little more for something that's proven better? Although there's still no hard data on the performance, I'd doubt AMD can outcome Intel as usual. The biggest hurdle for AMD is the fact that the mainstream still think Intel is better even though they charge more. I think they better off focusing their resource on the graphic card market as they surely kicked Nvidia's ass this time!
@andyusa Student like myself does not have a thousand dollar lay around for just a processor. Even AMD is a bit slower, they are still good for the price you pay for. Like you said, for regular consumer, Why would you spend a thousand dollar if you can't even see the different?
Have a nice day
@andyusa in a given price range, AMD typically dominates Intel in performance. It might take higher clock speeds and/or more watts to do so, but for someone on a budget that doesn't really matter. Intel may own the high end of the CPU market, but, again, someone on a budget wouldn't care about that.
The biggest hurdle for AMD is that most consumers don't care what processor is in their of-the-shelf sytems, and Intel has a firm grasp on OEM's.
@jeffrotull
Actually to be frank, I think the biggest hurdle for AMD is that enthusiasts and gamers like me prefer Intel motherboard chipsets. It's quite a big difference when u add some fancy components to the board. Even ATI cards run better with Intel processors and chipsets. They should optimize their chipsets and gfx card controller before thinking of winning the CPU war. I hope to see some real competition in the coming months as I really want to find out how the 6-core Phenom II would perform in real world. But for now, I'm sticking with my good old i7 920!!
@andyusa My wallet is fat enough to afford a 300$ hexa-core CPU, not 1000$.
And one great thing about AMD is that they don't change their socket every year. I wouldn't upgrade if I had to change my motherboard as well.
@mp3
FYI, the AM3 socket came out just a little a year ago. LGA 775 had been around for like 3-4 years? Intel doesn't "change" sockets, they offer varieties. LGA 775 is still the mainstream at the moment even though LGA 1156/1366 are making all those noises. I think what you get is what you paid. A $300 "Hexa-Core" AMD CPU might perform slightly better than the Core i7 860 but no way near the six-core i9 or the i7 980X. As I said earlier, Intel top-tier CPUs could seriously pwn AMD's big time any given day. They're just superior and they could do it all night long. There's no war here as it'd been ended light years ago.
@andyusa
You can use Phenom IIs on AM2+ and AM3 sockets just different memory DDR2 and DDR3 and the AM2+ is as old as the LGA775.
Now show me one Intel CU you can use on LGA1366 and LGA775 or even LGA 1156 and LGA 775 or LGA 1156 or LGA 1366. Nope they are all dependent on one socket. And you can't get a Core i(anything) chip in LGA775 so that doesn't even count. The upgrade path for that is dead.
@redspear
You're not getting the point here. Let me put this in layman's term. Would u buy and use a 3-4 years old cellphone model? As you said the AM2+ socket is as old as the LGA775, so it's pretty obvious that the architecture is kind of outdated. Yes, the AM3 is backward compatible with AM2s, but what's the point of it? People wouldn't really care for DDR3 anyways. The integrated memory controller is pointless. The biggest problem here is that the socket had its bottleneck. They have all the resource after winning the lawsuit, but they're just too lazy to updated the socket.
LGA775 is being phased out and that's a normal cycle in technology. After all 3-4 years is pretty much like 3-4 light years in the tech world. I just can't believe how AMD is sticking to some socket that's so obsolete. I wouldn't argue with you about the compatibility of LGA 775 and 1156/1366 topic. Those extra pins do exist for a solid reason. Just search for benchmark results and you'll understand the significance. Winning that lawsuit still doesn't change the fact that AMD's CPU is tremendously inferior to Intel's. They're great steals at the low-mid end markets, but for the highend, hell no!!
Nice article
Amd rocks
A little disappointed. I expected AMD Phenom 6 cores 3.0 Ghz cpu with 95W or lower not 125W. I also expecting a larger cache instead of avg 1 to 1.5 per core share cache.