News Headlines
- Fri, Aug 19
- Final Fantasy XV collector's editions won't include season pass, Square Enix "can't" make more
- Watch Dogs 2 multiplayer will feature seamless co-op and PvP without lobbies or loading screens
- Mario Party: Star Rush gets new box art after making everyone hungry for SpaghettiOs
- Thu, Aug 18
- NVIDIA reveals new GTX 1060 3GB model for $200, taking on the RX 480 4GB
- Capcom to show Monster Hunter Stories and Resident Evil 7 at Tokyo Game Show next month
New Articles
Related Articles

The Phenom II X4 965 has been holding flagship status over at AMD since August last year and now the company is finally bringing their hexacore chip to the desktop. In fact, servers have had access to AMD's 6-core processors for nearly a year now. These Opteron's, codenamed Istanbul, have a slightly different feature set although they share most of their design elements. Today's center of interest is codenamed Thuban and will show up on the shelves as the Phenom II X6 1090T.
Unlike Intel's Core i7-980X, a quick glance at the name tells at least part of the story -- we're looking at a 6-core part. Another even more interesting difference? The Phenom II X6 processors will sell for about a fourth of the price. Clocked at 2.8 GHz, the 1055T and its $199 MSRP is especially attractive. Our sample, the 1090T, comes clocked at 3.2 GHz and should retail for about $285. We'll see how they stack up in terms of performance,but both of these sound like an incredible value.
Let's check out AMD's current Phenom II lineup to see how today's chips stack up.
| X2 | X3 | X4 | X6 | ||||
|
555 |
720 |
955 |
965 |
1055T |
1090T |
||
|
Clock Speed |
3.20 |
2.80 |
3.20 |
3.40 |
2.80 |
3.20 |
|
|
Max. Turbo Freq. |
N/A |
3.30 |
3.60 |
||||
|
Cores / Threads |
2 / 2 |
3 / 3 |
4 / 4 |
6 / 6 |
|||
|
L3 Cache |
6MB |
||||||
|
TDP |
80W |
95W |
125W |
||||
|
Transistor Count |
758 M |
904 M (Istanbul) |
|||||
|
Die Size |
258 mm2 |
346 mm2 |
|||||
|
Architecture |
Callisto |
Heka |
Deneb |
Thuban |
|||
|
Process |
45nm |
||||||
Thuban is built on AMD's, or rather GlobalFoundries, 45nm manufacturing process and each core is cirtually identical to those in current Phenom II's. With 50% more cores comes an additional 50% L1 and L2 cache, but otherwise you're looking at the same specifications. While it's great that AMD was able to keep the TDP under control at 125W, the processor's cores now have to share that same 6MB of L3 cache with the two newcomers so that might affect performance negatively during heavy loads.
The Phenom II X6 is also AMD's first new die since the Phenom II X4 955 and although they won't publicly divulge its transistor count, they released die size and it happens to be the exact same as Istanbul, the hexacore server processor released almost a year ago. Clever minds that we are, we quickly looked up on Istanbul and found out it has just a tad over 900 million, so there we go.
Noticed that T in 1055T and 1090T? It designates Turbo CORE which is AMD's take at improving single threaded performance. However, there are a few caveats to their implementation. First of all, three or more cores must be idle before the processor can fire up turbo. This limitation is in place to make sure the TDP never exceeds 125W. There's also only a single level so either it's in full blown Turbo or not at all. Lastly, core voltage is increased in order to remain stable.
It is not as refined as Intel's Turbo Boost, however, AMD has another ace up their sleeve -- Turbo CORE is fully configurable through OverDrive. It is in fact possible to change the number of idle cores at while it will trigger, the clock multiplier to use and core voltage. This is a definite advantage if you are into tweaking.
![]()
Thuban, Lynnfield and Gulftown dies (to scale)
AMD's pricing strategy is awesome for the consumer, in that there is no doubt. Where it hurts though, is at their own bottomline and Thuban alleviates this issue, but doesn't entirely solve it. The problem lies in the fact that Thuban still is larger (the image above is to scale) and thus costs more to manufacture than both Lynnfield and Gulftown. I don't want to rain on AMD's party, but nothing is stopping Intel from cutting prices overnight or introducing a new part. We shall see what the future brings. Either way, competition is great for us.
Even though the Phenom II X6 will work in a whole bunch -- AMD claims over 160 -- of AM2 and AM3 motherboards currently on the market with a simple BIOS update, they are also releasing a new chipset in tandem with the new processors -- 890FX. This is the high end, enthusiast follow-up to the 890GX. The integrated graphics are ditched in favor of IOMMU and a slew of PCI-Express 2.0 lanes. The former comes from the server world and is primarily useful in virtualized workloads, but requires support from the operating system which isn't available in consumer versions of Windows.
The latter is a lot more interesting for us. With 890FX, motherboards have 44 PCI-Express 2.0 lanes at their disposal. The defacto configuration for video cards goes as follows: four full length slots running at 16x with one or two video cards or 8x if three or four are installed. The remaining lanes can be used for 1x or 4x slots as well as other onboard devices such as a USB 3.0 chip.
Without any further ado, let's check out what AMD has cooked up for us today.

They are damn well cheap though!!! so bang for the buck? I think so
There are rumors about a 3.4 GHz part coming, which totally makes sense. However the 1090T is a Black Edition, so if you buy one now it's not a big deal.
GlobalFoundries will have 32nm by the end of the year, so I'd guess we'll see 32nm AMD stuff in Q1 or Q2 2011... Just a guess of course!
So I'm curious now.
Phenom II X6 1055T Operating Frequency 2.8GHz and cache is the same and can be had for $200 now.
How long before we can possibly see an OC review of this chip as well? Any differences beside the clock speed?
I still think it'd be nice to see an intel i7 x4 or i7 x6 chip OC'd for compared review. Looking at old test results does give clues but seeing them stand side by side for comparison of exact same tests is always nice.
There are two difference between the 1055T and 1090T, the obvious one is clock speed, but the 1090T is also a Black Edition chip so it's easier to overclock with little knowledge. Unfortunately, we don't have a 1055T
Any specific benchmarks you'd like to see against OC'ed Intel chips? I can get some charts up for you
I'm curious to see what the results would be side/side of an i7 920 which is a pretty widely OC'd proc at similar OC speed. Same with the 6 core too actually. I'm not so interested I guess in gaming benches as they seem to swap back and forth, but I'm thinking the AMD chip will edgeout the 920 on productivity or transcoding results.
I don't have anything against AMD, by any means I'm actually a firm believer. I'm just interested in the numbers. I just think there are people interested in the OC results of the AMD 6 core that own an i7 who would be interested in head to head results at the same clock speed or closer. Same with current AMD quad owners. I can see where they could probably estimate the results of the increased performance over their new 6 core, but I'd think if they had a 965 or such OC'd now, they'd like to see that bottom line head to head comparison of both OC'd. Then it seems more clear and straight up the value of performance boost if they want to upgrade or purchase.
I do appreciate the sheer amount of comparisons that were done at stock clock speeds. Though I do wish that the introduction also stamped the frequency of each of the chips as well to remind just what each was at or maybe even what the turbo values would be at too.
Alright, I updated the non-gaming charts with results from the Core i7-980X at 4.1 GHz and the Core i7-870 at 4 GHz
Enjoy!
I will list overclocked clock speeds from now on, but adding every stock and turbo clock will get very messy. If you want more details on each processor, check this out
Thanks a million!
so the question is for all the gamers out there,why would they pump 300$ into getting the same gaming performance as the 180$ phenom 965?
same question goes to all the 955/65 phenoms owners.why would they upgrade?
There are probably a few reasons but Neoseeker always includes games in it's cpu and gpu benchmarks as there are tons of people who want to know how it will perform.
Not everyone is upgrading from a 965/55 and some people do more than just play games. If you were going into this thinking it would be a better gaming chip you're a fool. It's borderline common sense that nowadays games are barely threaded for four cores let alone six. To expect better performance would be asinine. Not to mention most games aren't exactly cpu starved as it is so it may not really make a difference anyways.
Personally, I'd like to see how these stack up with video encoding compared to the Intel quad-cores, as that's what I'll be doing most often (in terms of CPU stress, at least).