Amd phenom ii x6 1055t update drivers. Updating AMD Phenom II X6 (1055T) Drivers in One Click with DriverDoc. AMD Update Frequently Asked Questions
At the end of April, AMD officially presented its version of the vision of a six-core processor. This is how the AMD Phenom II X6 family with the Thuban core appeared, which should provide high productivity with ever increasing multitasking and at the same time becoming accessible to the masses.
But there is nothing fundamentally new and revolutionary in Thuban. This is, in fact, a refinement and expansion of the Deneb core, which is used universally for AMD Phenom II X4 processors and for obtaining less fast modifications. Only now the new crystal has two more cores, which theoretically increases the speed of such a processor by 50% at a constant clock frequency.
Deneb core for AMD Phenom II X4
Thuban core for AMD Phenom II X6
However, to ensure more efficient use of new processors and in the case of poorly optimized code for multi-core processors, AMD introduced the new Turbo Core technology, which is, in fact, the answer to Intel Turbo Boost.
But, as already noted in the material on the presentation of AMD Phenom II X6 processors, AMD Turbo Core technology is noticeably different from the technology of its competitor Intel Turbo Boost. So, firstly, in theory, AMD Turbo Core changes the frequency not in several steps depending on the number of involved cores, but only once increasing it by 500 MHz above the nominal. Secondly, AMD Turbo Core technology increases the frequency of three cores at once, provided that at least three other cores are idle. In this case, the frequency of non-working cores is reduced to 800 MHz. The latter is necessary so that in the acceleration mode the processor does not go beyond its thermal packet, since the voltage on the processor is forcibly increased.
AMD Phenom II X6 1055T processor
Despite the fact that AMD Phenom II X6 processors and, in particular, AMD Phenom II X6 1055T processors were presented at the end of April and even almost immediately appeared in the retail network, a full-fledged boxed version of some then the models. But recently, the "sought sample" was found in the base Technic-PRO system of Technics for Business, which allows us to conduct a separate study of the possibilities of the novelty. But since it was not a boxed processor that was tested for testing, we cannot fully tell about the packaging and delivery set of the processor, but we will try to help you find out the product on the shelf using information from the Web.
Well, inside such a box there should be the following: the processor itself, a warranty statement, a sticker on the case and a cooler.
The "top box" model AV-Z7UH40Q001 is used as a cooling system, which is familiar to fans of AMD processors as the most effective standard remedy cooling processors with a thermal package of 125 W or more (from AMD Phenom II X4 945 to AMD Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition). Considering that the thermal package for AMD Phenom II X6 1055T is about 125 W, it can already be assumed that the "boxed" cooler will be enough for cooling it and even for some overclocking, but under load and high temperature inside the system unit it will become the main one. a source of noise. For comfortable use of the system with a six-core AMD processor, and even more overclocking for constant use, most likely, you will have to replace the cooler.
AMD Phenom II X6 1055T Specification:
|
Marking |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
CPU socket |
Socket AM3, AM2 + |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Clock frequency, MHz |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Factor |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
HT bus frequency, MHz |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
L1 cache size, KB |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
L2 cache, KB |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
L3 cache size, KB |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Number of Cores |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Instruction support |
MMX, 3DNow !, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4A, x86-64 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Supply voltage, V |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Thermal package, W |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Clock frequency in AMD Turbo Core mode, MHz |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Critical temperature, ° C |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Process technology, nm |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Technology support |
Cool'n'Quiet 3.0 CoolCore Technology Dual Dynamic Power Management Enhanced Virus Protection Virtualization Technology Core C1 and C1E states Package S0, S1, S3, S4 and S5 states |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Built-in memory controller |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Memory types |
DDR2-800 / 1066 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Number of memory channels |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Maximum memory size, GB |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Maximum throughput, GB / s |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ECC support |
In addition to the more than once voiced differences between AMD Phenom II X6 on Theban core and AMD Phenom II X4 on Deneb core, such as the appearance of two more computing cores and the implementation of Turbo Core technology, the integrated memory controller of the novelty officially has support for DDR3-1600. The use of faster RAM should slightly reduce possible latencies due to the increase in the number of execution units without expanding the L3 cache.
And here is the processor itself. Its heat-distributing cover bears the mark HDT55TFBK6DGR, which can be deciphered like this: HD - AMD processor architecture K10.5 for workstations; T - processor with a fixed multiplier; 55T is a model number that identifies the processor itself and indicates support for Turbo Core technology; FB - processor thermal package up to 125 W at supply voltage up to 1.4 V; K - the processor is packed in a 938 pin OµPGA package (Socket AM3); 6 - the total number of active cores and, accordingly, the L2 cache size 6x512 KB; DGR is the core of Thuban stepping E0. Here I would also like to note that AMD's assortment also includes an energy-efficient version of the AMD Phenom II X6 1055T processor labeled HDT55TWFK6DGR, which is slightly more expensive but has a thermal package of up to 95 W. At the same time, such a processor has a high critical temperature, already 71 ° C, with a lower operating voltage level, which lies in the range of 1.075-1.375 V. Thus, theoretically, an energy-efficient modification of AMD Phenom II X6 1055T should have a greater overclocking potential, although in practice we We cannot verify this yet.
Almost all the characteristics declared in the specification and confirmed by the decoding of the marking are visualized by the CPU-Z utility.
The cache allocation of the AMD Phenom II X6 remains exactly the same as the rest of the dual-, tri-, and quad-core models with full L3 cache. Thus, AMD Phenom II X6 1055T has at its disposal 128 KB of L1 cache with two-line associativity separately for data and instructions for each core, 512 KB of L2 cache with sixteen-line associativity also for each core and a total of 6 MB of cache. memory of the third level with 48 lines of associativity. With such an organization of the cache memory, it will at best provide the same efficiency as for previous AMD Phenom II models, but when performing well-parallelized tasks, the L3 cache may not be enough, which will not allow you to get the expected theoretical + 50% acceleration.
The processor still has a 938-pin package for Socket AM3, although it is backward compatible with Socket AM2 +, and the memory controller built into the processor can work with DDR2 and DDR3 memory.
DDR3-2000 1024 MB Kingston HyperX KHX16000D3T1K3 memory modules used in the testlab were automatically recognized only as DDR3-1333, because extended modes are recorded in XMP format, which is not supported by the motherboard used for AMD processors. If you want to use such overclocking memory in a system with an AMD processor, then in order to use it in a faster mode than DDR3-1333, most likely you will have to make all the settings manually through the BIOS, including setting the correct timings. During testing we used Processor Test Bench # 1
Choose what you want to compare AMD Phenom II X6 1055T against
The speed of the AMD Phenom II X6 1055T processor, and, therefore, its efficiency and prospects are even more dependent on the tasks performed, as well as their combination. That is why in poorly optimized for multitasking applications, as well as those packages that cannot support more than 4 cores, the efficiency of the AMD Phenom II X6 1055T is not much higher than that of the AMD Phenom II X4 920, which was also tested with DDR2 memory -800. But when using more modern algorithms optimized for good parallelization, the AMD Phenom II X6 1055T processor, due to the acquisition of two more computing cores, shows almost 50% performance gain. However, when compared with the new generation Intel processors the insufficient performance of the built-in memory controller and / or the lack of the third-level cache memory are clearly visible. But, if you look not only at clock speeds and performance, but also at the cost of processors, then the closest opponent for the AMD Phenom II X6 1055T will be just a slightly more expensive Intel Core i5-750, which in many tests is still inferior to the six-core solution from AMD ... How AMD Turbo Core Technology Works The new AMD Phenom II X6 processors and their derivatives, the AMD Phenom II X4 quad-core models with a "T" at the end of the issue, support the new AMD Turbo Core technology, which allows you to get better performance in tasks not optimized for multi-core processors. In theory, AMD Turbo Core technology works according to the following algorithm: If half or more of the processor cores are unloaded, the idle processor cores frequency is reduced to 800 MHz; The voltage on all processor cores is increased so that the power consumption of the processor does not exceed the declared thermal package; The frequency of three or two cores for the AMD Phenom II X6 10XXT and AMD Phenom II X6 9XXT processors, respectively, increases by 500 MHz above the nominal. However, in practice, we could not fix exactly this algorithm of AMD Turbo Core operation, neither on the GIGABYTE GA-MA790XT-UD4P motherboard used in the test bench, nor on the GIGABYTE GA-890FXA-UD5 board used in the Technic-PRO system, nor with a standard cooler. , neither after installation is more efficient, nor in Microsoft Windows Vista nor in Windows 7.
In both systems, the BIOS option with the identical name "Core Performance Boost" was responsible for activating AMD Turbo Core.
Moreover, in the additional sub-item it was possible to select the maximum multiplier when the technology was triggered. Interestingly, in addition to increasing the multiplier and, accordingly, the frequency of the "boosting" processor cores, it was possible for some reason to choose a decrease. However, after saving the changes to BIOS settings and the system load, we were not able to register at least some changes in the processor frequency using the CPU-Z utility, although changes in performance were noted in the very first test packages. I had to arm myself with the proprietary AMD OverDrive utility, which completely unexpectedly showed the dynamic load distribution in 1-3 threads, which was called various applications, between all cores. At the same time, the frequency of the cores also changed dynamically and only upwards, and when some core reached 3.3 GHz, the supply voltage increased to 1.4 V. The load in one thread was sequentially distributed over several short-term accelerating cores. In the same way, the load of two and three threads was distributed to all cores, and the cores currently executing the task were accelerated. Under a load of 4 or more threads, the processor worked at the nominal supply voltage and frequency for all cores. Since in our set of tests not all packages are well optimized for multi-core processors, we were interested in how the system performance will change when AMD Turbo Core technology is enabled.
As you can see, in a number of tasks, AMD Turbo Core technology provides acceleration in the region of 10%, which is a good result, given that such an increase in performance is free. However, in other tasks, the change in performance is associated more with the error of change, therefore, on average, our test system accelerated only by more than 2 percent, which will be observed by the bulk of users. better optimization new software and excellent multitasking support with new operating systems. But in general, we would recommend leaving AMD Turbo Core technology enabled. Benefit from DDR3-1600 support Another feature of the new AMD processors is full support for RAM with an effective frequency of up to 1600 MHz, although this is not emphasized. Naturally, we wondered what the installation of DDR3-1600 modules into the system would give the user.
I would like to note right away that a simple change in the divider for RAM in the BIOS led to a not very good result - the motherboard does not support SPD extensions in the Intel XMP format and selected the optimal delays for the memory modules on its own. Increasing the frequency with increasing latencies led to the fact that in a number of tests, instead of accelerating, we got a drop in performance.
In order to try to remedy the situation, I had to set lower latencies for the RAM manually, but in this case, the system was never made to work with Command Rate 1T, which did not allow us to get a much larger performance gain:
And although we could not get a performance gain in all tests, in some cases and, which is especially pleasant, in games, the use of DDR3-1600 modules will provide a good increase in performance. Therefore, providing the controller of processors based on the Thuban core with support for faster RAM can be considered an important positive feature, and the owners of such processors should be advised not to save on memory modules, especially since DDR3-1600 is on sale at a price close to DDR3-1333. Overclocking Since the AMD Phenom II X6 1055T processor is architecturally almost indistinguishable from the familiar and overclocked AMD Phenom II X4, the overclocking method has not changed.
Having entered the BIOS, having previously disabled the Turbo Core technology, we slowed down the RAM, the HyperTransport bus and the north bridge built into the processor, so that during overclocking, an increase in the operating frequency of these components would not lead to a failure, and also increased the supply voltage of the processor itself, the chipset and memory modules. after which the reference frequency was increased to 295 MHz. Of course, the above settings were not selected on the first try, but in the end, the AMD Phenom II X6 1055T processor worked stably at a frequency of 4130 MHz.
We were able to overclock the AMD Phenom II X6 1055T processor that got tested by 47.5%, which is just a remarkable result for a six-core crystal. Moreover, increasing the core supply voltage above 1.45 V turned out to be not only dangerous, but also pointless - the bench cooler could no longer cope with the increasing heat generation. Let's see how this overclocking affected performance.
Overclocking the AMD Phenom II X6 1055T processor had a rather favorable effect on its performance, although the increase in speed is rarely close to theoretical, but if the owner of such a processor gets such an acceleration, he will obviously be happy about it. Although, as always, I would like to remind you that overclocking is a lottery at your own peril and risk, and the latter decreases with the acquisition of experience. Therefore, experiment, do not be afraid, but take precautions.
But, nevertheless, I would like to note that even with the help of overclocking to 4.13 GHz, the Thuban core of the six-core AMD Phenom II X6 1055T processor in most tasks is not able to provide performance superiority over the Intel Core i7-980X, and in a number of tasks over more affordable and slower quad-core models. conclusions Despite the fact that in processors AMD Phenom II X6 1055T, in fact, there is nothing revolutionary, tk. The new series of six-core AMD processors is just a refinement of the already well-proven 45nm Deneb core used in the four-core AMD Phenom II X4 and more affordable derivatives. But the addition, along with two more cores and AMD Turbo Core technology, which provides a noticeable increase in performance in non-multitasking applications, as well as the implementation of full support for faster DDR3-1600 RAM, which will also provide some system acceleration, coupled with a quite affordable price on these processors makes them a very good choice. Of course, such a processor will not always provide noticeable acceleration in a particular application, but it will allow more processes to run in the background without noticeable impact on performance. And if you use new operating systems and computing or multimedia software, then, for sure, you will notice an increase in performance up to theoretical + 50% compared to quad-core models. But, nevertheless, if you need uncompromising performance, then we would recommend looking at the older processors of the Intel Core i7 line - although the system based on them will not look so optimal in terms of performance / price ratio, but even the high overclocking potential of AMD Phenom II X6 won't let them compete. However, if you prefer to spend your money wisely and have no bias towards the AMD brand, then a processor such as the AMD Phenom II X6 1055T may be the optimal and promising choice for you. Article read 70544 times
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Competition is the engine of progress. If not for competition, we would not have witnessed such a rapid improvement in computer technology. In one of the works of American authors P. Horowitz and W. Hill, "The Art of Circuitry," it was said: ball 40 times! " Well, there is not so much sense from such a small Boeing for the layman, but the increase in computer performance is only for the benefit of users! Due to the constant struggle for the buyer's wallet, both processor giants are forced to constantly improve their products. This means that each new processor is faster, cooler, and often cheaper than its predecessor.
How do manufacturers increase the performance of central processing units? The answer is simple: it is necessary for the processor to perform as many computations as possible per unit of time. To do this, you need to increase the clock speed of the processor or increase the number of executable instructions per clock cycle. And, if the increase in clock frequencies is limited by the physical properties of semiconductors, then the parallel execution of the code can significantly speed up the work of the central processor. Server solutions and professional workstations have been using multiprocessor configurations since the end of the last century. But in the spring of 2005, AMD and Intel almost simultaneously presented their first dual-core products: Athlon 64 X2 and Pentium D. A further development of these events was the release of quad-core CPUs. More recently, both processor giants have introduced desktop six-core processors. And if Intel positions its Core i7 980X as a solution for very wealthy enthusiasts, then AMD aimed its six-core processors at the mass market! Today we will take a closer look newest AMD Phenom II X6 and compare its performance with a competing solution from Intel.
Phenom II X6: core design, specifications and proprietary technologies
The Phenom II X6 processors were unveiled to the public on April 27, 2010 along with the latest AMD 890FX chipset. AMD's systematic approach to product announcements is respectable. The fact is that no matter how powerful a processor is, an appropriate hardware platform and software support are needed to unlock its potential. AMD is fine with both. The Socket AM3 platform offers ample expandability and functionality, while AMD's proprietary Overdrive software allows for fine-tuning and monitoring. hardware directly from the environment of the MS Windows operating system. And if you add to this all the great DX11-compatible graphics adapters family "Evergreen", then we get a complete set of components for building a powerful gaming computer. This is what a high-end personal computer looks like in 2010. according to AMD:
So, we have a very, very serious configuration that can handle any task, be it a modern game, or video encoding for home archives. We introduced you to the latest AMD 890FX chipset and motherboard in one of our previous articles. A separate article was also devoted to the review of the architecture and testing of the ATI Radeon HD5870. Now is the time to introduce you to the "heart" new platform- AMD Phenom II X6.
To date, only two models are officially present in the AMD Phenom II X6 product line: 1055T and 1090T. The 1055T model has a reduced power consumption version. The characteristics of the Phenom II X6 family processors are presented in the table:
| Name | AMD Phenom II X6 | AMD Phenom II X6 | AMD Phenom II X6 |
| Model | 1090T BE | 1055T | 1055T |
| order number | HDT90ZFBGRBOX | HDT55TFBGRBOX | HDT55TWFGRBOX |
| Core | Thuban | Thuban | Thuban |
| Stepping | E0 | E0 | E0 |
| Process technology, nm | 45nm SOI | 45nm SOI | 45nm SOI |
| Connector | AM3 | AM3 | AM3 |
| Frequency, MHz | 3200-3600 | 2800-3300 | 2800-3300 |
| Factor | 16-18 | 14-16,5 | 14-16,5 |
| HyperTransport, MHz | 4000 | 4000 | 4000 |
| L1 cache, KB | 6x128 | 6x128 | 6x128 |
| L2 cache, KB | 6x512 | 6x512 | 6x512 |
| L3 cache, KB | 6144 | 6144 | 6144 |
| Supply voltage, V | 1,125-1,40 | 1,125-1,40 | 1,075-1,375 |
| TDP. W | 125 | 125 | 95 |
| Limiting temperature, ° C | 62 | 62 | 71 |
| Instruction set | ISC, IA32, x86-64, NXbit, MMX, 3DNow !, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a | ISC, IA32, x86-64, NXbit, MMX, 3DNow !, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a |
The new AMD processors are based on the familiar K10.5 architecture, with all its advantages and disadvantages. The updated Thuban core is constructively a good old Deneb with the number of cores increased to six:
The increase in the latter led to a natural increase in the number of transistors from 758 million (Deneb) to 904 million (Thuban), and the core area increased from 285 square meters. mm up to 346 sq. mm respectively. It should be noted that the size of the shared L3 cache remained unchanged and is still 6 MB. The processor is manufactured using an improved 45nm lithographic process, which allowed AMD to limit the heat dissipation of the Phenom II X6 to 125W. Of course, Thuban's production cost is slightly higher than that of Deneb, and the percentage of usable wafers is lower, which is associated with the greater complexity of the core. So lottery lovers can look forward to the imminent arrival of AMD processors, which are based on the latest core with disabled functional blocks. Who knows, maybe we'll still see five-core processors ?! Phenom II X6 received official support for 1600 MHz DDR3 RAM, while all previous Socket AM3 processors support DDR3 with a maximum frequency of 1333 MHz. At the same time, the memory controller retained backward compatibility with DDR2 RAM, so owners of Socket AM2 + motherboards can easily install the latest six-core processor by updating the BIOS beforehand.
With the introduction of the Phenom II X6, AMD has introduced Turbo Core technology to the general public. The essence of its work is to dynamically control the frequency of computing cores. With an intensive load of one or three cores, their frequencies increase by 400-500 MHz. In this case, the frequency of inactive cores is reduced to 800 MHz. At the moments of Turbo Core activation, the voltage on the processor rises to 1.475 V, but the heat dissipation still remains within the TDP equal to 125. With four to six computational threads, all cores operate at a frequency of 2800 MHz. Core frequency and voltage control is entirely the responsibility of the BIOS of compatible motherboards. Here's how Turbo Core technology works on the AMD Phenom II X6 1055T processor:
Thus, Turbo Core allows you to get some gain when performing tasks that do not have a pronounced multi-threaded optimization. These tasks include games and most sound or image processing programs. We'll look at the impact of this technology on performance a little later, but for now let's take a closer look at our Phenom II X6 1055T.
The set with the 1055Т, which are intended for retail sale, comes with a good cooler on heat pipes AV-Z7UH40Q001. The same cooling system is also available on other AMD 125W CPUs. The cooler is equipped with a 70 mm diameter fan, which accelerates up to 5000 rpm at high load, making an unpleasant noise.
Like all modern AMD Phenom II X6 1055T processors, it is covered with a heat-distributing cover. Externally, with the exception of labeling, the CPU is indistinguishable from their counterparts with fewer cores.
The processor was released in the eighth week of 2010. Diagnostic utility CPU-Z 1.54 is already trained to recognize Phenom II X6 and gives the following information:
Our sample turned out to have a fairly high VID equal to 1.425 V, but when idle, the Cool & Quite technology works, which reduces the core frequency to 800 MHz and the voltage to 1.225 V. As we said earlier, processors based on the Thuban core received official support for DDR3 1600 MHz:
The overclocking potential of the first Phenom IIs based on the Deneb core of C2 stepping was in the region of 3700 MHz, and complex and expensive cooling systems were not required to conquer such frequencies. The transfer of the Deneb core to the new C3 revision raised the overclocking bar to 4000 MHz when using a high-quality air cooler. The overclocking potential of the Phenom II X6 processors is still poorly understood, but there is information on the Internet about the successful overclocking of the Phenom II X6 1055T to 4000 MHz and higher. However, there is also information about the increased requirement of new AMD processors for the VRM power of motherboards. For the overclocking experiments, we chose the MSI 890FXA-GD70 board on the AMD 890FX chipset, with detailed overview which we will introduce you shortly. This motherboard has advanced overclocking capabilities and is equipped with a powerful 4 + 1 CPU power subsystem, where four phases feed the computing cores, and one phase is responsible for voltage generation for the RAM controller and L3 cache.
Our processor refused to work when raising the base frequency above 270 MHz. Even at 272 MHz, the system refused to start, despite disabling CnQ and Turbo Core, lowering the HT multiplier, NB and memory frequencies. This strange behavior of this processor was noticed even during testing of the Gigabyte GA-890FXA-UD7 motherboard. The initial overclocking was 3780 MHz (14x270 MHz) at Vcore 1.48 V and Vnb 1.225 V. The system worked absolutely stably in LinX and Prime95, but strangely it crashed out of the 3DMark Vantage CPU test! I had to lower the base frequency by 5 MHz. As a result, the overclocking was 3710 MHz, while the HyperTransport and NB bus frequencies were 2385 MHz. Lowering the clock frequency allowed us to reduce the voltage on the processor core to 1.46 V.
CPU-Z incorrectly displays CPU voltage when overclocking Phenom II X6 11055T on MSI 890FXA-GD70 motherboard. Instead of the current voltage value, the CPU VID value is displayed. CPUID program Hardware Monitor 1.16 reads and outputs Vcore quite correctly. We would like to draw your attention to the unusually low temperatures recorded by the sub-socket sensor and the thermal diode built into the CPU. During acceleration, the temperature under load did not exceed 51 ° C.
Alas, we were not able to get the "cherished 4 GHz", but on the other hand, the frequency of stable operation of all six cores was increased by 900 MHz, moreover, absolutely free! Do not forget that overclocking is a lottery and the frequency potential of processors varies greatly from instance to instance. Most likely, we just had no luck with a specific processor ...
Test bench and software configuration
Intel Core i5 750 and Phenom II X4 925 were chosen as opponents for the Phenom II X6 1055T in today's testing. The choice of the former is obvious, since the processor has a very close retail price and is one of the best (if not the best) options for building a home high-performance PC. Intel Core i5-750 has excellent overclocking potential and often surpasses the 4000 MHz mark when using inexpensive air coolers. The Phenom II X4 925 is included in the benchmark to determine performance scalability from four to six cores, and to evaluate the performance gain from using Turbo Core in applications that cannot boast of multi-threaded optimization. It should be noted that Intel Core i7 processors with Hyper-Treading support are significantly more expensive than Phenom II X6 1055T, and therefore cannot be considered as direct competitors. The main characteristics of test participants are shown in the table:
| Name | AMD Phenom II X6 | AMD Phenom II X4 | Core i5 |
| Model | 1055T | 925 | 750 |
| Core | Thuban | Deneb | Lynnfield |
| Stepping | E0 | C3 | B1 |
| Process technology, nm | 45nm SOI | 45nm SOI | 45 high-k |
| Connector | AM3 | AM3 | LGA1156 |
| Nominal frequency, MHz | 2800 | 2800 | 2666 |
| Maximum frequency, MHz | 3300* | 2800 | 3200** |
| Factor | 14-16,5* | 14 | 20-24** |
| HyperTransport / QPI, GT / s | 4000 | 4000 | 4800 |
| L1 cache, KB | 6x128 | 4x128 | 4x (32 + 32) |
| L2 cache, KB | 6x512 | 4x512 | 4x256 |
| L3 cache, KB | 6144 | 6144 | 8192 |
| Supply voltage, V | 1,125-1,40 | 0,90-1,40 | 0,65-1,40 |
| TDP. W | 125 | 95 | 95 |
| Limiting temperature, ° C | 62 | 71 | 72,5 |
| Instruction set | ISC, IA32, x86-64, NXbit, MMX, 3DNow !, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a | ISC, IA32, x86-64, NXbit, MMX, 3DNow !, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a | RISC, IA32, XD bit, MMX, EM64T, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4.2 |
* - with Turbo Core technology enabled
** - with Turbo Boost technology enabled
To test AMD processors, a test bench was assembled:
- processor: AMD Phenom II X4 925 (2800 MHz, 4 cores), AMD Phenom II X6 1055T (2800 MHz, 6 cores);
- motherboard: MSI 890FXA-GD70 (AMD890FX + SB850, BIOS 1.60 dated 05/18/2010);
- video card: PowerColor Radeon HD5850 1GB (850/4500 MHz);
- sound: Creative Audigy 4;
- power supply: FSP600-80GLN;
- body: Cheiftec CH01-B-SL.
- processor: Intel Core i5-750 (2666 MHz, 4 cores);
- cooling system: Xigmatek-HDT1284S;
- motherboard Gigabyte GA-P55-UD3R (Intel P55, BIOS F4 from 20.11.2009)
- memory: Take-MS, 2x2GB PC-10660;
- video card: PowerColor Radeon HD5850 1Gb (850/4500 MHz);
- sound: Creative Audigy 4;
- drive: WD1001FALS (1000 GB, 7200 rpm);
- power supply: FSP600-80GLN;
- body: Cheiftec CH01-B-SL.
AMD Phenom II X6 1055T and Intel Core i5-750 processors were tested in nominal operation and overclocked. When overclocked, Turbo Core and Turbo Boost technologies were disabled. Due to the abnormally hot weather, overclocking of the Intel processor had to be limited to 3800 MHz. AMD Phenom II X4 925 was tested only at the nominal frequency. For ease of perception, all the basic settings of the systems are summarized in the table:
| CPU | Processor frequency, MHz | Memory frequency, MHz | Basic delays (CL-tRCD- tRP- tRAS-CR) | Uncore frequency for Intel, NB for AMD, MHz | QPI frequency for Intel, HT for AMD, MHz | Vcore, V |
| Phenom II X6 1055T | 2800 | 1600 | 9-9-9-28-1T | 2000 | 2000 | 1,425 |
| 3710 | 1412 | 8-8-8-24-1T | 2385 | 2385 | 1,46 | |
| Phenom II X4 925 | 2800 | 1333 | 8-8-8-24-1T | 2000 | 2000 | 1,425 |
| Intel Core i5-750 | 2666 | 1333 | 8-8-8-24-1T | 2130 | 2400 | 1,125 |
| 3800 | 1520 | 8-8-8-24-2T | 3040 | 3040 | 1,325 |
Test results
Today's testing opens the memory subsystem performance benchmark, which is part of the Lavalys Everest 5.50 diagnostic and information utility. This application allows you to measure memory bandwidth with high accuracy, as well as determine the RAM access delay.
Alas, the miracle did not happen, and AMD Phenom II still lags behind Intel Core i5 750 in the performance of the RAM subsystem. Even the long-awaited support for DDR3-1600 does not save the AMD processor from defeat. But one should not be upset, since in real applications the balance of power can be very different from synthetics.
In the Super Pi discipline, Intel processors traditionally lead, and this time the Core i5-750 is the winner. It should be noted that Super Pi is a single threaded application, and there is no benefit from using additional processing cores. This test is sensitive to the clock frequency and the Phenom II X6 1055T outperforms the "equal-frequency" X4 925 by 15% thanks to the Turbo Core.
The Wprime application, on the other hand, has native support for multi-core processors. In this test, the X6 1055T significantly outperforms its predecessor X4 925 and is easily cracked down by its competitor from Intel, and the latter is not saved by overclocking to 3800 MHz!
Testing in the Fritz Chess Benchmark application will be especially interesting for chess fans. Others can simply compare the relative performance of today's test participants when calculating chess combinations.
Chess calculations scale well with an increase in the number of computational threads. In the nominal mode, the newcomer easily bypasses the competitors, and in overclocking the results of the X6 1055T become completely unattainable. Complete victory for the X6 1055T!
The PC Mark Vantage test suite offers versatile tools for assessing the performance of all major personal computer subsystems. In our today's roundup, we will compare the results of the Memory, TV and movie, Music and Communication scenarios.
The memories script includes tests for simultaneously working with images and converting DV video to a format for portable devices. In this scenario, the X6 1055T and i5-750 demonstrate a similar performance level at the nominal frequency, while the X4 925 loses to both of them. Overclocking the Intel processor makes it an absolute leader. TV and Movie script emulates intensive video content like transcoding and video playback at the same time high definition... At the nominal frequency, the six-core processor has a slight advantage. Intel is a little behind, and X4 925 deservedly takes the last place. But the performance of the X6 1055T does not scale well with increasing frequency, but the i5-750 gets good dividends from overclocking and takes the lead. Music script includes audio encoding tasks and emulates Windows operation Media Player... The X6 1055T processor famously bypasses the X4 925, which is quite natural. But the reason for such low Intel results at the nominal frequency remains a mystery to us. There is no error here, since the tests were repeated three times. Overclocking the Intel processor puts everything in its place and again provides the advantage of the Core i5-750. But the Communication test scenario, which emulates the work with WEB-applications, gives preference to the new product from AMD, and the overclocking of the 1055T only strengthens its position. Looking at the results, we can note the similar performance level of the Core i5-750 and Phenom II X6 1055T at the nominal frequency, but the Phenom II X4 925 looks like a kind of outsider.
From synthetic applications, we move on to applied problems and start with one of the most common - data archiving. In today's test, the WinRAR archiver is involved, as one of the most common representatives of this class of software, and 7-Zip is a very powerful and completely free archiver. Measurements were taken using built-in performance testing tools.
In nominal mode, the WinRAR archiver runs fastest on Core i5-750. And, if the X4 925 cannot oppose anything to the Intel processor, then two additional computing cores already allow the X6 1055T to compete with the competitor “on equal terms”. However, as the frequency rises, the performance of the i5-750 rises so much that it leaves no chance for rivals from the AMD camp.
A slightly different picture is observed in 7-Zip. This archiver feels great on multi-core processors and scales well in frequency. In the nominal value X6 1055T is significantly ahead of other participants, while the X4 925 and Core i5-750 processors demonstrate comparable results. In overclocking, the X6 1055T continues to hold the lead, ensuring the unconditional victory of the six-core AMD architecture!
Video encoding is another common task that users often face. We tested HD MPEG-4 processing performance using the x264 HD Benchmark.
Very interesting results are obtained with two-pass compression of a video file with the H.264 codec. On the first pass, the Core i5-750 processor is faster, and both AMD processors are slightly behind. But when performing the second, final pass, X6 1055T demonstrates all the advantages of six-core processors and confidently outperformed its rivals. And as the frequency increased, the new Phenom became completely out of reach for a competitor.
The following test reflects the performance of processors when rendering images in 3D editors. It's no secret that home PCs are often used to perform freelance tasks, and for such users time is money. To assess the speed of work in such tasks, the Cinebench 11.5R application was used.
Rendering 3D images is one of those tasks that scale well with an increase in the number of computational threads. In multi-threaded mode, the X6 1055T easily defeats its rivals, and even overclocking the Core i5-750 can only catch up with the younger six-core AMD processor. It is noteworthy that the single-threaded mode demonstrates a tangible increase from using Turbo Core. It is thanks to Turbo Core that the X6 1055T bypasses its younger brother X4 925, which lacks this useful function.
From synthetic applications and applied tasks, we are smoothly moving on to examining the performance of the Phenom II X6 1055T in games. But first, let me introduce you to the results in 3DMark Vantage.
Overall, the Intel Core i5-750 is victorious, but look how close the Phenom II X6 1055T gets to it. And in the CPU test, where physics and artificial intelligence are calculated, the new AMD processor does not leave any chances to its rival, both in overclocking and at nominal frequencies. The Phenom II X4 925 has the hardest time, as its not the most progressive architecture and low clock speed do not allow it to perform well.
Our current performance study ends with testing in modern games: FarCry 2, S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Call of Pripat, Tom Clancy`s HAWX and World in Conflict: Soviet assault. The tests were carried out in a resolution of 1680x1050 with high image quality settings. For S.T.A.L.K.E.R. CoP used the official benchmark, all other cases used the in-game performance measurement tools.
Judging by the test results, in this discipline the Intel Core i5-750 wins with a minimal advantage. The Phenom II X4 925 has the lowest score, while the X6 1055T is second on the podium. The second place went to the six-core processor very hard, and for this one should thank not two additional cores, but the Turbo Core technology. But this does not mean at all that Phenom II X4 925 or Phenom II X6 1055T cannot provide a comfortable fps level in games. On the contrary, the performance of any of the reviewed processors is quite enough for a comfortable game, and with an increase in resolution and detail, the difference will disappear altogether. The fact is that modern games (with rare exceptions) do not know how to use more than two computational cores, so programmers have something to work on in terms of multithreaded optimization ...
conclusions
It is safe to say that with the release of the Phenom II X6 1055T AMD has strengthened its position in the middle-end segment. The new processor offers excellent performance in multithread-optimized applications. Thanks to the introduction of Turbo Core technology, the beginner does an excellent job of performing tasks that do not have multi-threaded optimization. Moreover, in most of the optimized programs, the gain from two additional computing cores turned out to be close to 50%. In general, the Phenom II X6 1055T outperforms the Core i5-750 in most applied tasks, but lags behind it a little in modern games. Hence, if you are often involved with 3D modeling, handle large volumes of video content, or use extensively applications optimized for multi-threaded computing, then the Phenom II X6 1055T is your choice. It will also provide an acceptable level of performance in any task.
If performance is a priority for you in modern games, then the best performance will be provided by the Intel Core i5-750. As for AMD Phenom II X4 925, this processor demonstrated the lowest performance level. But do not forget that the price of X4 925 is about 25% lower than that of other test participants, and the overclocking potential allows you to boost frequencies up to 3600-3800 MHz. Therefore, many will opt for this particular variant with a good price / performance ratio. For now, we can confidently say that AMD is moving in the right direction by releasing its six-core processors for the mass market.
MSI 890FXA-GD70 motherboard for testing was provided by
Introduction Looking at the current state of the processor market, we can confidently say that clock frequency has ceased to be the main criterion for the attractiveness of modern products. For example, manufacturers have long since switched from marking processor models by frequency to rating numbers, which are assigned according to completely different principles. As a result of these changes, the rules of competition between AMD and Intel have also changed. Quite recently, these companies competed to conquer the next frequency boundaries, but today the "race for cores" has become much more important for both companies - now manufacturers are striving to be the first to release CPUs with the largest number of computing cores.
Today AMD is the leader in this unspoken competition. It is now ready to offer its customers the Opteron 6100 server processors, also known as Magny-Cours, with twelve processing cores. At Intel, the maximum number of cores in the processor has so far reached only eight: there are so many cores in the Xeon server models of the 7500 and 6500 series, also called Beckton or Nehalem-EX. However, it should be understood that the relationship between the number of cores and the level of performance is not so obvious. A proportional increase in performance when switching to a CPU with a large number of cores is observed only in specially optimized tasks, which are more typical for the server market, and therefore neither AMD nor Intel are striving to unleash such a multi-core race among desktop processors.
But some of the echoes of the "race for cores" still reach ordinary consumers. So, at present we are experiencing the moment of arrival of processors with six computational cores in desktop computers. The first step in this direction has already been taken by Intel, which recently released its six-core processor in the Core i7 family. But at the same time, this step of the microprocessor giant is clearly tentative. Firstly, only one model with six cores is offered - Core i7-980X, and secondly, it belongs to the rather expensive Extreme Edition series, aimed at a very narrow circle of wealthy enthusiasts. In addition, when releasing its six-core processor, Intel also used a new technological process with 32-nm standards: using this processor as an example, it is easy to run in the technical process - problems with either undersupply or excessively high cost are clearly not threatened. In other words, Intel, of course, was the first to bring to the market a six-core processor for home users, but it did it purely formally, rather to simply "mark" as a pioneer and mentally prepare users for the fact that the future is in multi-core processors.
Intel's traditional antagonist, AMD, has decided to pursue a different ideology. In response to the introduction of the premium six-core Core i7-980X processor, this manufacturer wants to begin introducing six-core processors into mainstream mid-range computers. And, I must say, AMD has all the necessary resources for this. The six-core AMD uses a core that has been tested in the server segment for a long time, and a mature 45-nm technology is used for its production. So the new six-core Phenom II X6 processor, which we are going to get acquainted with in this material, is not a direct competitor for the Core i7-980X. AMD is simply offering us a new option for conventional computers, which until now have only used dual-core and quad-core CPUs. But whether it makes sense to widely use six-core processors in desktop systems today, or AMD is running ahead of the locomotive - this is the question we will try to answer in our study.
Thuban: Istanbul for Socket AM3
AMD's six-core processor is far from new. Only earlier six-cores, known under the code name Istanbul, were supplied exclusively to the server and workstation market by this company, which, however, did not prevent, if desired, to use them in desktops, to which we dedicated separate article... Now, processors similar to Istanbul have come to desktop computers officially. They have been codenamed Thuban and will be sold under the Phenom II X6 trademark.The answer to the question why AMD decided to release a desktop six-core processor only now is quite obvious. No, it's not about introducing a new process technology. It's just that the 45-nm design process technology used by this company for the production of modern processors has reached the stage of maturity when the cost of sufficiently large six-core semiconductor crystals allows processors based on them to be set at prices that are acceptable to individual buyers. Moreover, given the fact that current AMD processors with Stars microarchitecture (K10.5) cannot compete in performance with Intel's top-price offerings, the manufacturer is going to sell the Phenom II X6 at very attractive prices - from 200 to 300 dollars.
And, nevertheless, the Phenom II X6 processors are based on a completely full-fledged six-core monolithic semiconductor crystal with an area of 346 square meters. mm., that is, exactly the same as used in the server processors of the Opteron 2400 and 8400 families.
Of course, the number of HyperTransport buses in the desktop six-core Thuban crystal has been reduced to one, and the memory controller has been reoriented to support non-registered modules, but these are minor and insignificant changes. At the same time, we can say that Thuban is also a direct descendant of the Deneb quad-core processors, in which two additional cores were simply added. Yet the general blocks such as the memory controller or the HyperTransport bus in Thuban are exactly the same as in the Phenom II X4 quad-core processors. Even the size of the shared L3 cache remains the same - 6 MB.
It comes as no surprise that the new Phenom II X6 six-core processors are fully compatible with existing Socket AM3 and Socket AM2 + motherboards. AMD continues to adhere to the principles of platform continuity established by itself. The only thing that may be required to ensure full functionality of new processors in older motherboards is a firmware update.
At the same time, AMD has prepared a very unexpected surprise for its adherents. The clock speeds of the Phenom II X6 processors will reach 3.2 GHz, which is significantly higher than the frequency of the older server processors with six processing cores. For this we have to thank AMD's manufacturing partner - Globalfoundries, which has mastered the use of a new material with a low dielectric constant between the layers of conductors. As a result, we got six-core processors with a relatively high clock speed, but with a calculated heat dissipation that does not go beyond the usual 125-watt limit.
In addition, AMD has come up with another enhancement that makes the Phenom II X6 more attractive in mainstream applications - Turbo CORE technology. More about her.
AMD Turbo CORE Technology
One of the key enhancements to the new Thuban family of processors is Turbo CORE, AMD's original response to Intel's Turbo Boost.Recall that the essence of the Turbo Boost technology, implemented in Intel Core i5 and Core i7 processors, is to increase their clock frequency in those moments when not all computing cores are loaded with work. Thanks to this trick, modern multi-core processors from Intel, whose clock speed is usually lower than that of dual-core ones, demonstrate good performance not only in multi-threaded applications, but also under poorly parallelized workload. Until now, AMD could not oppose anything to Turbo Boost, but in the new six-core processors, the symmetric answer has finally been found.
At the same time, AMD did not follow the difficult path beaten by Intel engineers. The Phenom II X6 processors do not have any special frequency control nodes that interactively monitor the processor temperature and current consumption. AMD's new six-core processors differ little from their predecessors in terms of microarchitecture. Therefore, AMD Turbo CORE technology is implemented in the simplest (or even the most convenient) way - through the "extension" of the Cool "n" Quiet technology. In other words, the decision to increase the clock frequency of AMD Phenom II X6 processors is made based on only one single factor - the number of processor cores loaded with work.
That is, in reality, AMD Turbo CORE technology works as follows: as soon as it is in an energy-saving state, with the Cool "n" Quiet reduced to 800 MHz frequency there are three or more processor cores - the processor raises the frequency of active cores by 400 or 500 MHz (depending on the processor model). At the same time, to ensure stability of operation at an increased frequency, the processor voltage rises by 0.15 V. It is important that with such automatic overclocking, the power consumption and heat dissipation of the processor does not go beyond the established 125-watt limit - the increase in the consumption of active cores is compensated by the fact that idle cores operate at 800 - megahertz frequency. But let's emphasize again, inactive cores are not disabled in AMD Phenom II X6. Despite the fact that their frequency decreases during idle time, when the turbo mode is turned on, they receive an increased supply voltage together with the overclocked cores. That is, AMD Turbo CORE technology in this sense inflicts a certain damage on the efficiency of the processor in states with its partial load.
For members of the Thuban processor line, Turbo CORE technology is as follows.
So far, AMD has announced two processors from this list: 125-watt Phenom II X6 1090T and 1055T, the rest of the models will be presented a little later - in the coming months. But AMD Turbo CORE technology works exactly the same in both current and future models. As an example, we looked at how it worked on the Phenom II X6 1090T. In full accordance with theory, with a load of 4 or more cores, their frequency was equal to 3.2 GHz.
But as soon as the number of cores loaded with work decreased to three, the multiplication factor increased, and the active cores reached a frequency of 3.6 GHz.
Thanks to Turbo CORE technology, the new Phenom II X6 1090T processor can rightfully be the flagship in the line of products offered by AMD. Despite the fact that the four-core Phenom II X4 965 released in August last year has a higher nominal clock frequency - 3.4 GHz, the older six-core will be faster in most tasks, because when loaded with three or fewer processor cores, the Phenom II X6 1090T operates at a frequency 3.6 GHz. To illustrate this fact, we compared the performance of the Phenom II X6 1090T and Phenom II X4 965 in the Fritz Chess Benchmark using different numbers of threads for calculations.
As expected, the Phenom II X4 965 turns out to be more efficient than the Phenom II X6 1090T with Turbo CORE enabled in the only case - when the calculations are performed with four cores. It is the change in this frequency within the framework of this technology that explains the fact that the increase in speed when switching from calculations in three threads to four in a six-core processor is significantly less than the increase in speed in all other cases.
But, as mentioned above, for an increase in performance when the processor is not fully loaded with work, you have to pay with increased power consumption. And these are not empty words - the following graph clearly shows how voracious the Phenom II X6 1090T with Turbo CORE technology becomes. To take readings, we used the Linx 0.6.3 utility in the settings of which we manually limited the number of threads created, and the processor power consumption was measured through a dedicated 12-volt power line.
In the event that the computing load falls on one, two or three of the six processor cores, Turbo CORE technology increases the total processor power consumption by 20-25 watts. As a result, under a three-thread load, the Phenom II X6 1090T with activated Turbo technology consumes about the same as it consumes when loading five out of six cores. Obviously, such a significant increase in power consumption is caused primarily by the addition to the supply voltage, which occurs when the turbo mode is turned on.
Thus, AMD Turbo CORE technology has a positive impact on performance, but it cannot be considered effective in terms of energy savings. However, it should be understood that its developers were significantly limited in funds, because Turbo CORE should be fully compatible with the existing Socket AM3 platforms. And here we can no longer make any claims: this technology does not require the installation of any software, it is transparent to the operating system and works quite well in all motherboards, and to activate it, you just need to support the Thuban processors in the BIOS.
By the way, in parallel, I would like to note the peculiarity of Turbo CORE operation on the Phenom II X6 1090T processor, which belongs to the Black Edition series. Due to the fact that this CPU is aimed at the audience of enthusiastic overclockers, it allows not only simple overclocking by changing the multiplier, but also more flexible configuration of the turbo mode. In BIOS Setup, along with setting the processor multiplier, an option appears to manually change the multiplier used when activating the turbo mode. This capability is offered on all Turbo CORE-enabled systems, but only on Black Edition processors.
Phenom II X6 lineup
Today AMD is announcing only two models of the new family: Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition and Phenom II X6 1055T.
Phenom II X6 1090T
We present the formal characteristics of these processors in the following table.
But such information about the older model Phenom II X6 1090T is given by the CPU-Z diagnostic utility.
However, AMD is not going to limit itself to two models, in the coming months the number of different representatives of the six-core Phenom II X6 processors will increase, plus quad-core processors based on a similar Thuban core with a disabled pair of cores will be added to them.
How we tested
For comparison with AMD's new six-core processors, we first chose a competitor's dual-core and quad-core processors that fall in the same price range. The six-core processor Core i7-980X, which is undoubtedly a much faster solution, also takes part in the tests "out of competition". In addition, in the diagrams, we present the results of the senior quad-core processor from AMD, whose successors in the mid-price segment should be the Phenom II X6. As a result, the following set of components was included in the test systems:
Processors:
AMD Phenom II X6 1090T (Thuban, 6 cores / 6 threads, 3.2 GHz, 6 MB L3);
AMD Phenom II X6 1055T (Thuban, 6 cores / 6 threads, 2.8 GHz, 6 MB L3);
AMD Phenom II X4 965 (Deneb, 4 cores / 4 threads, 3.4 GHz, 6 MB L3);
Intel Core i7-980X (Gulftown, 6 cores / 12 threads, 3.33 GHz, 12 MB L3);
Intel Core i7-930 (Bloomfield, 4 cores / 8 threads, 2.8 GHz, 8 MB L3);
Intel Core i7-920 (Bloomfield, 4 cores / 8 threads, 2.66 GHz, 8 MB L3);
Intel Core i7-860 (Lynnfield, 4 cores / 8 threads, 2.8 GHz, 8 MB L3);
Intel Core i5-750 (Lynnfield, 4 cores / 4 threads, 2.66 GHz, 8 MB L3);
Intel Core i5-670 (Clarkdale, 2 cores / 4 threads, 3.46 GHz, 4 MB L3).
Motherboards:
ASUS M4A89GTD PRO / USB3 (Socket AM3, AMD 890GX + SB850, DDR3 SDRAM);
ASUS P7P55D Premium (LGA1156, Intel P55 Express);
Gigabyte X58A-UD5 (LGA1366, Intel X58 Express).
Memory:
2 x 2 GB, DDR3-1600 SDRAM, 9-9-9-24 (Kingston KHX1600C8D3K2 / 4GX);
3 x 2 GB, DDR3-1600 SDRAM, 9-9-9-24 (Crucial BL3KIT25664TG1608).
Graphic card: ATI Radeon HD 5870.
HDD: Western digital VelociRaptor WD3000HLFS.
Power supply: Tagan TG880-U33II (880 W).
Operating system: Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate x64.
Drivers:
Intel Chipset Driver 9.1.1.1025;
ATI Catalyst 10.3 Display Driver.
Performance
Overall performance
The SYSmark 2007 benchmark, which shows the performance of systems under normal complex operation in common applications, does not rate AMD's new six-core processors too high. The fact is that not all applications can decompose the load into six equal threads, and this has a strong effect in this case. As for the Turbo CORE technology, in this case, as the results show, it does not fulfill the role of a panacea. Yes, the performance of the Phenom II X6 1090T is on par with the Phenom II X4 965, but no more. In general, AMD six-cores are inferior to Intel processors, which can be purchased for $ 200-300.
At the same time, the Phenom II X6 processors do a pretty good job of working on video content. Their respective result, generated from the performance measurement in Adobe After Effects, Adobe Photoshop, Adobe Illustrator, Sony Vegas and Windows Media Encoder, are on a par with the performance indicators of the younger Lynnfield, which, although they have four processor cores, fall into the same price category with AMD six-cores and are their direct competitors.
Gaming performance
We made sure that modern games cannot take advantage of six-core processors even during the Gulftown tests. In this case, we can only confirm that conclusion - gamers do not need six-core Phenom II X6 processors so far. The Phenom II X4 965 is slightly outperforming both six-cores from AMD in most cases, despite the fact that AMD tried to compensate for their lower clock speeds with Turbo CORE technology. And in Colin McRae: DiRT2, both Phenom II X6s demonstrate a suspiciously low fps number, which is obviously due to the optimization features of this game. In other words, the best choice for gamers at the moment seems to be Intel quad-core processors - it is their microarchitecture that most closely matches the load created by most games.
However, in all fairness, it should be noted that both Phenom II X4 and Phenom II X6 are powerful enough to provide a sufficiently high fps level. And this means that in reality, in gaming systems, the bottleneck will not be the processor, but the video card, to the correct choice of which gamers should be treated with full responsibility.
Synthetic tests
We inserted the test for the computation speed of 32 million decimal places of the number π into our study mainly due to the fact that it uses only one computational thread. This makes it an excellent benchmark for comparing processors operating in turbo mode, which is now supported not only by CPUs made by Intel, but also by AMD. And, as you can see from the diagrams, the Turbo CORE technology implemented in the Phenom II X6 turns out to be quite effective. The senior six-core AMD processor noticeably outperforms the senior Phenom IIX4, approaching the result to the Core i7-860 operating under a single-threaded load at 3.46 GHz.
In the 3DMark Vantage test, the processor component of which perfectly parallelizes the load across an arbitrary number of processor cores, the Phenom II X6 does not shine with its achievements. The most they can boast of is superiority over the quad-core Core i5-750. Core i7 processors, which in addition to their four cores have four virtual cores implemented on the basis of Hyper-Threading technology, turn out to be much faster.
Application performance
Having measured the performance of the Phenom II X6 in several common applications, we come to the disappointing conclusion that AMD's new six-core processors can only compete with the competitor's four-core processors that do not support Hyper-Threading technology. Processors of the Core i7 family, in which this technology is available, in most cases will show a higher speed. So the Phenom II X6 should probably be seen as an alternative to the Core i5 series, but nothing more.
However, the described picture is still not always observed. There is a whole range of tasks for which AMD's new processors are very well suited. These are tasks related to video processing and transcoding. In such applications, the relative performance of the Phenom II X6 looks much better than in all other cases, in them they perform even more successfully than the Core i7-860 or i7-930. So if your area of interest is closely related to working with media content, we sincerely recommend taking a closer look at the new AMD processors.
Energy consumption
Formally, the increase in the number of cores in the new Phenom II X6 processors did not entail a change in the calculated heat dissipation. Like other senior members of the Phenom II family, they have a design heat dissipation of 125 W. This is the result of both certain improvements in the technological process and the introduction of new processor stepping. In addition, one should not lose sight of the lower supply voltage compared to the four-core Phenom II X4 processors, limited in the specification of new products to 1.4 V.However, it is hard to believe that a 1.5-fold increase in the complexity of a semiconductor crystal had little effect on consumption. Therefore, in order to get a more detailed picture, we also carried out practical testing of power consumption. The following graphs show the total system consumption (without monitor) measured "after" the power supply, which is the sum of the power consumption of all components involved in the system. The efficiency of the power supply itself is not taken into account in this case. During the measurements, the load on the processors was created by the 64-bit version of the LinX 0.6.3 utility. In addition, to correctly estimate idle power consumption, we have activated all available energy-saving technologies: C1E, AMD Cool "n" Quiet and Enhanced Intel SpeedStep.
Without load, the consumption of Socket AM3 systems with Phenom II X6 processors is really only slightly higher than the consumption of a similar system with Phenom II X4 965.
The same picture is observed under load. As promised, the consumption of the new six-core AMD processors does not differ much from that of the older Phenom II X4. This means that platforms with Phenom II X6 can boast of higher energy efficiency not only than their predecessors, but also than systems with LGA1366 processors. However, they still lose to LGA1156 platforms in this parameter.
Overclocking
Unlike Intel, AMD did not implement a more modern technological process to release its six-core processor. But, despite this, we expect some increase in frequency potential from the new processors, because the changes in the 45nm process technology made by AMD's manufacturing partner Globalfoundries made it possible to reduce the specific heat release of each core even without introducing thinner transistors.To test this hypothesis, we tried to overclock the Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition provided to us for tests. Let us remind you that the peculiarity of this processor is that its multiplier is unlocked, which opens up an easy way to increase its clock frequency, which we used during the experiments. Stability tests during overclocking were checked using the LinX 0.6.3 utility. A Thermalright Ultra-120 eXtreme air cooler was used to cool the CPU. Turbo CORE technology was deactivated during overclocking experiments.
First of all, we decided to take a look at what maximum frequency the six-core Phenom II X6 1090T can operate at when using its nominal supply voltage, because, as we showed in our recent material, just such overclocking is the most energy efficient and does not lead to a dramatic increase in power consumption and heat release.
Practical tests have shown that stability without raising the processor voltage is not lost at the maximum frequency of 3.7 GHz.
It's funny that without increasing the supply voltage, we achieved the processor's operation at a frequency higher than the frequency in turbo mode, in which the voltage rises automatically. In other words, it seems that the increase in voltage is not at all necessary for Turbo CORE to work, however, it is not possible to turn it off.
We tried to overclock the processor with increasing voltage. For the second part of the tests, the CPU power was increased to 1.475 V - the voltage supplied to the processor in turbo mode. We deliberately did not "raise" the voltage too much, as its excessive increase for a six-core CPU is fraught with a catastrophic increase in power consumption and heat dissipation. In this mode, we were able to pass stability tests at 4.0 GHz.
At the same time, I would like to note that the processor could load the operating system and pass some tests at 4.2 GHz, but it still could not withstand full stability testing in this state. That is why we consider the achievement of a frequency of 4.0 GHz as the final result of overclocking experiments. That is, the frequency potential of Thuban is at least not inferior to the frequency potential of the four-core processors of the Phenom II X4 family. So overclockers with AMD's new product should certainly be happy.
Unfortunately, we cannot give details about the temperature conditions of the Phenom II X6 1090T in the overclocked state. The data on its own temperature, issued by the processor, do not correspond to reality and the values shown in all diagnostic utilities are clearly lower than the real values. Perhaps the thermal sensor of the first batch of six-core processors was not correctly calibrated, or this problem should be corrected in Motherboard BIOS boards. The thermal and electrical parameters of an overclocked processor can be estimated based on the fact that its real power consumption at 4.0 GHz under load is about 260 W.
4.0 GHz seems to be a good achievement for the Phenom II X6 1090T, this frequency is 25% higher than the nominal one. However, the performance of the overclocked six-core AMD turns out to be below the desired level. This is evidenced by the results of an express test in which we compared the performance of the overclocked Phenom II X6 1090T with the speed of the Core i7-930 processor, also overclocked to 4.0 GHz.
Surprisingly, a quad-core overclocked to 4 GHz with Intel Nehalem microarchitecture and Hyper-Threading technology almost always outperforms the six-core AMD processor. At the same time, it cannot be said that the frequency potential of Thuban exceeds the potential of Core i7 processors based on Lynnfield and Bloomfield cores. So the conclusion is quite unambiguous: the microarchitecture of modern Intel processors at the same clock frequency allows them to significantly outperform AMD processors. And AMD cannot compensate for this gap even with a 1.5-fold increase in the number of processing cores. So we come back to the conclusion that AMD's main lever in the fight for the consumer is pricing.
However, despite this, the Phenom II X6 1055T can become a very interesting object for overclocking. This CPU competes with the Core i7-750, in which there is no support for Hyper-Threading technology, and if the younger model of the six-core AMD can also overclock up to 4.0 GHz, then it may well outperform its overclocked rival in terms of speed.
conclusions
It seems that no one will deny the fact that the Stars (K10.5) microarchitecture used in modern AMD processors is outdated and loses to the Nehalem microarchitecture in many respects. However, this does not mean at all that AMD is unable to produce quite relevant products. In the face of the Phenom II X6, we see another confirmation of this. Of course, this six-core CPU lacks stars from the sky, but the manufacturer managed to adapt such a support and counterbalance system to the existing microarchitecture, which made the Phenom II X6 quite an interesting proposal that can find many adherents.Compared to the previous generation flagship Phenom II series processors, the six-core novelty boasts several advantages at once. Firstly, the Phenom II X6 has 1.5 times more cores, which significantly increases its performance under multi-threaded workload. Secondly, the Phenom II X6 has a quite acceptable level of power consumption, achieved by adjusting the 45nm technological process and lowering the voltage supply of the processor core. Thirdly, despite the increase in the number of cores, the overclocking potential of the new processors has not deteriorated at all - they freely reach the 4 GHz line. Fourthly, in the Phenom II X6, the manufacturer has implemented Turbo CORE technology, which increases the performance under a weakly parallelized load.
But the pricing policy makes the Phenom II X6 a really attractive solution, which AMD has become especially adept at lately. The official price of the Phenom II X6 1090T is set at $ 300, and the price of the younger model, the Phenom II X6 1055T, is $ 200. This means that AMD's six-core processors fall into the mid-range and are the only affordable multi-core processors of their kind. It is this factor that will, most likely, ensure their popularity with buyers.
Moreover, the tests have shown that six processor cores can be very useful when working with video content, and this kind of activity is becoming more and more popular every day. However, in many other applications, the six cores of the Phenom II X6 may prove useful. Six-core processors have raised the speed bar for Socket AM3 systems, and now they can compete in speed with platforms based on the older Core i5 processors with four cores. However, unfortunately, the six-core Phenom II X6 is still slower than the four-core Core i7 processors that support Hyper-Threading technology.
But in conclusion, I would like to emphasize that six cores are far from always better than four. The share of software that is not optimized for multicore architectures is still quite significant. This means that there is a whole layer of tasks for which the best choice dual-core and quad-core CPUs remain. These tasks, first of all, include modern games. Therefore, if you are looking for the basis for a gaming system, the Phenom II X6 is far from the best choice, despite all its strengths.
Check availability and cost of 6-core processors
Other materials on this topic
Six cores for desktop: Intel Core i7-980X Extreme Edition
Power consumption of overclocked processors
Looking Ahead: AMD Istanbul Six-Core Processor in Desktop