facebook rss twitter

Review: AMD Phenom II X6 1075T and Phenom II X4 970 Black Edition CPUs

by Tarinder Sandhu on 23 September 2010, 21:19 3.0

Tags: Phenom II X4 970 Black Edition, Phenom II X6 1075T, AMD (NYSE:AMD)

Quick Link: HEXUS.net/qaz6t

Add to My Vault: x

Final thoughts and rating

The introduction of seven new chips provides AMD with greater coverage at practically every price point below £200. In particular, the arrival of the Phenom II X6 1075T and Phenom II X4 970 BE nicely fills the £150-£200 bracket. This is important because Intel's current performance chips - Core i7, both sockets - retail north of £200 and we doubt the semiconductor giant will be moved enough to reduce pricing to match AMD's.

AMD isn't bringing any new technology to the table with the high-end chips, however, as both CPUs are based on existing silicon revisions from the quad- and hexa-core families. Rather, the approach here is to put pressure on the pricing of Intel's enthusiast-orientated CPUs, we believe.

Phenom II X6 1075T slots right in-between the faster 1090T (£205) and slower 1055T (£155), making it an ideal fit in AMD's six-core processor line-up. Pricing, at £189, is too close to the multiplier-unlocked 1090T's for our liking, making it difficult to recommend until retailers drop the 1075T to, say, £175. 

Our benchmarks show that the fastest quad-core chip that AMD has ever produced, Phenom II X4 970 BE, makes a little sense if your usual workloads aren't massively parallel, insofar as they can't take great advantage of more than four cores. Priced £10 below the Phenom II X6 1055T, its natural inter-family competitor, we find it a hard sell due to Turbo Core goodness in the six-core chips, which practically covers the frequency shortfall against quad-core CPUs when running apps on three, or fewer, cores. Unfortunately for the 970 BE it's difficult to look past the excellent 95W 1055T, if you can find one.

The optimist in us would have liked AMD to introduce a glut of high-performance, low-power chips before it transitions to a new microarchitecture. As it is, the X6 1075T and X4 970 BE serve to solidify AMD's position as price-to-performance leader in the sub-£200 processor market, and it's only the relative excellence of the surrounding Phenom chips that inhibits us from giving out recommendations.

The Good

Both high-end chips augment AMD's performance/value proposition
AMD provides a 500MHz Turbo Core boost on X6 1075T

The Bad

Simply fillers and speed-bumps
Quad-core chips' lack of Turbo Core is telling

HEXUS Rating

3/5
AMD Phenom II X4 970 BE

3.5/5
AMD Phenom II X6 1075T


HEXUS Where2Buy

The AMD Phenom II X4 970 BE is currently available from SCAN.co.uk*.

The AMD Phenom II X5 1075T is currently available from SCAN.co.uk*.

HEXUS Right2Reply

At HEXUS, we invite the companies whose products we test to comment on our articles. If any company representatives for the products reviewed choose to respond, we'll publish their commentary here verbatim.

*As always, UK-based HEXUS.community forum members will benefit from the SCAN2HEXUS Free Shipping initiative, which will save you a further few pounds plus also top-notch, priority customer service and technical support backed up by the SCANcare@HEXUS forum.



HEXUS Forums :: 32 Comments

Login with Forum Account

Don't have an account? Register today!
The 970 BE is going to be a hard sell against the 1055T. £10 extra gives you 6 cores instead of 4, a boosted clock speed almost as high as the 970. Is the fact that it's Black Edition enough?
Probably not. It only takes a 7.5% clock nudge (to 215MHz base clock) for the 1055T to become a 3.0GHz / 3.5GHz Turbo chip, just like the 1075T. I can see the 1075T being used by system integrators though: not everyone will be comfortable with even that small an overclock. Can't see any reason for an enthusiast to look anywhere else though (particularly if they can get hold of a 95W 1055T…)
Which are currently on sale at OCUK I think for £165
And OEM from CCL for ~ £155ish. Shame I have no need to build a new computer at the minute, really ;)
Tarinder, a question if I may? How does a benchmark that is bottlenecked in each case by the GPU illustrate relative gaming performance across the compared CPUs in the review?