Home > Processors > AMD Phenom II X6 1035T 1045T 1055T 1075T Vs 1090T six core processors

AMD Phenom II X6 1035T 1045T 1055T 1075T Vs 1090T six core processors

August 27th, 2010 Leave a comment Go to comments

AMD Phenom II X6 1035T 1045T 1055T 1075T Vs 1090T six core processors

All of the 1035T, 1045T, 1055T and 1075T and 1090T are six core processors based upon AMD’s K10 microarchitecture. These six core processors are ready to take on stiff competition from the Lynnfield series of processors from Intel.

While the 1055T and the 1090T part were launched initially in April 2010, the 1035T, 1045T and 1075T parts are expected to be launched in the third quarter of 2010.

The following table gives you a quick glance of the differences in these processors.

Table : AMD Phenom II X6 processors

Model Frequency Turbo Frequency TDP Launch
1035T 2.6 GHz 3.1 GHz 95 Watts Q3 2010
1045-T 2.7 GHz 3.2 GHz 95 Watts Q3 2010
1055-T 2.8 GHz 3.3 GHz 125 Watts April 2010
1075T 3.0 GHz 3.5 GHz 125 Watts Q3 2010
1090T 3.2 GHz 3.7 ? GHz 125 Watts April 2010

Pricing Information

Several sources including newengg and Amazon are quoting 1055T processor at $199 – which have been competitively priced to take on the Intel’s processors.The fastest of the line 1090T – a 3.2 GHz part is being seen around $290.00. If you are a gaming enthusiast, this is something you would like to grab.

Are you an expert in your field and wish to write for http://starredreviews.com ? Get paid $3 per article you write – check out the details at Writing for starredreviews.com

The 1035T, 1045T, 1055T, 1075T and 1090T share some common architectural properties since they belong to the same Thumban series of processors. All of them support the Turbo Core, which means that the core frequency can be stepped up on demand. For example, while the nominal frequency of the 1075T is 3.0 GHz, the turbo frequency is 3.5 GHz. Moreover, the architecture allows 3 of the 6 cores to be shut down if the process require more

AMD’s design of this new hex core processors has won several positive reviews. The gamers have, in particular, liked the motherboard compatibility of this processor with the AM3 based motheboards.

The biggest advantage of the AM3 socket is that it supports DDR3 in addition to the DDR2.

Here are some more questions and answers on these processors

Q. Will the 1035T, 1045T, 1055T, 1075T and 1090T also fit in the AM2+ socket ?

A. Theoritically yes. The 1055T processor will, for example fit in the AM2+ socket and will, in that case have its DDR2, in place of the DDR3 memory controller taking control.You would, however, like to use a motherboard with AM3 socket in place of AM2+ socket to unleash the power of the six core processor. The DDR2 is officially limited to 800 MT/s as against the 1333 GT/s of the DDR3.

Q. Can you suggest some motherboard for 1055T or the 1090T ?

A. A good question. You may like to take a look at GIGABYTE GA-890XA-UD3 AM3 ( available are $119 at newegg.com) or the MSI 890FXA-GD70 ( tigerdirect has it for $217). You may also check ASUS Crosshair IV Formula AM3 or other AM3 based motherboards. Just make sure they explicitly say that they support Phenom II six core processors.

Q. Is 1090T great for gaming ?

A. Apparently it looks like 1090T has been received very enthusiastically among gamers. The processors is a very high end, and does not need a separate or special motherboard. So, if you take into account the cost of the processor plus the motherboard it is very cost effective against the Intel processors.

Q. Which Intel processor should I consider against the AMd’s six core 1090T processor.

A. You may like to take a look at Intel’s Core i7-980X. However, the core i7-980X is priced at $999 as against $290 for the AMD’s 1090T. The core i7-980X has been shown to be faster in benchmarks. You may also like to consider intel’s i7-975 ( $745 part) , i7-930 ($289 part , 2.8 GHz, quad core) and the  i7-920 ($269 part , 2.66 GHz, quad core).

The closest parts in comparison are the Intel’s i7-930 and i7-920. You may like to check their benchmarks.

Categories: Processors Tags:
  1. Mike Masone
    October 3rd, 2010 at 19:47 | #1

    The Table list out frequency in both the second and the third column. I belive that the third column should be listed at turbo frequency.

  2. William
    October 23rd, 2010 at 00:58 | #2

    This is a really good review in my opinion: it’s concise, factual and you’ve even answered some common user questions. I can read this review and say I’ve learned something new today, instead of (like so many other reviews), trawling through pages and pages of information.

    As for the actual CPU’s under review, I think they are a very nice choice for anyone thinking of building a powerful games machine; if doesn’t matter if it takes more cores to beat Intel – at this price and with this level of backwards compatibility I find it almost impossible to turn down. The only problem I can envisage is the apps and games that don’t take advantage of the extra cores – even with Turbo Core I think the core performance of the i5 and i7 would be better. Plus, the i5 clocks like a demon, despite it’s use of a controversial and limited socket technology.

    These new 45nm parts look too good to turn down. I want one for video transcoding (alongside the CUDA/Stream engine), and I prefer real cores to threading units especially for this kind of task and heavy multi-tasking. AMD has done a wonderful job optimising an older but more compatible and price-friendly product without sacrificing much in the way of performance. Knockout.

  3. admin
    March 12th, 2011 at 14:27 | #3

    @Mike Masone
    Hi Mike, thanks for pointing the Typo. The Table has been updated to reflect this.