sheldorisafk Posted April 27, 2010 Posted April 27, 2010 (edited) pure sexyness! I want one! I earlier said I wanted one, but I think I'm gonna reconsider for now. My 955 keeps me happy enough as it is. Edited April 27, 2010 by sheldorisafk Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bp9801 Posted April 28, 2010 Posted April 28, 2010 I'll take one. Be a very nice upgrade over my E6600. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larzeee Posted April 28, 2010 Posted April 28, 2010 Would there be price drop for the Phenom 965? I hope... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oh_fubar Posted April 28, 2010 Posted April 28, 2010 they have been dropping http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/Se...mp;Sku=A79-1965 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
potatochobit Posted April 28, 2010 Posted April 28, 2010 I hope they dont drop too much I need to resell my 720 first *cough* Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joel.monteiro Posted April 29, 2010 Posted April 29, 2010 wht cooling was used for this review? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joel.monteiro Posted April 29, 2010 Posted April 29, 2010 http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2010...black-edition/8 over here the i7 beat the phenom II x6 bye a large margin even the phenom II x4 was better is this real? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Praz Posted April 29, 2010 Posted April 29, 2010 http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2010...black-edition/8 over here the i7 beat the phenom II x6 bye a large margin even the phenom II x4 was better is this real? Unless I looked at the wrong charts no two runs were even run at the same clocks. What type of comparison is that? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
El_Capitan Posted April 30, 2010 Posted April 30, 2010 They really need to run better comparisons. 1. i7 980x @ 4.1 GHz 2. i7 980x w/HT @ 4.1 GHz 3. i7 930 @ 4.1 GHz 4. i7 930 w/HT @4.1 GHz 5. 1090T @ 4.1 GHz 6. i7 980x @ 4.6 GHz 7. i7 980x w/HT @ 4.4 GHz 1. Find the performance at the same frequencies. Does it perform better at multi-threading tasks than the i7 930 without Hyper-threading? What about with Hyper-threading? 2. Does it perform better than the i7 980x without Hyper-threading? What about with Hyper-threading? 3. How much better can the i7 980x perform at top speeds? What I want to know is how it compares to the i7 930 with Hyper-threading at 4.1 GHz. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drdeath Posted April 30, 2010 Posted April 30, 2010 (edited) Unless I looked at the wrong charts no two runs were even run at the same clocks. What type of comparison is that? i7 930 beat it at lower clock speed in 6 out of 8 tests.... Epic fail in my book. Amd needs new architecture to make an impact. Edited April 30, 2010 by Drdeath Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cirro Posted April 30, 2010 Posted April 30, 2010 I use my cpu's for video encoding, compression and heavy gaming.. this might as well of not even come out to users like me. i don't see why you would want/need a 6core if you didn't want it for those purposes, to me they tried to hit a market area, but could of just used a re-structure instead of adding more cores to a already downhill CPU battle Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rourkchris Posted April 30, 2010 Posted April 30, 2010 You guys are so negative. I think this looks like a real winner for AMD and us. A $300 6 core CPU that will work on new chipsets and older ones. Gives a nice upgrade path for many and let's many systems last a lot longer with an affordable upgrade. I know I'll be doing a couple of builds with this CPU soon, especially if these hit 4Ghz consistently on air. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts