premiumgfx Posted December 7, 2010 Posted December 7, 2010 OCC Reviewer ajmatson evaluates the latest CPU in AMD's hexa-core line-up, the Phenom II X6 1100T. Promising a stock speed of 3.3GHz and 3.7GHz via Turbo Core, how will the 1100T compare to it's predecessor, the 1090T? Read on and find out - http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/phenom2_x6_1100t/ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IVIYTH0S Posted December 7, 2010 Posted December 7, 2010 Good review sir, but as expected, I'd still pick a 1055T over it Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojunikey7 Posted December 8, 2010 Posted December 8, 2010 Good review sir, but as expected, I'd still pick a 1055T over it Why? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IVIYTH0S Posted December 8, 2010 Posted December 8, 2010 Why? Because it offered nothing that the 1055T can't accomplish for cheaper Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bp9801 Posted December 8, 2010 Posted December 8, 2010 Because it offered nothing that the 1055T can't accomplish for cheaper Plus the fact that 1100T OC'd about the same as the other X6 chips on air. All in all though, its a great chip, hell of a performer for 300 bucks. Good review Alan! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccokeman Posted December 8, 2010 Posted December 8, 2010 You can;t look at it that way as the majority of the user out there do not overclock and buy processors based on the clock speed. Think how many boards Intel sells that sit there and run the stock clock speeds and how many people buy aftermarket boards and never ratchet them up. If you were a non overclocker then the increased clock speed is the selling point. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bp9801 Posted December 8, 2010 Posted December 8, 2010 You can;t look at it that way as the majority of the user out there do not overclock and buy processors based on the clock speed. Think how many boards Intel sells that sit there and run the stock clock speeds and how many people buy aftermarket boards and never ratchet them up. If you were a non overclocker then the increased clock speed is the selling point. So true. I built a rig for a buddy of mine who has no interest in overclocking. I got him the highest speed processor available at the time for his budget (X3 720) and he is more than satisfied with it and doesn't think OCing would do anything for him. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IVIYTH0S Posted December 9, 2010 Posted December 9, 2010 You can;t look at it that way as the majority of the user out there do not overclock and buy processors based on the clock speed. Think how many boards Intel sells that sit there and run the stock clock speeds and how many people buy aftermarket boards and never ratchet them up. If you were a non overclocker then the increased clock speed is the selling point. Ya I know, but since I WILL overclock it. I don't see a point to anything about the minimum when they all seem to max out the same. (even for the unlocked multi, there are cheaper alternatives ) unless extreme cooling was introduced to the equation, a locked multi X6 would be limited far quicker by temps than by bclock potential. (not to mention my friends 1055T was set it and forget it easily OC'd to 3.8ghz, I still have to go over there and see what I can max it out at. That was just quick because I was tired and didn't want to get into a long overclock session) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts