GameSpot may receive revenue from affiliate and advertising partnerships for sharing this content and from purchases through links.

AMD Phenom 9900 Processor Hands-On

We take the AMD Phenom 9900 out for a spin. Find out about AMD's Spider platform and how the Phenom performs.

406 Comments

AMD has recently released the Spider platform, the first joint product launch resulting from the company's merger with graphics manufacturer ATI. The Spider platform consists of three new product lines: the ATI Radeon HD 3800-series GPU, the AMD Phenom CPU, and the AMD 7-series motherboard chipset. This is the first time AMD has been able to offer customers a complete processor, graphics, and motherboard system platform with AMD chips handling all three major functions. They also represent AMD's most advanced technology to date.

The ATI Radeon HD 3800 graphics chips offer more performance and more power efficiency than the Radeon HD 2900 series. The AMD 790 chipset line brings HyperTransport 3.0, PCI Express 2.0, and CrossFireX quad-GPU support to motherboard platforms. GPU updates and new chipsets are always welcome, but the AMD Phenom processor is the most anticipated part of the platform.

AMD earned a lot of credibility in the PC gaming community during the past four years because it was finally able to come up with a CPU design that could take the performance lead away from rival Intel. AMD's Athlon 64 line outperformed the Pentium 4, Intel's best offering at the time. Intel was able to recover the performance lead with its new Core 2 processor line, but AMD had established itself as a viable option among gamers and many looked forward to AMD's new processor, the AMD Phenom.

The AMD Phenom processor features what AMD calls a "true quad-core" design, which has all four processing cores on a single piece of silicon rather than two dual-core processing units side-by-side as Intel does to create its quad-core processors. Having all four processors on a single die allows all the cores on the Phenom chip to share a single L3 cache. Each core still has dedicated L1 and L2 cache, but the shared L3 cache helps improve multicore performance by reducing the amount of time it takes each core to access shared data.

The Phenom features a number of power-saving features designed to increase efficiency. The system can independently adjust the frequency of each core and dynamically disable unused parts of the CPU to reduce power consumption. The Phenom also has several thermal sensors that will automatically reduce the processor speed if heat becomes a problem, in case of CPU fan failure, for example.

The Athlon 64 has an integrated memory controller that helps reduce system memory access time, and AMD has continued supporting that feature in the Phenom by incorporating a DDR2 memory controller on the CPU die. The new integrated memory controller can handle DDR2 memory speeds, ranging from DDR2-400 up to DDR2-1066. AMD has also added HyperTransport 3.0 I/O data bus support, which greatly increases the amount of bandwidth available for data communications, provided that the processor is installed on an HT 3.0 capable motherboard. However, that does not mean that the Phenom will require a motherboard upgrade.

The Phenom is a Socket AM2+ chip, but it will work on current Socket AM2 motherboards. The backward compatibility support will allow current Socket AM2 Athlon 64 owners to upgrade to a Phenom processor without having to buy a new motherboard, but they might have to update the motherboard BIOS. Backward compatibility aside, AMD would still like customers to pick up an AMD 7-series motherboard to go along with every Phenom CPU.

The AMD 7-series chipsets all include Socket AM2+, HyperTransport 3.0, and PCI Express 2.0 support. The AMD 7-series includes three different chipsets: the AMD 790FX at the very high end, the AMD 790X at the merely high end, and the AMD 770 at the mainstream. The main difference between the chipsets is primarily the number of video cards each one supports. AMD 790FX motherboards will be able to support up to four video cards in CrossFireX configuration. AMD 790X boards will handle up to two cards, and the AMD 770 will be the chipset for single-card systems.

You can use the AMD OverDrive utility to overclock your CPU and memory

AMD will supply motherboard manufacturers with an AMD OverDrive utility that will let users tweak settings, such as CPU speeds, memory timings, and voltages. Experienced users will be able to take advantage of the granular options, but the application will also include an automated "Auto Clock" overclocking feature for beginners.

System Setup: Intel Core 2 Q6700, Intel Core 2 Duo E6700, Intel 975XBX2, AMD Phenom 9900, AMD Phenom 9600, ASUS M3A32-MVP Deluxe, 2GB Corsair XMS Memory (1GBx2), 750GB Seagate 7200.10 SATA Hard Disk Drive, Windows XP Professional SP2. Graphics Card: GeForce 8800 GTX, beta Nvidia ForceWare 169.09.
[Update: We listed the Intel Core 2 Q6700 and the Intel Core 2 E6700 incorrectly as the Q6600 and E6600, respectively, in the system setup. We have corrected the mistake and apologize for the error.]

We tested the 2.6GHz quad-core AMD Phenom 9900 against the 2.66GHz quad-core Intel Core 2 Q6700 to see how the two processors compared on a clock-for-clock basis.

The Intel Core 2 Q6700 turned in the better numbers in all of our tests. The Intel chip may have had an extra 60MHz to work with, but that's not nearly enough clock speed to account for the size of the performance gap. We also included the Intel Core 2 E6700 to see if we could spot any performance differences between dual-core and quad-core. The extra cores seemed to help most in the 3DMark06 CPU benchmark, the Valve Particle test, and the Crysis physics test.

The current Phenom chip design has a bug, or erratum as AMD prefers to call it, that may cause the system to hang in rare instances, such as while running in virtualization mode with high utilization across all four cores. All Phenom processors, including the Phenom 9700 and 9900 shipping in mid-to-late Q1 2008, will have revised cores with an erratum fix in place. Motherboard manufacturers will soon release new BIOS updates to resolve the issue in current Phenom processors, but the fix will result in some performance degradation.

AMD stressed to GameSpot that the problem is extremely rare. So rare, in fact, that users will be able to use the AMD OverDrive utility to disable the errata fix to get full performance out of the processor. The Asus motherboard we tested did not have a BIOS fix, but we did not notice any system instability when we benchmarked our Phenom engineering sample using the motherboard's shipping BIOS. Please keep in mind that our test results show the Phenom running at full power without any errata fix limitations.

Judging by the benchmark results, it looks like AMD will need to increase clock speeds or lower the price of the Phenom to stay competitive with Intel, and it looks like AMD is doing a little of both. AMD has told GameSpot that the Phenom 9900 will sell for "below $350" when the chip arrives next spring. In comparison, the Intel Core 2 Q6700 currently retails for just under $550, but we wouldn't be surprised if Intel cuts the price to give the Phenom 9900 a warm welcome. AMD will also ship a 2.4GHz Phenom 9700 at around the same time for "below $300." Consumers can currently find the 2.2GHz Phenom 9500 and 2.3GHz Phenom 9600 in retail for about $250 and $275, respectively.

The AMD Phenom certainly isn't the Lebron James, Intel-killer many had hoped for, but it also isn't a Kwame Brown-like disappointment. The numbers show us that the CPU is competitive. If AMD can increase the clock speeds and keep the price affordable, the Phenom could very well develop into a star.

Got a news tip or want to contact us directly? Email news@gamespot.com

Join the conversation
There are 406 comments about this story
406 Comments  RefreshSorted By 
GameSpot has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to toxic conduct in comments. Any abusive, racist, sexist, threatening, bullying, vulgar, and otherwise objectionable behavior will result in moderation and/or account termination. Please keep your discussion civil.

Avatar image for Vasot
Vasot

1115

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By Vasot

They used XP because they are light and faster in games from Vista Vista is a resource hog right now and has some stability issues Microsoft is trying to fix it with SP1 But until then XP RULEZ. ------------------------- As about Phenom it is a good cheap solution for the average gamer that does not have big cash But Intel Core technology is still the KING for the high end gamer

Upvote • 
Avatar image for marianox1
marianox1

42

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

Edited By marianox1

this processors are great, just look at the prices between the Intel Core 2 Q6700 @ 2.66GHz and AMD Phenom 9600 @ 2.3GHz this is just the beginning ;)

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Last_Ride
Last_Ride

38

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Last_Ride

Even with these results, I think that it is still a good investment to buy the AM2+ compared to the upcoming X38 chipset. This socket will be able to support upcoming AMD processors like AM3. Much cheaper and easier... which is what most gamers want.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Last_Ride
Last_Ride

38

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Last_Ride

Even with these results, I think that it is still a good investment to buy the AM2+ compared to the upcoming X38 chipset. This socket will be able to support upcoming AMD processors like AM3. Much cheaper and easier... which is what most gamers want.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for dallasanderson1
dallasanderson1

160

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By dallasanderson1

mate to be honest i couldnt really make head or tail of it till i read most of the comments my fellow users left..thanks guys for making it a little simpler for some one like me kind regards

Upvote • 
Avatar image for deactivated-6240536ee3567
deactivated-6240536ee3567

65

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

It's good that AMD is trying to compete. With no competition Intel would get fat and lazy.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for sinister_id
sinister_id

49

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By sinister_id

The Phenom does NOT have better multitasking. Look at the 3DMark scores. One of Intel's 'fake' quad cores beats it clock for clock(60mhz doesn't make a difference) and 3DMark definitely pushes all available cores the their limit.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for pablomartin2004
pablomartin2004

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By pablomartin2004

I dont want only Speed, why all of you only see the speed?, The Phenom is not only speed, a Woman i not only a body with flesh, is much more. The Phenom is better multitasking operation because the four independent cores, and thats is very important to me too.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for deactivated-5e376fa88bd45
deactivated-5e376fa88bd45

4403

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

A quick look at the benchmarks and it appears that AMD still can't compete as well as I hope they would. Price wise, I don't even know if AMD can even turn in a viable profit that will fund thier future projects. This to me is really important. Why? Because the last thing I don't want, and i'm sure that no one else would want is a monopoly on the processor market. Because monopoly= full control and ability to jack up the prices as high as they want to maximize profits. Obviously it won't be ridiculously priced but it would prove higher had the competition not existed. We need another to keep that hypothetical monopoly broken and ensure that us customers are paying alot cheaper with competetive pricing for our CPUs. Had it been Intel in AMD's situation, I would have said we need Intel to stay alive.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for donmega1
donmega1

1456

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By donmega1

you gotta pay the cost to be the boss...............

Upvote • 
Avatar image for bubbalooga
bubbalooga

124

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

Edited By bubbalooga

[This message was deleted at the request of a moderator or administrator]

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Bavoke
Bavoke

585

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Bavoke

cheaper thing is lower performance, that's the way it is XP Bavoke 8)

Upvote • 
Avatar image for matti89
matti89

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By matti89

AMD IS THE BEST!!!!!!!! dont u tards know that all that mathers is PRICE/POWER RATIO!!!! meaning amd is best by far and with the extra money u save on the processor u ca buy ram and other stuffs=P and about the ati thing for the price of one 8800gtx i can buy two 3870 and run em in crossfire mode and outmatch 8800gtx BY FAR SO STFU ITS ALL ABOUT PRICE/POWER RATIO

Upvote • 
Avatar image for abbnormmal
abbnormmal

315

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By abbnormmal

Lets not forget that the Phenoms are priced to reflect to lesser performance.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for sinister_id
sinister_id

49

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By sinister_id

To all of you who say the Phenom is amazing. You're wrong. It's only being compared to Intel's processors that have been out for quite some time and still doesn't even beat those. The Phenom can't even come close to competing with the QX6850, let alone the new QX9650. Phenom is a waste of silicon.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Stealth_B
Stealth_B

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

Edited By Stealth_B

it's a nice addition to the market. might become a target for the AMD fans but it's not as good as they said it would be. true quad-core? who are they to say which one is the true one? look... the 'true quad core' sucks compared to Intel's giants... which were on the market way before AMD said anything about the Phenom.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for bubbalooga
bubbalooga

124

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

Edited By bubbalooga

[This message was deleted at the request of a moderator or administrator]

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Infinite-Zr0
Infinite-Zr0

13284

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Infinite-Zr0

Reason why this site is called Gamespot, not Techspot. They didn't even bother with the Q6600 or E6850

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Xerran
Xerran

190

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By Xerran

I am the winner, I hereby declare the pi$$ing contest over as I get a 15300 in 3DMark06 on my Q6600 B3 Stepping and 8800 GT SLi.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for RiVeX
RiVeX

47

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By RiVeX

Looks like its a pretty sweet setup, Doesn't look any better than Intels, but at least they are not going to roll over and die on us..........

Upvote • 
Avatar image for nippon00
nippon00

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By nippon00

i'm just glad there is are two cpu companies so that the industry won't end up being like just a **** microsoft. i still have bugs with my vista os.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for megadisc
megadisc

140

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

Edited By megadisc

totally unbelievable !

Upvote • 
Avatar image for NYJonesy26
NYJonesy26

33

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By NYJonesy26

I hope AMD can crank out another Intel-killer. I've always preferred AMD's processors. They just seem to be more efficient.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for keisuke1
keisuke1

26

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

Edited By keisuke1

Lets see the results against the Intel core 2 quad extreme, ^_^

Upvote • 
Avatar image for PicardGamer4
PicardGamer4

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By PicardGamer4

One year after Vista and still no True 64 bit head-to-head performance test between Intel and AMD? AMD is supposed to be superior in 64 bit computing not the 32 bit. Come on Vista sp1. Maybe you can convince GameSpot to run a 64 bit test.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for RaiKageRyu
RaiKageRyu

4204

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By RaiKageRyu

Intel is just too good.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for OgreB
OgreB

2523

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By OgreB

@fastpunk Thats what it said in the charts...go look for yourself.....

Upvote • 
Avatar image for unndead16
unndead16

28

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By unndead16

It's bad enough that ATI had to sell to AMD, now it looks like ATI's bad luck came along with the merger!!! It's really sad!!!

Upvote • 
Avatar image for fastpunk
fastpunk

1855

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 48

User Lists: 0

Edited By fastpunk

@OgreB: Toms Hardware is hardly a reliable source. I'm not saying that these new Phenoms are better than Intel Core 2 cause they aren't but 2 times the power draw?! That's a load of bull.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for OgreB
OgreB

2523

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By OgreB

The more I read about it the worst it gets... Just came back from Toms hardware..yikes.. Especially as the AMD Quads draw 2x the power underload as a comprable Intel.. Just like ATIs GPU...Runs hot and sucks juice... I was really kinda of rooting for AMD... Always a step behind.... The only thing you can do is OC them.... It's like a nitrous oxide Gremlin trying to race a V-12 Jaguar...sure you might catch up..or even pass...but you might blow your motor along the way....!!! ( AMD vs Intel ) Never OCed in my life...don't want to be forced to either... I guess I'll be getting that Q6700 EE after all....come on lower prices..!!!

Upvote • 
Avatar image for DINGO770
DINGO770

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By DINGO770

Yea, I was an AMD fanboy when they produced a superior product at a good price but now their product just can't stand up. This new processor is good for the price but that is about all. To be completely honest, if this new product line doesn't sell well. AMD will go out of business within 2 years (check their plummeting stock price). Hopefully Apple will still put these processors in the next line of macbook pros which would match well since they use less power. Like said in a previous post, AMD is no longer trying to compete for the high-end gaming market (come on they bought ATI). It really isn't even fair to compare these two products for the specific purpose of high-end gaming.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Konfusion
Konfusion

5049

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Konfusion

Hardware Virtualization ??? I know this is all about games, but I'm a big fan of VMs as well... a quad-core processor with virtualization is a Virtual Machine user's dream...

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Stoo2k
Stoo2k

47

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Stoo2k

I for one am pleased to see a cheap quad-core that holds it's own at stock settings against the nearest Intel competitors. 10 - 20 fps is a small performance hit for a $200 saving especially when you're looking at benchmark scores above 100fps (See UT3 test) And the 9600 actually out-performs the E6700 in all but the UT3 test, brilliant for gamers on a budget! Where I see these chips doing well will be in the already installed user base of AM2 socket owning gamers looking for a relatively pain free upgrade. It'll be nice to see if they drop a chip with a higher clock speed than 2.6ghz any time soon though, not sure I can be bothered switching from my 5200 just yet.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Justinisrad
Justinisrad

40

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Justinisrad

@Bane546 Before you randomly start screaming doom and gloom for AMD you should probably keep this in mind...: Jochen Polster (manager of AMD Germany) emphasised that the Phenom quad-core processor does not represent a high-end model for now. AMD plans to price the Phenom models markedly lower than Intel's quad-core models. Don't act like your some sort of industry expert.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for bane546
bane546

45

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By bane546

@ballroomwest "Sometimes I wish gamespot wasn't so, well,...... American! " They are American and live in America and it's an American based website so what would you expect... ? And basketball is not just an american thing so i'm actually surprised you don't know lebron james, kwame i can understand tho. if ur just not a sports fan that's a completely different to start out with. Anyways, Intel will never let AMD have any significant percentage of the market share now that they percieve AMD as a threat to their market shares. Ever since AMD integrated memory controll on the die and beat out Intel performance wise, Intel's R&D department has been working non-stop to never let that happen again. Intel has so many contracts and relationships already well established so that if AMD ever wants to truly compete they would need some completely revolutionary new chipset to hope to get its foot really in the door. Intel already has the majority of the PC market and now all macs (at least most macs) are shipping with intel chips now as well. It just comes down to resources and Intel has more by far. They were complacent and let AMD get close, but even now the new "true quad core" still doesn't outperform Intel's older quad-chipsets. I love AMD for offering competition to make both companies make a better product, but I can never see them ever being anything except a niche company for enthusiasts or gamers looking for a little cheaper rig.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Themaazandar
Themaazandar

30

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

Edited By Themaazandar

I'm glad AMD is finally thinking about heat issues, Intel has already had that one fixed for a while now. What I believe is that Intel seems to aim for the general purpose user while AMD seems to aim for the gamer. We might just see these companies take different paths of development and that could be interesting. AMD is still young but it has a lot of potential.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for paabss
paabss

1001

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By paabss

wow!!! The Q6600 beats this new chips by far! ouch AMD is in trouble.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for predatorGS
predatorGS

46

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

Edited By predatorGS

Just look at the test results at tom's hardware.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for doomdpanic
doomdpanic

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By doomdpanic

vista doesnt suck at all you only need a brain to use it and a decent rigg to run it

Upvote • 
Avatar image for rarson
rarson

936

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 18

User Lists: 0

Edited By rarson

"even if intel has better processors that wont convince me to get one." So if AMD goes out of business, I guess you'll switch to Cyrix, huh?

Upvote • 
Avatar image for rarson
rarson

936

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 18

User Lists: 0

Edited By rarson

"AMD needs to shape up a bit, or in the not too distant future Intel will have the same monopoly- hold over processors that Microsoft has over (bug ridden) operating systems!" Yeah, but as long as AMD can remain in business, even if Intel does wind up (again) with the lion's share of the market, there's nothing to worry about. The whole reason AMD started kicking butt was because Intel was on top and became complacent. AMD's surge towards popularity really put pressure on Intel, and that directly resulted in the Core 2 being such a great CPU. The problem with AMD right now is that AMD is still reeling from the purchase of ATI. ATI was started to get trounced pretty bad by Nvidia and AMD themselves were starting to hurt, and to top it all off, AMD spends a load of cash to buy ATI. So far, AMD hasn't realized any benefit from that purchase. But already, ATI is already starting to make up some ground with their new chips that offer competitive performance for a great price, so things are starting to look up. AMD's next CPU needs to be a good one, and hopefully they can start integrating the GPU's to offer something that Intel cannot. All in all, AMD spent a LONG time in the market without having close to Intel's share, so I see this as another bump in the road, another swapping of "who currently makes the best CPU," but this time, there's just a little bit more to worry about with AMD having acquired ATI. Either that'll help them or hurt them, but I think it's just too early to tell. We can all agree that the consumers benefit from having both companies offering products.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for igl
igl

215

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

Edited By igl

The Q6600 is so missing from this...

Upvote • 
Avatar image for revolutionary0
revolutionary0

61

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By revolutionary0

i understand that the price is cheaper but in my experiences with building and disassembling pc's and mac's the intel processors come out on top with the amd's not far behind but with some key issues the amd's currently in the past few years been built exclusivley for gamer who want performance in the game. the intels however were building for everyday usage and moderate games usage. now the tides have turned with e6;q; and the x series of these things built for games and graphic design and supid speeds with really high price tags because they are built for speed, games and design and not for the pcs you buy on sale at best buy on sunday morning. the price however can be combated with the price tags for the core2duo's spanning many plans inluding under 120 dollars i know that doesn't sound like alot but it doest the trick for all your gaming needs it even runs crysis on high assuming you have the right graphics card to go with it.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for KandyKornMan
KandyKornMan

310

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By KandyKornMan

my first pc I built was going to be intel but the high prices pushed me away.so I went with amd and have stuck with them ever since.even if intel has better processors that wont convince me to get one.always better to wait on new tech and get it for a cheaper price later down the road.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Nuclear_Kernel
Nuclear_Kernel

163

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Nuclear_Kernel

I had both AMD and Intel processors there both good for Guys the price is the most important part for choosing a new computer. "Enthusiasts" make only a small percentage of the market, barely 10% according to a study. If they make a product that has a good performance/ price ratio they will win. Nokia doesn' t sell tens of millions of N80, but models like 1200. Remember is better to have many competitors not just one.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for ballroomwest
ballroomwest

41

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

Edited By ballroomwest

Sometimes I wish gamespot wasn't so, well,...... American! Why liken the processors to basketball players noone outside of the US has heard of? Lebron James and Kwame Brown??? Who?? I had to google'em. Why not use Metaphors like Spiderman or James Bond, or even Mario/Sonic that are internationally known heroes/figures around the globe. Its a game (and sometimes movie-tie in)website afterall. Not an American Sports site. Anyway back on track..... AMD needs to shape up a bit, or in the not too distant future Intel will have the same monopoly- hold over processors that Microsoft has over (bug ridden) operating systems! Good that they finally got a Quad-Core out though.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for rarson
rarson

936

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 18

User Lists: 0

Edited By rarson

"Point is, AMD just owned Intel, i have a core 2 CPU but i must admit the Phenom 9900 owns, competitive performance for 200$ less (not as good performance but the difference is no way near worth 200$) Now that is ownage." Uh, sure, until you take into account things like overclockability, performance, and reality. AMD's chips have never overclocked as well as Intel's, and we've seen no reason to suspect any different with Phenom. So until Phenoms can be tweaked up an extra GHz, the real world value ends up being Intel. I've owned more AMD chips than Intel, and I love AMD, but Phenom isn't good enough for what Intel has at the moment. AMD has a lot of catching up to do.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for BorkaBonum
BorkaBonum

92

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 0

Edited By BorkaBonum

Nightwalker, the AMD Phenom will not give better results with a HD3800-card, it only allows the videocard to theoreticly run PCIE2.0 at 5.0gb/s while a regular CPU is usually capping the PCIE to 2,0gb/s out of the PCIEx16 cap of 2,5gb/s. But no videocard to date has capped the first generation PCIEx16 yet so there's little need - though AMD Crossfire will increase performance slightly using PCIE2.0 since Crossfire is better at consuming bandwith than for example SLi. MSI has the best Spider-enabled platforms to date, their K9A2 Platinum is superior to the rest of the 790FX in both price and compability (only mobo supporting dual-slot-VGA Crossfire-X). And for DirectX10... Uhm, I hope you do understand this was a CPU test and not a visual benchmark? DirectX10 consumes alot more power than DX9 since the programming under DX10 is far from acceptable and Windows Vista consumes quite a significant lot of power compared to WinXP. AMD will have more finished processors Q1 next year without the L3-Cache Ghosts and so on. I find it to be a great boost in performance for Phenom already at only 200mhz increased clock - and since the unit is built in 65nm just as the Core2 Duo processors it is most likely to clock great once locks are getting rid of with Black Edition or 9900.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for rarson
rarson

936

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 18

User Lists: 0

Edited By rarson

They used XP because Vista sucks and no one uses it.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for nightwalker9000
nightwalker9000

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By nightwalker9000

I don't understand Gamespot anymore. They run these tests using only a small bit of hardware. You can't get accurate readings from what they used. For one, they used an 8800GTX for everything. Come on already, the spider setup uses the ATi 3k series, it even says it in the review. The Intel processors are running on an Intel board, unlike AMD on an Asus board. True, it uses the 7 chipset, but the board is a 3rd party design. The memory too, its Corsair XMS 2GB, of what? The Phenom supports a large range of speed, get specific. Finally, for the love of god, why WinXP? DX10 isn't even being put to use here.

Upvote •