I'm trying to decide between a 930 and a 1090T (or 1055T) for my new workstation. Thing is that I'd overclock either set-up as high as possible (tho stability is paramount) so it's harder for me to use reviews and benchmarks to compare the two as most do not include the OC'd CPU's.
TASKS:
3D modeling. Photoshop. Simulations. 3D rendering. After Effects. 1080p editing.
I can fully use any core, thread and Mhz while rendering. However, smooth performance while working is also very important.
CORE SYSTEM:
Samsung 1000GB SATA-300 7200RPM 32MB HD103SJ Spinpoint F3
CoolerMaster HAF 922 (High Air Flow)
Corsair TX650 Watt PSU
Noctua NH-D14
EVGA GTX 460 1024MB 675/3600 EE (External Exhaust)
LG H22LS30 DVD
THE DILEMMA
I found a few benchmarks which pitted the OC'd CPU's against each other.
http://www.extremeoverclocking.com/reviews/processors/AMD_Phenom_II_X6_1090T_15.html
Both at 3.8 Ghz and it's obvious that the 1090T is faster at multi-threaded applications, but only by a small margin. This while the 930 is faster in single-threaded applications, but by a larger margin.
Am I interpreting this correctly?
http://www.techreaction.net/2010/05/06/amd-phenom-ii-six-core-1090t1095t-thuban-review/
In this review it seems as if the 920 is able to catch up with the 1090T when they're both OC'd.
http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/amd_1090t_six_core_review/5
Strangely enough in this review the 1090 consistently beats the 930. Even when not overclocked, which doesn't seem consistent with other reviews.
Tho the review doesn't test any applications like Photoshop or After Effects.
Reviews of non OC'd CPU's only increase the confusion. One time the 1090T seems superior and the other time the 930.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3674/amds-sixcore-phenom-ii-x6-1090t-1055t-reviewed/7
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/charts/desktop-cpu-charts-2010/compare,2420.html?prod[4477]=on&prod[4438]=on&prod[4437]=on
http://www.behardware.com/articles/789-5/amd-phenom-ii-x6-1090t-1055t.html
http://www.behardware.com/articles/789-11/amd-phenom-ii-x6-1090t-1055t.html
But maybe the non OC reviews aren't really valid.
So if anyone can please make sense of which CPU is faster, because to me it seems reviews are contradicting each other.
As for other advantages/disadvantages per CPU:
I can't afford 12GB of RAM but I can afford 8. So my 1090T build would have 8 and the X58 set-up only 6. The more the better.
Apparently when both OC'd to the same Ghz the 1090T and the 1055T are equally fast. This would be quite nice since the 1055T is €100 cheaper.
Downsides of the 890FX build are the lack of SLI (which could be a large disadvantage as I'm going to use GPU rendering) and the fact that I can only get a Asus Crosshair IV Formula which is reported to have north bridge overheating issues.
Anyways, thanks immensely for all your help.
TASKS:
3D modeling. Photoshop. Simulations. 3D rendering. After Effects. 1080p editing.
I can fully use any core, thread and Mhz while rendering. However, smooth performance while working is also very important.
CORE SYSTEM:
Samsung 1000GB SATA-300 7200RPM 32MB HD103SJ Spinpoint F3
CoolerMaster HAF 922 (High Air Flow)
Corsair TX650 Watt PSU
Noctua NH-D14
EVGA GTX 460 1024MB 675/3600 EE (External Exhaust)
LG H22LS30 DVD
THE DILEMMA
I found a few benchmarks which pitted the OC'd CPU's against each other.
http://www.extremeoverclocking.com/reviews/processors/AMD_Phenom_II_X6_1090T_15.html
Both at 3.8 Ghz and it's obvious that the 1090T is faster at multi-threaded applications, but only by a small margin. This while the 930 is faster in single-threaded applications, but by a larger margin.
Am I interpreting this correctly?
http://www.techreaction.net/2010/05/06/amd-phenom-ii-six-core-1090t1095t-thuban-review/
In this review it seems as if the 920 is able to catch up with the 1090T when they're both OC'd.
http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/amd_1090t_six_core_review/5
Strangely enough in this review the 1090 consistently beats the 930. Even when not overclocked, which doesn't seem consistent with other reviews.
Tho the review doesn't test any applications like Photoshop or After Effects.
Reviews of non OC'd CPU's only increase the confusion. One time the 1090T seems superior and the other time the 930.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3674/amds-sixcore-phenom-ii-x6-1090t-1055t-reviewed/7
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/charts/desktop-cpu-charts-2010/compare,2420.html?prod[4477]=on&prod[4438]=on&prod[4437]=on
http://www.behardware.com/articles/789-5/amd-phenom-ii-x6-1090t-1055t.html
http://www.behardware.com/articles/789-11/amd-phenom-ii-x6-1090t-1055t.html
But maybe the non OC reviews aren't really valid.
So if anyone can please make sense of which CPU is faster, because to me it seems reviews are contradicting each other.
As for other advantages/disadvantages per CPU:
I can't afford 12GB of RAM but I can afford 8. So my 1090T build would have 8 and the X58 set-up only 6. The more the better.
Apparently when both OC'd to the same Ghz the 1090T and the 1055T are equally fast. This would be quite nice since the 1055T is €100 cheaper.
Downsides of the 890FX build are the lack of SLI (which could be a large disadvantage as I'm going to use GPU rendering) and the fact that I can only get a Asus Crosshair IV Formula which is reported to have north bridge overheating issues.
Anyways, thanks immensely for all your help.