bit-tech.net

AMD Phenom II X4 970 Review

Comments 1 to 25 of 45

Reply
mi1ez 14th October 2010, 09:39 Quote
No 965 in the benchmarks?
Lizard 14th October 2010, 09:50 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by mi1ez
No 965 in the benchmarks?

I'm afraid not, the 965 is such an old product (Nov 2009) that it was tested with different components/software. However, the only difference between it and the 970 is 100MHz, so they perform very similarly.
Snips 14th October 2010, 11:18 Quote
Ouch!

Still, if you have a compatible board then it will make a good upgrade.
Jipa 14th October 2010, 12:26 Quote
Yeah but you might just as well save some cash and go for the 955. Just crank that multiplier up and you'd never know the difference.

Fair conclusion there. The Phenoms aren't bad (like intel fans would have you believe), but there's a huge difference in the OC.. Then again, a quad-core Phenom at 4 GHz isn't particularly sluggish and will sere any gamer just fine.
Hustler 14th October 2010, 12:47 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jipa
. Then again, a quad-core Phenom at 4 GHz isn't particularly sluggish and will sere any gamer just fine.

Well thats the thing really, any of the 9xx Black Edition quads are as powerful as you need for any of todays and tommorrows games...

You only really need to go Intel if you are a non gaming user with serious proffessional Application use in mind...

970 with a top GPU will be a better gaming machine than an overclocked i7 and an average GPU....

Decide what you use the machine for and choose accordingly....
ulfar 14th October 2010, 13:18 Quote
theoretically, wouldn't it be better to get the intel anyway? i understand what you guys are saying with the oc and whatnot. but i keep thinking, if they are similar at price and have similar performance (at standard), why not go for the option that allows you to get a performance boost in the future (oc when the situatuion calls for it, let's say when your rig is getting "old"). that would keep you from thinking 'bout an upgrade a little while longer. why not go intel oc'd with top gpu? same price apart from a new cooler.
just thinking.
Hustler 14th October 2010, 13:37 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by ulfar
theoretically, wouldn't it be better to get the intel anyway? i understand what you guys are saying with the oc and whatnot. but i keep thinking, if they are similar at price and have similar performance (at standard), why not go for the option that allows you to get a performance boost in the future (oc when the situatuion calls for it, let's say when your rig is getting "old"). that would keep you from thinking 'bout an upgrade a little while longer. why not go intel oc'd with top gpu? same price apart from a new cooler.
just thinking.

If your building a system from scratch then yes go for Intel if you want maximum possible performance now and in the future comapred to an AMD quad...

But, if you already have an AM2+ or AM3 setup, its not worth the cost of a new MOBO as well to go Intel....unless you just fancy a change that is...
MaverickWill 14th October 2010, 13:42 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hustler
If your building a system from scratch then yes go for Intel if you want maximum possible performance now and in the future comapred to an AMD quad...

But, if you already have an AM2+ or AM3 setup, its not worth the cost of a new MOBO as well to go Intel....unless you just fancy a change that is...

If you're still on DDR2, don't have a third-party cooler, etc, the upgrade to a G6950 could well be worth it over a Phenom II 9xx. For starters, you'd probably spend as much on CPU and mobo for the Intel path as you would on just the Phenom chip. Benchmark scores favour the G6950 once it's overclocked, and since you're buying the rest of the platform at the same time, why not? From there, an i5/i7 is a drop-in upgrade, should you fancy the extra performance.

I'm not saying "KILL ALL YOUR AMD STUFF - IT'S TERRIBLE" - just that if you're upgrading from AM2, the DDR3 question rears its head, and if you fancy that upgrade, Intel might be the better path.
ulfar 14th October 2010, 14:00 Quote
atm i'm leaning towards intel (not buying, just speculating =) ). can't see any advantages in going amd, unless one is stuck with an amd mobo. we'll see what happens pricewise when sandy bridge is let loose. wonder if amd will keep up (or down) with the pricedrop.
Paradigm Shifter 14th October 2010, 14:04 Quote
I'm looking at going AMD for a 1090T based rig simply because I've got bored with overclocking Intel stuff. You know what they say - a change is as good as a rest. :D Well, that and it's a hexacore CPU that is actually affordable. ;)
Bungletron 14th October 2010, 14:18 Quote
Between the i5 and the phenom, it appears the system build tested would only differ by motherboard and processor, what do you reckon the price difference would be between the setups from scratch?
flibblesan 14th October 2010, 14:38 Quote
I would have liked to see this chip put up against the 955BE in the benchmarks. Is this any better?
Hustler 14th October 2010, 14:43 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by flibblesan
I would have liked to see this chip put up against the 955BE in the benchmarks. Is this any better?

Basically the same chips, but with a 300mhz speed bump....benchmark scores will scale accordingly...

Although the 955 generally tops out in the 3.8-3.9Ghz overclocked territory with normal, non water cooling, whereas the 965 and 970 can usualy break the 4Ghz barrier (just) with a decent air cooler..
MaverickWill 14th October 2010, 14:43 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by flibblesan
I would have liked to see this chip put up against the 955BE in the benchmarks. Is this any better?

Considering they're the same chip design, same stepping, and both Black Editions, probably not. Binning may help to some extent, but even aggressive overclocking in this review only yielded 100MHz more than the 965.

EDIT: Ninjas are out in force today...
knuck 14th October 2010, 15:18 Quote
this thing just had to come out a few weeks after I bought my 965 huh
Snips 14th October 2010, 15:37 Quote
Let's not be kidding ourselves here. This is no alternative for a new build in anyway at all. The Intel equivalent is better by a long way.

Unless you have an existing compatible motherboard fine but for anything else as per the Bit-tech recommendation, it's just not worth it.

Leave the fanboism at the door. AMD have to bring out something stunning even to take on everything below an i7. Since any NEW architecture isn't due until way into 2011, this isn't going to change realistically for at least a year.
Tangster 14th October 2010, 15:46 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snips
Let's not be kidding ourselves here. This is no alternative for a new build in anyway at all. The Intel equivalent is better by a long way.

Unless you have an existing compatible motherboard fine but for anything else as per the Bit-tech recommendation, it's just not worth it.

Leave the fanboism at the door. AMD have to bring out something stunning even to take on everything below an i7. Since any NEW architecture isn't due until way into 2011, this isn't going to change realistically for at least a year.
Sadly true. My 1055T is a purely Cinema 4D rendering based decision.
Snips 14th October 2010, 15:47 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tangster
Sadly true. My 1055T is a purely Cinema 4D rendering based decision.

But a bloody good decision at that.
funkymonk 14th October 2010, 16:15 Quote
The AMD's are a good deal cheaper than the Intel equivalents. And not everyone wants to overclock. In fact the vest majority of people will never have a need to overclock.
Xir 14th October 2010, 16:24 Quote
Yep, most people out there don't overclock, and if the bang for the buck is just as good (or better) in the mainstream market, thats good for AMD.
We here, who read this forum...meh Many do overclock, and many go for top-end-of-line. And there (alas) Intel rules.
Snips 14th October 2010, 16:48 Quote
Well how is it everytime Bit-tech review an AMD processor up against an Intel processor, the Intel one ends up as the recommendation EVEN at stock levels?

AMD can no longer cling on to the best "Bang per buck" quote.
flibblesan 14th October 2010, 17:24 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hustler
Quote:
Originally Posted by flibblesan
I would have liked to see this chip put up against the 955BE in the benchmarks. Is this any better?

Basically the same chips, but with a 300mhz speed bump....benchmark scores will scale accordingly...

Although the 955 generally tops out in the 3.8-3.9Ghz overclocked territory with normal, non water cooling, whereas the 965 and 970 can usualy break the 4Ghz barrier (just) with a decent air cooler..

Thank you. I'll have to look at overclocking my chip sometime. I never did get round to replacing the stock cooler :(
okenobi 14th October 2010, 17:24 Quote
The only time I wonder about an AMD build is when you consider at the tighter price points, there's a fight to be had. But I still think the Phenom II X2 is the only chip to consider.

With 800 series chipsets offering native 6gig sata and USB3, and if you can then unlock a core or two and overclock - it would seem worthy of consideration. Especially when mobo costs are roughly the same, ram is roughly the same, but the 550/555/560 is about half the price of an i5-750/760....

Sure the Intel solution is faster, but it won't have USB3 or SATA6gig, it's around £70 - £80 more expensive and in most games there will be little difference.
-EVRE- 14th October 2010, 18:13 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by
As such, if you've got £150 to spend on a new CPU, we cant recommend the X4 970 BE unless you already own a compatible motherboard and just want a simple upgrade.

>:(
I really don't like that Bit-Tech is says this processor isn't worth it because it doesn't overclock like an Intel.

Let me tell you a short story.
Bought my AMD 940BE Feburary of 2009 and I have never overclocked it even though it is liquid cooled. This is from a person who spent hundreds getting a Barton 2600+ to run at 2.6ghz at 2.1v

SO get your head strait and remember than no everyone overclocks and base Bit-Tech's recommendations appropriately.
Senilex 14th October 2010, 18:55 Quote
Even if your building a PC from scratch then the AM3 socket route provides better future proofing than any of Intel sockets.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums