Difference between AMD Phenom 1090T and Intel i5 2500K processor

[McKenzie!]

Sponsored Links

I have 2500K as my main computer from now, but I'm not completely satisfied with the speed of multitasking. I am trying to see the differences among these two CPU as I am using the same settings in the software. 2500K boots very fast and unpacks a single item really fast, but when it comes to heavy multitasking loser with 1090T sometimes up to a point that I think stagnation. For a fast CPU is powerful 4core though. 1090T is not too slow or too fast, while the 2500K can be. 2500K performance is sometimes worse than the 1090T, and every now and then faster. The 1090T is more impartial. However energy consumption of the wall is a difference.

[Alexisus]

I had the same a few days before the consultation. But now it seems clear to me. I would like to just show it. For the post heavy multitasking, more cores (if they are reasonably fast cores) are better than fewer cores faster. My Settings X6 is easily the best experience I ever had. I still imagine that a quad-core is more than enough for most people, though. Even a store 2500K easily overcome X6 1100 to 4.2 in multitasking.

[Nutty]

I saw your other thread; I know you know what I'm talking about. I'm not trying to imply that the X6 has a higher level of performance than the 2500K, I am implementing that there are two dissimilar (and important) types of speed: not the calculation speed and the speed of the interface. My example is pretty ridiculous and easy too, with the hope I have my point of view. I will give a real world example, like this: We have one core SB, no HT, clocked at something ridiculous, say 50 GHz.

[Terrextre]

Imagine that we have happening to using that kernel code establishing a Trans HD video that is long enough to take some time and the priority of that thread in real time. If I want to do more with that team, I'm pretty screwed, because no resources are available. The interface "feels" slow. Contrast this to say, a 1 GHz dual-core Bobcat, a thread of converting the video and the other free to do whatever. In this case, although the wildcat is slower in every way, still "feels" faster.

[AmdUser]

Now, that's not a practical example, and as others have pointed out, most people tend to be limited IO in such situations. I have an SSD and 8 GB of memory. At one point I was analyzing a large data set (30 GB +) with a custom code that I had written. I led 5-wire, leaving the final nucleus of inactivity. Subjectively, the machine runs as fast as my C2D@1.5 GHz. In my humble opinion, this is something worthwhile. More recently, I was playing terrariums, Minecraft and CyanogenMod compiling a Linux virtual machine at the same time. Yes, there is a likely use case for many people, and maybe a 2500K work just as well. But my statement still stands, best machine I purchased.

[Logan.M]

The idea of the subsidiary bodies K variant is that you get an unlocked multi. Regardless of how you get there, you can run at 4.5 GHz somehow forget the whole idea of bus overclocking chips 2500 and 2600K. If you follow that than it will greatly improve image quality with an extra 6450 graphics card. There is something about the IGP is not good. You may not obtain the correct colors. This is much better with 4200IGP and now in 645 its running fine. Higher energy consumption at idle a little 55W / surf.

[Sn0w-Le0p@rD]

I would rather buy a Core i5 2500K for its overclocking potential instead of saving electricity. The additional power consumption of 20W of the 1090T is small and for me the payback in energy savings is not worth changing. This is a desk for additional energy consumption does not matter much, but it is a different case if it were a laptop or any mobile device in my humble opinion. It depends on the choices they have to 4.5GHz, but some get a Core i5 + H67 2500K just because they want an IGP is better than the HD2000 and do not need an IGP is better than the HD3000.