I can't help but seeing the awesome decrease in DDR3 pricing as a good thing for i7 and a bad thing for AMD.

Once you go over a certain budget in your wallet, the i7 is just the smarter choice - especially as an overclocker.

I built one recently for someone and I was so surprised to notice even Windows performance seemed better, I haven't noticed a jump in ages and my machine is no slouch.

Totally off topic. The page layout fills only the centre 1/2 of my wide-aspect screen, yet I am stuck with horizontal scroll bars to view some of the tables in the article. Am I doing something wrong? (Firefox 3.0.9)

edit: whoops, just seen the width thinger. Still could be wider though.

Is it just me or has the transition to 45nm been AMD's most successful ever? For as long as I can remember, ever time AMD went to a smaller feature size process, it started at lower speeds and higher power consumption than the previous process. It was very late in the game that AMD's 65nm finally surpassed their 90nm products. Was it the same going from 130nm to 90nm? I can't remember. Maybe it was just that the 65nm transition was particularly unimpressive for AMD. But they seem to have nailed the 45nm process, and now it seems like they are rapidly improving it, already eeking out some higher speeds and lower power consumptions.

Adi.

And now finally has an answer for the core2's and has defeated them.well i may say DEFEATED because one would rather pick a phenom2 as it has a good upgradeable platform over a soon to retire LGA 775 core 2 platform.And it does match and defeat core 2 quad q9550 in most of the tests(Excluding Nero and Winzip).And i hope AMD does something with their southbridge problem in the upcoming RD890 chipsets or it could ruin them all.And about core i7's they are a totally different story all together as they virtually have 8 cores so the competition is b/w Phenom 2's and core 2's . Well may be Istanbul may be an answer to current core i7's...guess ill wait and watch.hope amd has some answer to Hyper Threading....

second!!! ! ! ! ! !! ! !

growing hair in weird places

Waaay TMI.

Just a question. Does anyone even look at the first three graphs in the Power Consumption page? It's almost impossible to find what to look for in that mess of lines, I think the traditional bar graphs work much better.

Nicely done review. I would like to have seen the MSI 790FX-GD70 board in this review. I've been considering whether to go with a single fast Phenom II X4 in a DDR3 motherboard or two slower 2.3GHz Shanghai quads in a server board. The single CPU option is quite a bit less than half the cost.

It is time to retire both the Source engine particle simulation and the Half Life 2: Episode Two benchmarks. Combine the two with Left 4 Dead.

I see a wide range of average fps scores when jumping from 1 to 2 to 4 cores @ 1920x1200 running L4D timedemos. Can we see see some hi res gaming benchmarks in the near future?

Speaking of overclocking, way back in Nov of 2008 Scott promised to get back to us with detailed test results on overclocking i7s:

http://www.techreport.com/articles.x/15818/15

Did that ever happen? I couldn't find it.... Anyway, I'm wondering what the performance and value picture would be like between an overclocked PII X4 955 and an overclocked i7 920 (no general comments, thanks - I want to see hard numbers. Just the facts, ma'am, just the facts)

Nice to still AMD still managing to be competitive, intel bounced back with pretty strong competition with Core2 and now i7. If only their financials would improve. We only need to look back to the Pentium II days to see what happens when there isn't enough competition.

Sounds exciting, just wish it caught up better to the i7 system.....I guess everybody here at the AMD camp can just continue to cross our fingers -_-

Edit: Though by looking at the article a second time, I did notice that about 2/5th's of the time it keeps up or surpasses the i7-920 (gaming seems to be one stronger sector), and quite a bit of the losing instances for it being benchmarks (which aren't necessary always the most accurate in real world usage). Overall, this processor did fairly well, though for a flagship "top of the line" model it could have brought more performance to the table. I feel if this undercuts the i7-920 in price (along most AMD motherboards vs. intel compatible motherboards) this could very well make a nice enthusiast processor.

Well looks like AMD is back to being pretty competitive. Core i7 is still the top dog for heavy multithreading and not too much more than the Phenom system but the conclusion is spot on - AMD positioned this CPU perfectly and with cheaper motherboard options it has lots of potential for budget multithreading.

Very nice article. Goes great with a cup of coffee.

Um, what's up with the first graph on the power consumption page:
http://techreport.com/articles.x/16796/12
There's an outlier there. I /think/ it might be the dual QX9770 but I don't see that in the legend.

I am a bit surprised by how competitive this processor is. I guess I'm still getting used to the idea that AMD has a CPU that can compete with the Core 2 Quads. It's really lovely to see such competition.

first - im excited about this processor. hope everyone had a great 420.peeacceee

Viva ma AM2 4200+!

Okay it's decided my next pc, this cpu with Nvidia's 780a chipset so no annoying southbridge issues.

c2d holding on remarkably well.

Anybody else use Handbrake enough to want to see it in a review?

I still haven't seen a good value case being made for the i7 cores. Not that they aren't terrific performers, it's just that on average, you will pay $200 - 300 more for a baseline i7 system (920 and mobo) than you would for a a system built with a Q series processor at competitive performance.

It's not that the i series isn't a hell of a performer, but even the lowest end one doesn't give you as good a bang for the buck once you take into consideration the ridiculous costs of the X58 motherboards.

Performance/price graphs should be done with price percentage (not $) on the horizontal axis. It would make it easier to compare and separate the plots for readability. IMO, of course.

Looks like Wednesday I'll be ordering this cpu for my new windows 7 machine. Just can't figure out psu to put in my coolermaster haf 932 case just yet. i'm just wait & see what parts are coming out for am3

Is there not a newer Image test than Photoshop CS2 by now?

hhhmm... AMD back in action, and this time it's a respectable cheap, you just can't ignore. Finally, something to challenge the core2 series, now all they need is something to challenge the i series...

Suggestion: since you're comparing mostly with the Q9550, color that chip's bars in the graphs differently than the other Intel offerings so it's easier to chase down.

Very impressive. If you're lucky enough to have an AM2+ board that's compatible with these CPUs, I'd dive in - that board is going to last you a while yet.

I think I just found my next processor. I've always been an AMD fan, although I've used Intel for the past few years since the Core 2 came out. But for what I do - mostly games, internet browsing, other Windows apps - the Phenom II will do just fine. It's nice to see AMD competitive again, even if they don't have the absolute fastest processor in existence. If I can get one of these and overclock it to 3.6 or 3.7 GHz, it should be more than enough for me.

exellent review, might add that Phenom II 955 is a exellent upgrade for AM2/AM2+ motherboard owners :)

like me
i can put a Phenom II 955 i my GA-MA790FX-DS5 board i bought in 2008 ;)

I'm so excited that AMD is producing quality products again. Unfortunately i already have a banging intel system, and see no reason to switch. i probably wont upgrade for another year. In which i think is the case for alot of people, hopefully AMD can hold out with minimal sales on these phenoms until the next gen.
I recommend these chips to people looking to build new computers. But is there enough.

GL

GO AMD!!!!!!!

looks like this is the #1 gaming chip