AnandTech: AMD Phenom II X4 940 & 920: A True Return to Competition

Home

About

Forums

RSS/Mobile Users

News

My AnandTech

Blogs

Galleries

Bench (beta)

- CPU

- SSD

AMD Phenom II X4 940 & 920: A True Return to Competition

Date: January 8th, 2009
Topic: CPU & Chipset
Manufacturer: AMD
Author: Anand Lal Shimpi

Buy the AMD HDZ940XCGIBOX Phenom II 940 Black

	$155.99
	$149.99
	$149.99

Fallout 3

Bethesda's latest title uses an updated version of the Gamebryo engine.

Fallout 3 - 1680 x 1050 - Medium Quality

Left 4 Dead

Left 4 Dead - 1680 x 1050 - Max Settings (No AA/AF/Vsync)

The Phenom II might not match the Core 2 series on a clock for clock basis in these two games, but performs very well compared to the Q9400 and Q8200. Overall gaming compatibility and stability was excellent with the 940 and 920 on the MSI 790GX based motherboard.

Gaming Performance - FarCry 2 & Crysis Warhead

Index

Tools

Share

Find the lowest prices

Digg

del.icio.us

E-mail

Print this article

91 Comments - Last by Walkeer, 117 days ago

Username:

Password:

remember me

Bravo by Kromis, 397 days ago

*Stands up and applause*

Reply

RE: Bravo by wowo, 292 days ago

how x264?

x264 benchmark is 819,very old.

now is 1139.Improved a lot

please ues new x264,more scores will be Changed.

Reply

. by san1s, 397 days ago

still slower than core 2?

Reply

Food for thought! by slayerized, 397 days ago

AMD has indeed made some notable improvements with Phenom II and their 45nm. Reviews keep mentioning about how there is an upgrade option with Phenom II being AM2 compatible; however, what next (this is probably their last product with AM2 compatibility)? Shouldn't the reviews consider the upgrade options for Core i7/X58 with Westmere in a couple of years too? For someone who is considering a fresh build, I think that is something that should be analyzed too imo. Great review otherwise as always; the playing field if not leveled is at least starting to look competitive in a few segments!!

Reply

RE: Food for thought! by Griswold, 396 days ago

No. Facts and "might turn out that way in a few years" arent the same thing.

Reply

Funny thing happened... by kmmatney, 397 days ago

I was on a plane flying back from Taiwan (I work in the Fab industry) and I happened to sit next to an Intel employee who had traveled to Asia for the Core i7 launch. I asked him about the small L2 cache, and he explained that these run about 300 test applications, and chose the cache amounts based on a compromise between performance (and latency) and die size. We talked a bit and he asked me how I knew so much about computer hardware, and I mentioned I'm an avid Anandtech reader. He recognized the name, and mentioned that he saw Anand argue with one of his coworkers for quite some time about the L2 cache size!

Reply

RE: Funny thing happened... by Zaitsev, 397 days ago

That's a great story! I would love to see anand duking it out with some intel employees! LOL

Reply

So who wants to buy me one? by Goty, 397 days ago

If I didn't have a 5000+ BE sitting in a K9A2 in my rig right now I probably wouldn't consider this CPU, but seeing as I do, it looks like I've found my next upgrade.

Reply

Why Q9450 is often slower than Q9400 by kknd1967, 397 days ago

I thought Q9450 should be better with larger cache?

Reply

RE: Why Q9450 is often slower than Q9400 by Anand Lal Shimpi, 397 days ago

In some of the tests the two will swap places simply because they run at the same clock speed and the added cache doesn't always help performance. In those cases if the Q9450 is behind it's most likely due to normal variation between test runs.

Take care,
Anand

Reply