AMD Performance Midrange System

AMD recently launched their new six-core Thuban processors, the Phenom II X6 1055T and 1090T. With the same power requirements as previous Phenom II X4 processors, plus Turbo Core for boosting performance in situations where some of the cores are idle, the Thuban processors are generally better than the previous X4 series. In fact, our power tests show that despite having two additional cores, the new CPUs actually draw slightly less power than quad-core Phenom II thanks to process refinements. In something of a shocking break with tradition, our AMD Performance Midrange system actually ends up costing as much as the Intel setup, mainly because of the motherboard and CPU choices. We could certainly build a quad-core AMD system and save a lot of money, but the features offered by the newer CPU and motherboard are compelling.

AMD Performance Midrange System
Hardware Component Price Estimated
Shipping
Rebate
Processor AMD Phenom II X6 1055T Thuban 2.8GHz 6x512K L2, 6MB L3 125W $205    
Cooling COOLER MASTER Hyper 212 Plus $27 $3  
Video Gigabyte HD 5850 1GB (OC)  $310 $8  
Motherboard ASUS M4A89GTD PRO/USB3 AM3 890GX SATA 6Gb/s $135    
Memory G.Skill Ripjaws 4GB DDR3-1600 F3-12800CL9D-4GBRL $110    
Hard Drive Western Digital Caviar Black 1TB WD1001FALS $100    
Optical Drive LG BD/HD DVD 10X BD read/16x DVD read/write UH10LS20 - OEM $105    
Audio Onboard      
Case Cooler Master Storm Scout SGC-2000-KKN1-GP Mid-Tower $80 $10  
Power Supply Corsair CMPSU-750TX 750w 80 PLUS Certified SLI/CrossFire Ready $110   ($20)
Base System Total $1,182 $21 ($20)
Display ASUS VW266H Black 25.5" 2ms (GTG) HDMI Widescreen LCD Monitor (1920x1200) $310 $12 ($30)
Speakers Logitech X-540 70 watts 5.1 Speakers  $89    
Input Microsoft Comfort Curve Desktop 2000 Black USB Keyboard and Optical Mouse – OEM $28 $8  
Operating System Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium OEM 1-Pack (for System Builders) $100    
Complete System Bottom Line $1,709 $41 ($50)

At $205, the six-core Phenom II X6 1055T Thuban is a great bargain in its own right. While the 1055T is superior to the i5-750 in multithreaded applications, the i5 holds an advantage in gaming, so the decision as to which platform to adopt may boil down to your intended use. The 1055T also utilizes a turbo mode (AMD Turbo Core), and its 2.8GHz clock speed can increase to 3.3GHz on lightly threaded workloads (when half the cores are idle). Additionally, the 1055T is a fine overclocker out of the box, with sizeable increases in clock speed being attainable with the retail cooler. All in all, AMD’s 1055T deserves a serious look for those shopping around at the performance midrange level, especially for those users who do a great deal of video encoding.

Alternately, if you’re looking to save a few bucks, you might want to (re)consider the 965BE, an outstanding processor for $185. Though it gives up a couple of cores to the 1055T, it performs slightly better in gaming, and its unlocked multiplier will appeal to those who are looking for maximum flexibility in overclocking their AMD machine.

Like the Gigabyte board chosen for the Intel system, the ASUS M4A89GTD Pro offers a lot in the way of features and capabilities without breaking the bank. This board includes Realtek’s 8111E LAN (PCIe), six SATA 6.0 Gbps ports (as well as an eSATA 3.0 GB/s port), two USB 3.0 ports, 12 USB 2.0 ports, and Realtek’s ALC 892S – 7.1 Channel Audio – with DTS Surround Sensation Package. The board also features support for CrossFireX (not to mention an integrated ATI Radeon HD 4290 GPU, just in case). All in all, the M4A89 GTD Pro is worth a long look in the performance midrange segment.

We debated a bit about moving to an 890FX board, but the fact is the added $25 to $50 doesn't get you much beyond better overclocking support. If you're dead set on some serious overclocking, we'd recommend moving to the ASUS M4A89TD PRO, but for the vast majority of users it's not necessary. As another potentially interesting option, instead of our above recommended system, Newegg currently has a massive combo package that includes just about everything you need. You get the same 1055T CPU, Rifle cooler, a more expensive case, a 1.5TB HDD, value RAM, and a Cooler Master 700W 80Plus PSU. You lose the 5850 and drop to an ASUS overclocked 5830, and you also lose the Blu-ray reader and get a standard DVD-RW, but the total price of $1054 (with $40 in main-in rebates) is a pretty good chunk of change if you don't mind the slower GPU.

Intel Performance Midrange System Base System Components
Comments Locked

102 Comments

View All Comments

  • GullLars - Wednesday, May 12, 2010 - link

    So using your own estimation, the optimal load for a PSU is rougly 75%, lower means cooler and more silent but less efficient.

    The build in question has full load peak power draw roughly 350W from the wall socket. Idle likely under 100W.

    750W: optimal efficiency at 750*0,75 = 562W, overshooting by 562/350=1,6x=60%
    idle load: <100/750 = 13%, wastefull?

    500W: optimal efficiency at 500*0,75 = 375W, overshooting by 375/350=1,06=6%, close to optimal.
    idle load: <100/500 = 20%, less wastefull yet still cool at idle fan speed?
  • Exodite - Wednesday, May 12, 2010 - link

    Actually it's even less than that as the rated wattage and load level refer to output wattage and load, not input wattage.
  • JarredWalton - Wednesday, May 12, 2010 - link

    And despite all this discussion, we already mentioned the potential to downgrade the PSU on page 4:

    " Those looking to run a lower spec PSU with a single GPU will be fine with the little brother of our recommended PSU, the CORSAIR CMPSU-400CX 400W. Priced at $50 (with a $10 MIR), it should be more efficient when your system is idle while still providing enough juice for the 5850. If you are thinking about going the Clarkdale route and/or a less powerful GPU, then we'd definitely recommend the 400W PSU as a more sensible choice. Just don't try running SLI/CrossFire setups."
  • Jediron - Tuesday, May 18, 2010 - link

    Yes, and the 400watt is only just enough and leave hardly any room for future singlecard upgrades, or a few harddisks for a raid mode. Around 500watt would be optimal for this config and a single videocard.
  • aftereview - Wednesday, May 12, 2010 - link

    Normally power supply efficiency is rated at close to full load. This means running a power supply outside that range is actually less efficient.
    At a lower load although it will draw less power and generate less heat in an absolute sense, it will draw more power and generate more heat PER watt.

    Now take a 750W and a 500W (similar design) both running at say 400W, generally the 500W will be more efficient, thus draw less and run cooler.

    More is better is not necessarily true and too many people seem to forget that.

    Your math is correct but the basis for your conclusions is not.
    A power supply should be rated to cover the Peak power of the system with a continuous rating close to that of the system.

    The power supply chosen for this article happens to have a 80plus rating at 20%, 50% and 80% load (mfg. spec.) which definitely make it suitable for the built. As some other people pointed out, a less expensive unit/lower power would work as well.
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, May 13, 2010 - link

    Some of what you say is actually incorrect. At pretty much any load, a 750W PSU will be quieter than a 500W PSU, because it's not reaching the limits of its design. Also, at 400W load, the 750W will be in the range of maximum efficiency (using 53% of its rated output) while the 500W will be heating up more and running at lower efficiency (80% of maximum output). The 80Plus specs maximum efficiency at 50% load, and while the 500W will be more efficient at 100W loads, once you get to 350W the 750W will be more efficient (unless you're comparing a crappy 750W to a good 500W of course).

    Also note that at idle power draw of around 100W (give or take), the 500W at 80% efficiency would be using 125W; if the 750W is 70% efficient, it's using 142W. Bump power draw up to 400W and if the 500W is now 82% compared to 85% you're looking at 488W vs. 470W. Basically, you're trading lower power draw at idle for higher power draw at load. But you'll also have a noisier system at load with the 500W, as all PSUs pretty much start ramping fan speed quickly beyond 50% load.

    So given the choice, I'd stick a 750W into an upper midrange system, simply because it runs quieter and leaves room to grow (i.e. a second GPU could be added). But, if you know you're never going to add a second GPU or heavily overclock I'd stick with a 500W (as recommended in the text).
  • Jediron - Tuesday, May 18, 2010 - link

    -This system eats aorund 300, not 400watt.
    -A good psu can cope with a littel heat
    -at 300 watt, the 500watt also makes hardly more noise

    Three invalid arguments in a row. Need i say more.
  • Jediron - Tuesday, May 18, 2010 - link

    I mean your arguments, not mine.

    Yours are flawed, based on 400watts at load.
  • Jediron - Tuesday, May 18, 2010 - link

    No, good psu ramping up around 60/70%. Besides, that's what a fan is for, spinning. Noise become nasty, around or above 80%. Below that, most good psu's stay very silent.
    Futhermore, often you will not even notice it while alot of people are a playing a game at that point and
    you can imagine what makes the most noise....
  • GullLars - Wednesday, May 12, 2010 - link

    Like my subject title says
    I'm so upset now i find it physically challenging to sit still and type.
    WHY ON EARTH do you not include an SSD in a $1500+ build in 2010??? But you include BluRay???

    Sollution #1:
    Remove Bluray, add random dvd burner (if needed) and an Intel x25-V for OS + core apps.
    This will roughly double the PCmark vantage score of the machine, and make a serious increase in value.

    Sollution #2:
    Remove Bluray, downgrade from 5850OC to 5830 (or 5770 for "good enough" instead of best graphics), add random dvd burner (if needed) and an Intel x25-M G2 80GB for OS + apps. This give much greater value, as the 5830 can run all the same games at a slightly lower framerate for $100 less, possibly with a step down in resolution or particle/HDR/texture/AA/AF.

    I will speculate the only reason this article got posted and not corrected in the editorial is because Anand is out of the country. I am seriously disappointed such an article was posted on Anandtech.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now