facebook rss twitter

Review: AMD Phenom X4 9850: Phenom fixed, but not phenomenal

by Parm Mann on 18 April 2008, 08:48

Tags: Phenom X4, Phenom X4 9850 Black Edition, Phenom X4 9600, Dell (NASDAQ:DELL), Gigabyte (TPE:2376), ASUSTeK (TPE:2357), Intel (NASDAQ:INTC), AMD (NYSE:AMD), OCZ (NASDAQ:OCZ), Corsair, FSP Group (TPE:3015), PC

Quick Link: HEXUS.net/qamli

Add to My Vault: x

Dollar and Euro HEXUS.bang4buck

Dollar and Euro HEXUS.bang4buck

Going back to our HEXUS.bang4buck and taking the US Dollar and Euro pricing into account, we'll be using the same three metrics as on page eight.



HEXUS.PiFast Quake 4 Multitasking Average UK Price Average Euro Price Average US Price
AMD Phenom 9850 82.0 90.8 92.7 £152 €201 $237
AMD Phenom 9750 78.4 86.4 87.9 £137 €177 $215
AMD Phenom 9600 76.1 81.6 84.3 £135 €211 $215
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 100 100 100 £144 €192 $252

So, the above table shows performance in percentage form and it just so happens that Intel dominates the competition, claiming 100 per cent on each benchmark. In order to get our HEXUS.bang4buck, we simply divide the benchmark percentage by the processor price. Simple enough, right?

For US pricing we took an average from Newegg, TigerDirect, and eWIZ.

The reason why AMD's Phenom X4s are much closer to, and just about beat on occasion, the Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 lies with the higher online price of that chip in the US.

Now looking at Euro pricing, derived from an average of Alternate.de and Hardwarefreak.de's pricing.

The AMD Phenom X4 9750 is well-priced in mainland Europe, bringing its HEXUS.bang4buck up, but the Intel's lower-than-Phenom X4 9850 pricing means that it still looks better on our graphs.

Summary

US-based customers' choices, based on performance-per-dollar, are more convoluted than in the UK or mainland Europe. We can recommend all X4s in the US and, in particular, the AMD Phenom X4 9750 in Germany.


HEXUS Forums :: 8 Comments

Login with Forum Account

Don't have an account? Register today!
Oh dear, AMD…
I don't know what to say neither, AMD arn't performing too great in the graphics sector neither.

I think AMD underestimated both intel and Nvidia
its because amd decided to merge with ati, too say the least it was a failure of a merge. AMD can get back but need too seriously put all their effort in the cpu market, quad core isnt really high end anymore but in graphics card imo i class an 8800GT a high end card because it plays all games well(except crysis ofc), so if amd just design a simple card that is cheap which they have the 3450/70 which works very well, that takes the stress out of the gpu area now they just need to get a new cpu that kicks intel back.
Some one at AMD must have actually said this

MD1
“Ok, we are the weakest mainstream CPU manufacturer in both home and business sector so we need to make some big changes.”

MD2
“I know why not buy the weakest GPU manufacturer and merge to make the weakest CPU and GPU manufacturer all in one!!”

MD1
“What a fantastic idea, get on it”
The thing is, if they didn't, they'd be in the position NV are now - snookered and desperately looking around for an x86 partner.

Poor decision? We'll have to wait and see. Eventually needed? Certainly.

Can't justify a high-end AMD CPU for any purpose myself - they're far from bad, and are comparable, but you wouldn't get one if you already had an AM2+ board. Lower end I'm all over them. My next HTPC will be moving away from my Intel set up to a dual-core AMD EE CPU, unless someone releases a range of motherboards based on one of the new mobile Penryns or Atom (perfect if it's up to it) for the desktop.

I'm not worried about the GPU sector. I'd still take any AMD GPU over an NV one, despite generally be a little slower upwards of the HD3850.