Prove me wrong.

I had a 1090T and seen it, tested it benched it. How bout you? There are tons of benchmarks in the internetYep, you are VERY wrong

IThere are tons of benchmarks in the internet

Care to share some links?

The specs of the actual processors are enough to prove you wrong! For a start, AMD have been using the same socket for how long now? And intel hasn't used 45nm tech in ages. Clock for clock, the sandy bridges demolish the AMD hexacores. Look at any form of benchmark. Doesn't have to be FSX. Just look at an CPU benchmark.

Care to share some links?

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/146?vs=287

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.htmlthere's a link. Amd 6 core = destroyed by both the 2500k and 2600k and all the i7 9xx's.

I am well aware that Sandy bridge outperforms the 1090T in several categories and benchmarks. But we are talking here FSX performance, or general gaming performance for that matter.At resolutions of 1080p and above they perform the same.

AMD v INTEL.... Who Cares! Everyone builds to a budget. As long as the computer starts who gives a crap who builds it.

I am well aware that Sandy bridge outperforms the 1090T in several categories and benchmarks. But we are talking here FSX performance, or general gaming performance for that matter.At resolutions of 1080p and above they perform the same.

Edited: comment removed. Sorry.

I am well aware that Sandy bridge outperforms the 1090T in several categories and benchmarks. But we are talking here FSX performance, or general gaming performance for that matter.At resolutions of 1080p and above they perform the same.

Sorry to say, but you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about man. Do you realise how CPU bound FSX is?Have you run any tests to back up that statement?NGX, you should edit that out, and probably apologise too

But why an x6 for FSX if you are in a budget? AMD offers good bang for the buck in multithreaded apps. You would have the same performance with an X3You know that you'll need a new mobo for Bulldozer and then you will have more cores doing nothing? for 300$ you can get an 2500K and a motherboard

I don't really use FSX much for flying anymore, for the most part I use my system to do scenery development and so I really a lot on programs that can use threads. For example if I need to go back into an archived project that's 5gb zipped I'd like to extract the file today lol. I have an AM3+ motherboard so if I choose to upgrade to Bulldozer I won't need a new motherboard. Hopefully by that time my budget will improve and I'll be able to switch back to Intel and hand this system down to my brother. I can't get a 2500K, motherboard, and 8gb of decent RAM for $300 though and that was the deciding factor... Even 8gb is cutting it close for editing photoreal's of a certain size and I looked for weeks for a nice 2500K, mobo, RAM combo but nothing came close enough to $300. The reason I didn't get an X3 was that if I was going to be using a Phenom II I might as well get the best I can. It suits me well enough, all the work I do for ORBX I build with sliders maxed out to make sure I see all the detail and I get decent performance. 45-60fps is about the maximum I'll get but throttled at 30fps it feels smooth enough for what little flying I do. One day I'd like to build a rip-roaring system using whoever's processors are at the top at the time but for now I enjoy what I do have

AMD v INTEL.... Who Cares! Everyone builds to a budget. As long as the computer starts who gives a crap who builds it.

The ones who care about performance? Those people.

I am well aware that Sandy bridge outperforms the 1090T in several categories and benchmarks. But we are talking here FSX performance, or general gaming performance for that matter.At resolutions of 1080p and above they perform the same.

Higher resolutions don't change this playing field.

This thread is now nothing more than "My dad's better than your dad" Intel and AMD both make good processors Period! There are plenty of people running FSX fluidly on both processor types, so why do we need YET ANOTHER Intel v Amd debate.

+1. We don't have to agree, just let others have their own opinion.

+1. We don't have to agree, just let others have their own opinion.

Exactly. This thread was started as a performance review of an AMD processor. We all know how the sandybridge runs, but can we let the AMD guys have their own thread for once for those that are doing some homework and might be considering buying the chip.

I don't really use FSX much for flying anymore, for the most part I use my system to do scenery development and so I really a lot on programs that can use threads. For example if I need to go back into an archived project that's 5gb zipped I'd like to extract the file today lol. I have an AM3+ motherboard so if I choose to upgrade to Bulldozer I won't need a new motherboard. Hopefully by that time my budget will improve and I'll be able to switch back to Intel and hand this system down to my brother. I can't get a 2500K, motherboard, and 8gb of decent RAM for $300 though and that was the deciding factor... Even 8gb is cutting it close for editing photoreal's of a certain size and I looked for weeks for a nice 2500K, mobo, RAM combo but nothing came close enough to $300. The reason I didn't get an X3 was that if I was going to be using a Phenom II I might as well get the best I can. It suits me well enough, all the work I do for ORBX I build with sliders maxed out to make sure I see all the detail and I get decent performance. 45-60fps is about the maximum I'll get but throttled at 30fps it feels smooth enough for what little flying I do. One day I'd like to build a rip-roaring system using whoever's processors are at the top at the time but for now I enjoy what I do have

My bad, your board supports Bulldozer, it's true. And I had no idea that your main use for that rig is not FSX (and working for ORBX! wow, that's awesome)