890FXA-UD7 vs. CrossHair IV Formula with X6 1090T - AMD Strikes Back?

Memory operations:

In terms of memory management, there is not much difference between the two tabs, which of course is not surprising. Reading and copying in the 890FXA-UD7, while writing in the CrossHair IV Formula, proved to be somewhat faster.

Let's move on to synthetic test programs and rendering. What you see is summarized at the bottom of the page.

In all tests, it is clear that compared to the top-of-the-line Intel core model, AMD’s hexa-core savior is virtually unmatched in every area. Before we get worse by the masses of AMD sympathizers, we would note that this of course did not come as a surprise to us, we were approximately aware of the distance between the two competitors, and of course it is not negligible that the 1090T costs just over a quarter of the 980X, which weighs a lot. in its assessment. Bottom line, the 980X EE results are just a comparison rather than a realistic opponent, but the former is perfect.

The war between the GIGABYTE GA-890FXA-UD7 and the ASUS CrossHair IV Formula is fierce and fully on par as expected, nowhere have we seen a significant advantage in favor of one or the other, but if we take the minimal differences seriously, then graph 7 of GIGABYTE 3, while ASUS wins 4 battles. Under Super Pi, the poor performance of the 1090T is quite surprising, we definitely expected a better time there, and otherwise it watches its opponent according to the specification almost everywhere from a decent distance. Regardless, it can be said that the Phenom II X6 1090T is also a bull-powered processor, and the 6 cores can do a very good job of rendering or encoding.