I don't know about it winning in almost every application. But this post is where I got most of my information ( [Blog] AMD Phenom II Six Core 1090T vs Core i7 920 Full Comparison | TechREACTION ) , and it seems to end up about 50/50 for performance. And if they are equal, I think going with the processor with less cores makes more sense (because it will work with more applications). Also I can get it for ~70$ cheaper. Either way both processors are beasts and this doesn't need to turn into another thread with people arguing over it.
I didn't have much trouble getting my 930 to 4.1GHz stable, using 19x217 it runs at 4.1GHz, 1.30V actual (1.325 BIOS), and 8x RAM multiplier works just fine. Every CPU is different but I've had no problems with my 930.
I didn't have much trouble getting my 930 to 4.1GHz stable, using 19x217 it runs at 4.1GHz, 1.30V actual (1.325 BIOS), and 8x RAM multiplier works just fine. Every CPU is different but I've had no problems with my 930.
I have (2) i7 920's and I bought a i7 930 when they came out. I had no problems getting the 930 up to 4.125 GHz , but it would go no farther without disabling features. When I disabled Hyper-Threading the 930 did get up to 4.3 GHz. Both both 920 will run at 4.4 GHz with Hyper-Threading enabled. They run pretty hot at 4.4 GHz so it's not an everyday thing, but they run cool at 4.2 GHz
Mine's around 4.125 and I've had it go farther for a while but it would crash, possibly due to the RAM. I may be able to go farther with my voltage increase now, if I could get 220x19 it would be nice