difference between 3.1 &3.9ghz

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Solution
jaguarskx
Assuming the Haswell generation Core i7 is also a quad core version, the overall raw performance increase would be about 41%.

The i7 2670qm is a Sandy Bridge generation CPU. Ivy Bridge CPUs are on average 6% more powerful than Sandy Bridge CPUs. Haswell CPUs are on average 6% more powerful than Ivy Bridge CPUs. Therefore, a Haswell generation quad core i7 CPU running at 3.9GHz would be considered equal to a Sandy Bridge i7 CPU running at 4.38GHz (3.9GHz * 1.06 * 1.06). 4.38GHz is about 41% greater than 3.1GHz.

How does that translate into gaming performance depends on the game itself. BioShock is an example of a game that simply does not give a damn how powerful your CPU as long as it does not bottleneck the GPU. That increase of...
Sort by date Sort by votes
vmN

vmN

Honorable
Oct 27, 2013
1,666
0
12,160
well generally the difference between sandy-bridge and haswell, there is bout 10-30% general performance increase. This would still require heavy applications for you to actually see the differences.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
FX6350

FX6350

Honorable
Feb 12, 2014
106
0
10,710
A CPU with 500 million transistors, will ( This is almost never true, different cache sizes etc fsb. ) need to be at 8Ghz to compare to a 4Ghz 1 billion transistor CPU.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
jaguarskx

jaguarskx

Titan
Apr 19, 2006
27,979
3
84,965
Assuming the Haswell generation Core i7 is also a quad core version, the overall raw performance increase would be about 41%.

The i7 2670qm is a Sandy Bridge generation CPU. Ivy Bridge CPUs are on average 6% more powerful than Sandy Bridge CPUs. Haswell CPUs are on average 6% more powerful than Ivy Bridge CPUs. Therefore, a Haswell generation quad core i7 CPU running at 3.9GHz would be considered equal to a Sandy Bridge i7 CPU running at 4.38GHz (3.9GHz * 1.06 * 1.06). 4.38GHz is about 41% greater than 3.1GHz.

How does that translate into gaming performance depends on the game itself. BioShock is an example of a game that simply does not give a damn how powerful your CPU as long as it does not bottleneck the GPU. That increase of 41% in raw performance will probably give you an extra 2 FPS at best.

On the other extreme, SimCity is one of those rare games that are truly CPU limited. From overclocked benchmarks that I have seen there is nearly a 1 to 1 ratio increase in terms of CPU performance and actual FPS increase. Meaning If you overclock or install a CPU that is 33% more powerful, your FPS will also increase by 33%. However, as stated SimCity is a rare case.

For the most part I would say that you should see between an increase of 0% and at best half of the actual raw CPU performance increase when it comes to game performance. In other words, expect between a 0% to 20% increase in FPS depending on how CPU intensive the game is.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
jaguarskx

jaguarskx

Titan
Apr 19, 2006
27,979
3
84,965


That is basically useless information since actual perform depends on the design of the CPU architecture.

For example, AMD's Phenom II X6 series has 904 million transistors. The Bulldozer generation FX-8150 has about 1.2 billion transistors. However, many benchmarks have shown the Phenom II X6 is the overall better performing CPU.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
FX6350

FX6350

Honorable
Feb 12, 2014
106
0
10,710

( This is almost never true, different cache sizes etc fsb. )

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom