| Test Hardware | |
|---|---|
| Processors | Intel Core i7-3770K (Ivy Bridge) 3.5 GHz (35 * 100 MHz), LGA 1155, 8 MB Shared L3, Hyper-Threading enabled, Turbo Boost enabled, Power-savings enabled |
| Intel Core i5-3570K (Ivy Bridge) 3.4 GHz (34 * 100 MHz), LGA 1155, 6 MB Shared L3, Turbo Boost enabled, Power-savings enabled | |
| Intel Core i5-3550 (Ivy Bridge) 3.3 GHz (33 * 100 MHz), LGA 1155, 6 MB Shared L3, Turbo Boost enabled, Power-savings enabled | |
| Intel Core i5-3550S (Ivy Bridge) 3.0 GHz (30 * 100 MHz), LGA 1155, 6 MB Shared L3, Turbo Boost enabled, Power-savings enabled | |
| Intel Core i5-3570T (Ivy Bridge) 2.3 GHz (23 * 100 MHz), LGA 1155, 6 MB Shared L3, Turbo Boost enabled, Power-savings enabled | |
| Intel Core i7-2700K (Sandy Bridge) 3.5 GHz (35 * 100 MHz), LGA 1155, 8 MB Shared L3, Hyper-Threading enabled, Turbo Boost enabled, Power-savings enabled | |
| Thermal Paste | Zalman ZM-STG1 |
| Motherboard | Gigabyte Z77X-UD5H (LGA 1155) Intel Z77 Express Chipset, BIOS F7 |
| Memory | G.Skill 16 GB (4 x 4 GB) DDR3-1600, F3-12800CL9Q2-32GBZL @ 9-9-9-24 and 1.5 V |
| Hard Drive | Intel SSD 510 250 GB, SATA 6 Gb/s |
| Graphics | Intel HD Graphics 4000 |
| Intel HD Graphics 3000 | |
| Intel HD Graphics 2500 | |
| Power Supply | Cooler Master UCP-1000 W |
| System Software And Drivers | |
| Operating System | Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit |
| DirectX | DirectX 11 |
| Graphics Driver | HD Graphics Driver For Windows 7 (15.26.8.64.2696) |
In addition to testing all four Core i5 processors, we also re-ran our results using the Core i7-3770K and Core i7-2700K using Intel HD Graphics 4000/3000.

| Game Benchmarks And Settings | |
|---|---|
| Batman: Arkham City | Game Settings: Lowest Quality Settings, Anti-Aliasing: Disabled, V-sync: Disabled, DirectX 11 Mode, 1280x720, Built-in Benchmark |
| The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim | Game Settings: Low Quality Settings, FXAA disabled, V-sync: Disabled, 1280x720, 25-second playback, Fraps |
| World of Warcraft: Cataclysm | Game Settings: Good Quality Settings, Anti-Aliasing: 1x AA, Vertical Sync: Disabled, 1280x720, Demo: Crushblow to The Krazzworks, DirectX 11/9 |
| Audio Benchmarks and Settings | |
| iTunes | Version: 10.4.10, 64-bit Audio CD ("Terminator II" SE), 53 min., Convert to AAC audio format |
| Lame MP3 | Version 3.98.3 Audio CD "Terminator II SE", 53 min, convert WAV to MP3 audio format, Command: -b 160 --nores (160 Kb/s) |
| Video Benchmarks and Settings | |
| HandBrake CLI | Version: 0.9.5 Video: Big Buck Bunny (720x480, 23.972 frames) 5 Minutes, Audio: Dolby Digital, 48 000 Hz, Six-Channel, English, to Video: AVC Audio: AC3 Audio2: AAC (High Profile) |
| MainConcept Reference v2.2 | Version: 2.2.0.5440 MPEG-2 to H.264, MainConcept H.264/AVC Codec, 28 sec HDTV 1920x1080 (MPEG-2), Audio: MPEG-2 (44.1 kHz, 2 Channel, 16-Bit, 224 Kb/s), Codec: H.264 Pro, Mode: PAL 50i (25 FPS), Profile: H.264 BD HDMV |
| Application Benchmarks and Settings | |
| WinRAR | Version: 4.11 RAR, Syntax "winrar a -r -m3", Benchmark: 2010-THG-Workload |
| WinZip 16 | Version: 16.0 Pro WinZip CLI, Benchmark: 2010-THG-Workload |
| 7-Zip | Version 9.22 beta LZMA2, Syntax "a -t7z -r -m0=LZMA2 -mx=5", Benchmark: 2010-THG-Workload |
| Adobe Premiere Pro CS 5.5 | Paladin Sequence to H.264 Blu-ray Output 1920x1080, Maximum Quality, Mercury Playback Engine: Software Mode |
| Adobe After Effects CS 5.5 | Version: CS5.5 Tom's Hardware Workload, SD project with three picture-in-picture frames, source video at 720p, Render Multiple Frames Simultaneously |
| Adobe Photoshop CS 5.1 (64-Bit) | Version: 11 Filtering a 16 MB TIF (15 000x7266), Filters:, Radial Blur (Amount: 10, Method: zoom, Quality: good) Shape Blur (Radius: 46 px; custom shape: Trademark sysmbol) Median (Radius: 1px) Polar Coordinates (Rectangular to Polar) |
| ABBYY FineReader | Version: 10 Professional Build (10.0.102.82) Read PDF save to Doc, Source: Political Economy (J. Broadhurst 1842) 111 Pages |
| 3ds Max 2012 | Version: 10 x64 Rendering Space Flyby Mentalray (SPECapc_3dsmax9), Frame: 248, Resolution: 1440 x 1080 |
| Adobe Acrobat X Professional | PDF Document Creation (Print) from Microsoft PowerPoint 2010 |
| SolidWorks 2010 | PhotoView 360 Render 01-Lighter Explode.SLDASM (SolidMuse.com) Image Output Resolution: 1920x1080, Render: Preview Quality “Good”, Final Render Quality “Best” |
| Visual Studio 2010 | Compile Chrome project (1/31/2012) with devenv.com /build Release |
| Synthetic Benchmarks and Settings | |
| PCMark 7 | Version: 1.0.4 |
| 3DMark 11 | Version 1.0.3 |
| SiSoftware Sandra 2012 SP3 | CPU Test=CPU Arithmetic/Multimedia, Memory Test=Bandwidth Benchmark, Cryptography, Cache Latency |
Previous
Next
Summary
- Four Ivy Bridge-Based Core i5 CPUs, Compared
- Lining Up The Contenders: Are There 95 W IVBs?
- Test Setup And Benchmarks
- Benchmark Results: PCMark 7
- Benchmark Results: SiSoft Sandra 2012
- Benchmark Results: Adobe CS 5.5 And Content Creation
- Benchmark Results: Productivity
- Benchmark Results: File Compression
- Benchmark Results: Media Encoding
- Benchmark Results: 3DMark 11
- Benchmark Results: 3DMark 11, Integrated Vs. Entry-Level Discrete
- Benchmark Results: Real-World Games
- Power Consumption And Max. Temperature
- Efficiency
- Low-Power CPUs: Specific Applications Only
Ask a Category Expert
Actually a lot of sites have shown just what Chris is talking about. Even a dual core Pentium with a HD6670 beats the top end Llano piece (a quad core) even with CFX of the IGP with a HD6570. Llano is great for some things but overall in DT its only a low end entry level product and is much weaker per core and per clock than Intels CPUs.
What Chris did was pulled the same charts from his first IB review and added in the HD2500 (the new low end Intel IGP) for comparison.
If someone cannot take this information and realize that its just for comparison and that its not to show anything better, then thats their problem. If this was a Llano article, or the Trinity article when it comes out, you better believe Chris will do everything to check ever performance aspect. But its not. Its an article to see if the T and S models are worth it.
Overll, llano is overrate in my book. We have barley sold any at my work place. Just doesn't have the pulling power like a CPU and discrete GPU does.
Because this is a story about the Intel chips. To the contrary, though, the AMD-based platform is more likely to bottleneck a discrete graphics card than the Intel one. AMD's strength is in the integrated graphics right now.
Because this is a story about the Intel chips. To the contrary, though, the AMD-based platform is more likely to bottleneck a discrete graphics card than the Intel one. AMD's strength is in the integrated graphics right now.
Actually a lot of sites have shown just what Chris is talking about. Even a dual core Pentium with a HD6670 beats the top end Llano piece (a quad core) even with CFX of the IGP with a HD6570. Llano is great for some things but overall in DT its only a low end entry level product and is much weaker per core and per clock than Intels CPUs.
What Chris did was pulled the same charts from his first IB review and added in the HD2500 (the new low end Intel IGP) for comparison.
If someone cannot take this information and realize that its just for comparison and that its not to show anything better, then thats their problem. If this was a Llano article, or the Trinity article when it comes out, you better believe Chris will do everything to check ever performance aspect. But its not. Its an article to see if the T and S models are worth it.
Overll, llano is overrate in my book. We have barley sold any at my work place. Just doesn't have the pulling power like a CPU and discrete GPU does.
I'm thinking in terms of a HTPC/"Super-Console". Low power, high gaming+A/V performance, quiet, 'instant'-on.
If you guys get the time to, of course.
I must admit, with a low to mid end card, Llano wouldn't really cause any bottlenecking issues, however it wouldn't be reasonable to expect Llano to perform the same or better than SB or IB i3s and i5s using the same card for most games. SB and IV are just faster even if Llano had a higher clock, period.
In instances where he HD4000 has enough GPU power, but the HD2500 does not, the 3570k will offer a lower total system power option than either of the t/s options once you factor in adding a GPU that meets your needs.
If you jut bought a 3570k and undervoled it, which IB seems very good at, the results wouldn't even be close.
Those processors may be the only ones that you could get into your mini-ITX board. For example, Foxconn H61S mini-ITX will only accept less than 65W CPUs http://www.cpu-upgrade.com/mb-Foxconn/H61S.html
However, seeing that the 77W CPUs top power draw is practically the same as 3550S, I wonder whether they will not fit in those mini-ITX boards.
That was a teaser from the original Intel Core i7-3770K Review: A Small Step Up For Ivy Bridge.
What happened? Was this it?
I'm still very curious!
Thermal paste is only usefull when used to fill in air gaps between heat conductive materials so it can disipate more heat than air can. But replace metal with the paste? Look like someone tried to make more profit here by cutting down production cost. Next Bridge, please!
What I want to know, is take the i5 k series chips. Ivy starts out more efficient, but as you overclock them, due to voltage jumps on ivy - does sandy become more efficient at some point.