Test Hardware And Benchmarks
| Test Hardware | |
|---|---|
| Processors | Intel Core i7-920 Extreme (Bloomfield) 2.66 GHz, LGA 1366, 4.8 GT/s QPI, 8 MB L3, Power-savings enabled |
| Intel Core i7-870 (Lynnfield) 2.93 GHz, LGA 1156, 8 MB L3, Power-savings enabled | |
| Intel Core i5-750 (Lynnfield) 2.66 GHz, LGA 1156, 8 MB L3, Power-savings enabled | |
| Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550S (Yorkfield) 2.83 GHz, LGA 775, 1,333 MHz FSB, 12 MB L2, Power-savings enabled | |
| AMD Phenom II X4 965 BE (Deneb) 3.4 GHz, Socket AM3, 4 GT/s HyperTransport, 6 MB L3, Power-savings enabled | |
| Motherboards | Asus P6T (LGA 1366) X58/ICH10R, BIOS 0707 |
| Gigabyte P55-UD6 (LGA 1156) P55, BIOS F3 | |
| Intel DX48BT2 (LGA 775) X48/ICH10R, BIOS 1902 | |
| Asus M4A79T Deluxe (AM3) 790FX/SB750, BIOS 1103 | |
| Memory | Corsair 4 GB (2 x 2 GB) DDR3-1600 7-7-7-20 @ DDR3-1333 |
| Corsair 6 GB (3 x 2 GB) DDR3-1600 7-7-7-20 @ DDR3-1333 | |
| Hard Drive | Intel SSDSA2M160G2GC 160 GB SATA 3 Gb/s |
| Graphics | Sapphire Radeon HD 4870 X2 2GB x2 |
| BFG GeForce GTX 285 OCFU Edition 1GB x2 | |
| Power Supply | Cooler Master UCP 1100W |
| System Software And Drivers | |
| Operating System | Windows 7 x64 RTM |
| DirectX | DirectX 11 |
| Platform Driver | Intel INF Chipset Update Utility 9.1.1.1015 |
| Graphics Driver | Catalyst 9.8 |
| GeForce 190.62 | |
A few notes about our setup here:
Most notably, we've shifted from Windows Vista to Windows 7 for testing. Let us know what you think about this in the comments section, but it was pretty clear that Vista was never a favorite, so we're hoping Windows 7 is a more popular environment in which to test. We can confirm that all of the games benchmarked here work in Windows 7. FS X did have occasional hiccups when loading a map, but restarting the app fixed the problem every time.
It should also be noted that the GeForce GTX 285 OCFU Edition cards are clocked too aggressively for an SLI configuration; we had to manually turn the fan speed up in Nvidia's System Tools utility in order to keep them stable through testing. To be fair, we also had trouble with the Radeon HD 4870 X2s in CrossFire on Asus' P6T, where the top card doesn't get enough fresh air due to spacing issues.
All power-saving options were left enabled so that Turbo Boost, EIST, and Cool'n'Quiet would function as intended in a production environment.
| Benchmark Configuration | |
|---|---|
| Benchmark | Setttings |
| S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Clear Sky | High Quality Settings, No AA / No AF, vsync off, 1680x1050 / 2560x1600, DirectX 10 / DirectX 10.1 |
| High Quality Settings, 4x AA / No AF, vsync off, 1680x1050 / 2560x1600, DirectX 10 / DirectX 10.1 | |
| Resident Evil 5 | Fixed Benchmark, No AA / No AF, vsync off, 1680x1050 / 2560x1600, DirectX 10 |
| Fixed Benchmark, 4x AA / No AF, vsync off, 1680x1050 / 2560x1600, DirectX 10 | |
| Far Cry 2 | Ultra High Quality Settings, No AA / No AF, vsync off, 1680x1050 / 2560x1600, Steam Version, DirectX 10 |
| Ultra High Quality Settings, 4x AA / No AF, vsync off, 1680x1050 / 2560x1600, Steam Version, DirectX 10 | |
| Left 4 Dead | High Quality Settings, No AA / No AF, vsync off, 1680x1050 / 2560x1600, Tomshardware Demo, Steam Version |
| High Quality Settings, 4x AA / 8x AF, vsync off, 1680x1050 / 2560x1600, Tomshardware Demo, Steam Version | |
| Grand Theft Auto 4 | Very High Quality Settings, No AA / Max AF, vsync off, 1680x1050 / 2560x1600, In-Game Benchmark |
| Crysis | Very High Quality Settings, No AA / No AF, vsync off, 1680x1050 / 2560x1600, DirectX 10, Patch 1.2.1, 64-bit executable |
| Very High Quality Settings, 4x AA / No AF, vsync off, 1680x1050 / 2560x1600, DirectX 10, Patch 1.2.1, 64-bit executable | |
| Flight Simulator X | Ultra High Quality Settings, No AA / Trilinear Filtering, 20 fps target, 1680x1050 / 2560x1600, DirectX 10 |
| Ultra High Quality Settings, AA Enabled / AF Enabled, 20 fps target, 1680x1050 / 2560x1600, DirectX 10 | |
Related Stories :
- Core i5, Core i7, CrossFire, And SLI: Gaming Paradise, Redux?
- 3rd-Gen Zbox Mini-PCs Receive Core i3, i5 Treatment
- Deals April 12: HP Core i5 Ivy Bridge Desktop $435
- Next Intel NUC Will Carry Core i5 & i7 CPUs
- Report: Haswell Core i5 Benchmarked
- Intel Core i5, i7 Haswell Processors to be Released in June
- Origin PC Millennium: 3-Way SLI And A 4.6 GHz Core i5
- Deals Dec 5: 14" Toshiba Ultrawide Core i5 Ultrabook $599.99
- Deals Nov. 21: Core i5 Ivy Bridge Slim Desktop $424
- Deals Oct 10: Loaded Ivy Bridge Core i5 Laptop $499.99
so we can assume for gaming the 965BE (or 955 oc) and ATi cards are just as fast as Core i7 and i5 but at a fraction of the price
The 955 does cost less. The 965 is more expensive than Core i5.
Only thing I don't like is how you knock Crossfire with 2 HD 4870X2's, since when is it even feasible that 4-way CF would scale as well as 2-way SLI?
But excellent review, overall, I'm actually surprised at how the 965BE did, I thought it'd be behind, where it was actually right in the pack.
I would have liked to see a 780a or a 980a SLI motherboard used to check the SLI numbers on the P2 965BE. I'm also surprised there's no overclocking numbers in the comparison, is that article still to come out?
It's upcoming dirt; Patrick is the one working on it (and our Italian team sent word of its i5 and i7s in excess of 4.2 GHz)
Nice game collection you got there.......
Great review.
I like vista, rock solid and stable since I got it years ago. Don't listen to the bashers who never have tried the product.
You giotta remember vista is design for spoecific hardware and powerfull hardware that can run it, so people with P4 3GHz and vista complain about its speed, vista is OK, i dont like it cause my computer doesm't like it thats fine i get over it and chnage my OS
Thanks for weighing in, guys!
So there's no benafit from adding a second 285 to a q9550s or an x4 965 be ??
I get a good performance boost from my second gtx280 with my q9650 @ 4 gz
crash--
As mentioned in the story, these were tested on 790GX and X48 platforms, which don't do SLI. While there are Nvidia-based SLI platforms available for both configurations, I felt that they were quite a bit more rare and applicable to a much smaller contingent of readers than the CrossFire-capable platforms. The beauty of X58 and P55 is that they'll do both!
Regards,
Chris
Kudos for adding the Flight Simulator X as a benchmark.
Why so many tests today with 2 4870x2s?
I'd rather have seen 4890 and then 4890CF. That way you see single card performance compared to crossfire instead of dual corssfire compared to quad crossfire.
I do understand why the card is compared to the GTX 285 based on price though.
Let's be glad AMD is still around to provide competition to Intel. Gaming is obviously fine on either CPU, but some people say: "OMG, I must have the Core i7 because it can do the Monte Carlo simulation faster!!!". The performance difference between Core i7/Phenom II is marginal right now, but if AMD were to exit stage left, then these round ups would be VIA vs. Intel, and I don't know about you, but VIA's offerings really AREN'T fast enough for me... Consider a Phenom II, I love mine...
Let's be glad AMD is still around to provide competition to Intel. Gaming is obviously fine on either CPU, but some people say: "OMG, I must have the Core i7 because it can do the Monte Carlo simulation faster!!!". The performance difference between Core i7/Phenom II is marginal right now, but if AMD were to exit stage left, then these round ups would be VIA vs. Intel, and I don't know about you, but VIA's offerings really AREN'T fast enough for me... Consider a Phenom II, I love mine...
I wish there is a third and fourth player in the market so AMD won't sit on its butt and do nothing. AMD has this idea that “we don’t have to compete on performance, just make our product cheap enough and people will buy it”. That’s what doomed GM and Chrysler.
I wish Nvidia and NEC join/rejoin the CPU market.
Thank you, Toms, for the detailed Graphics comparison. Yet regarding the comments section, I have to shake my head that we're again continuing the AMD versus Intel wars.
I thought people should have learned by now that GPU~intensive tests say little about CPUs, except whether they're 'Good Enough', or not.
I wonder if u will ever include WOW in ur benchmark suite. Its just a MMORPG but it happens to be the most played game on the planet, thus making it interesting for a lot of us out there who are looking on information when deciding to buy one video card vs another or one processor vs another. Thnkz.
Pei-Chen: This article shobuld make it painfully obvious that AMD can and DOES compete on performance in games. AMD has brought plenty of innovation, even if they don't always finish first, but only for the CPU-based video rendering enthusiast does it make no sense to purchase AMD, the other 99.9% of us couldn't tell the difference in a taste test.
PS: If you want a 3rd and 4th player, you should go discuss x86 licensing with your beloved Intel...
The only question that remains for me is how things will turn once the DirectX 11 cards are announced.
Then, I can see x8 PCIe2.0 links hurting the P55 chipset and the X58 showing its true potential.
This will definitely affect SLI/Crossfire setups but I am not sure how it will affect single card solutions.