Benchmark Results: Application Benchmarks
AVG’s virus check doesn’t benefit much from the faster clock speeds. This doesn’t necessarily apply to all anti-virus programs, though. We're looking into other AV suites, since the latest versions of this one have just fallen off with regard to scalable results.
3ds Max scales in a linear fashion, but this application can benefit much more if you go for a quad-core processor rather than trying to coax additional performance from a dual-core chip. You’ll almost halve the rendering time at similar clock speeds. Check out our current Desktop CPU Charts on 3ds Max for details.
PDF creation happens noticeably faster for our 115-page PowerPoint document. While the process takes 1:35 at stock speeds, the same PDF finishes in 1:17 at a 4 GHz nominal speed (4.16/4.32 GHz Turbo Boost).
There are noticeable benefits for image processing using Photoshop, as well.
WinZip 12 isn’t optimized to take advantage of additional cores, but it does benefit from any clock speed increases. This is another one we plan to replace, as there isn't much room left for compression/decompression titles that aren't written with parallelism in mind.
Fritz 11 is a chess program that takes advantage of multiple cores and clock speed increases.
Related Stories :
- Overclocking: Get The Performance Of A Core i5 From Core i3
- 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
Thanks for an informative overclocking article that helps put things in perspective.
Nice article!!
These i5 are good overclock-able chips
Very nice article and I totally agree with the conclusion paragraph and changing the way CPUs are looked at for use.
Cool.
But after all that, I'm just wondering what kind of efficiency I could get out of a high binned dual core that's left on stock clocks but heavily undervolted with 2x2GB 1.5v DDR3, a 80GB x18-m and a 5670 and a board/PSU designed for low powert usage. Hell, my current CPU would use as much power as that entire system. =)
But, we didn't buy i7's for the performance-to-watt ratio now, did we?
Patrick Schmid and Achim Roos - Can I ask why are your articles are always co-authored?
Thank you.
Patrick Schmid and Achim Roos - Can I ask why are your articles are always co-authored? Thank you.
The co-authoring probably has to do with one being the writer of the original article and the other being the translator, or one is the SME and the other is the technical writer.
We could use a i5 750 at stock speed to see how it compare with an overclocked i5 661. Maybe throw an i3 in there too to keep things in perspective.
It would be nice to see Turbo Boost disabled (power savings still up) and see how the overal efficiency behaves. Whitout Turbo Boost, you can keep the multiplier under control maybe reducing the core voltage needed.
Pretty interesting that there was not much of an efficiency increase even with small overclocks. Maybe this is because of Turbo Boost? If so, I think envolva's got the right idea.
My question is what role the 45 nano graphics core plays in this?
Might have been more interesting to use a i5-670 part, where the base core speed is 133 mhz higher and graphics core starts at 733 mhz versus 900.
The power/clock speed graph looks a little odd, I wonder how much of it is the cpu core staying low power while the graphics core uses more and more energy?
I'd be curious if overclocking the graphics part increases pure processor performance at all. The knee-jerk reaction is that this is an idiotic question, but consider the memory controller is in the video controller, and there's a possibility that even if you don't use the IGP, you might be well to overclock it to improve the memory performance slightly.
What were the temperatures like?
I must say that in my mind your testing is faulty from the start: if you just start increasing base clock with stock voltages, the outcome is obvious even without testing (that best efficiency is around the point you can go without rising voltages). If you want to get us some real and even remotely useful data on microarchitecture/manufacturing process efficiency you must UNDERVOLT every test frequency you use down to minimum stable voltage! So any chance we will see that in future?
It would´ve been interesting to see some game benchmarks as well. To see if there´s any benefit to efficiently overclock the cpu for games.
I want Gulftown!!!
Is it just me, or did I miss the Voltage Table on the Voltage Table and Settings page? What voltages were used at each BCLK?
It's not just you.
i think there should be a effeciency article done for an i3, i mean they're really easy to overclock with the one in my mITX system doing 3.8GHz easy on stock cooler