Benchmark Results: Left 4 Dead 2
More so than any other test, Left 4 Dead 2 helps demonstrate why a processor like Core i7-980X might be well-suited to a gaming environment. It’s so damn fast that any game that doesn’t bring a graphics subsystem to its knees will, in fact, realize a speed-up.
At both 1680x1050 and 1920x1200, the six-core CPU earns slim victories over the Core i7-975 Extreme. This isn’t because Valve’s Source engine is taking advantage of six cores. Rather, the threads it is employing are getting access to the larger shared L3 cache.
Of course, because it isn’t incredibly graphically-intensive, a solid card like our Radeon HD 5850 lets you turn on more eye candy without knee-capping performance. Enabling 8xAA and 16xAF is more than playable, even at 2560x1600. And at that point, you’re again looking at comparable performance between the six-core Core i7-980X and sub-$200 Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition.
- 1 / 6
- Next
-
Latest CPU News
- 05/24 – Nvidia to Push Tablet Prices to $199 With Kai Platform
- 05/23 – AMD Backing Out of CPU Speed Wars Against Intel
- 05/22 – AMD Hitting The Casino Floor With Embedded R-Series
- 05/22 – Does Your AMD FX Platform BSOD with Steam? Read This.
- 05/20 – Intel To Support Cheap Ultrabooks With Low-Cost Celerons
Latest CPU reviews
- 05/24 – Overclocking Core i7-3770K: Learning To Live With Compromise
- 05/22 – Core i5-3570K, -3550, -3550S, And -3570T: Ivy Bridge Efficiency
- 05/18 – Best Gaming CPUs For The Money: May 2012
- 05/15 – AMD A10-4600M Review: Mobile Trinity Gets Tested
- 05/14 – Core i7-3720QM: Ivy Bridge Makes Its Mark On Mobility
-
Latest Intel News
- Intel Picks UK for Research Institute on Sustainable Cities
- Specs for Dell's Windows 8 Clover Trail Tablet Leaked
- Thunderbolt Will Become Key Motherboard Spec in 2H 2012
- AMD Backing Out of CPU Speed Wars Against Intel
- Intel Hopes New Batteries Can Reduce Ultrabook Cost
-
Latest Intel reviews
- Overclocking Core i7-3770K: Learning To Live With Compromise
- Core i5-3570K, -3550, -3550S, And -3570T: Ivy Bridge Efficiency
- Best Gaming CPUs For The Money: May 2012
- Intel SSD 330 Review: 60, 120, And 180 GB Models Benchmarked
- Core i7-3720QM: Ivy Bridge Makes Its Mark On Mobility
First Comment, I'll be staying up to read this review =)
I'm guessing you didn't read this.
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/t [...] ,9855.html
Hm, not bad at all more cores at the same price as 975. Games don't seem to scale that much but CAD and transcoding is improved overall. Glad to see AMDs 965 hold its own in the game segment.
I'm guessing you didn't read this.http://www.tomshardware.com/news/t [...] ,9855.html
Nope, Haven't bothered looking at that. The 980x doesn't really make any difference in gaming but I wasn't expecting anything earth shattering. Does look good against the 965 x4 for mutlimedia applications.
glad im going with the right x58! miiiight have to upgrade my cpu choice
Nope, Haven't bothered looking at that. The 980x doesn't really make any difference in gaming but I wasn't expecting anything earth shattering. Does looks good against the 965 x4 for mutlimedia applications.
It is a good reminder how to act on toms you should read it when you get the chance.
Lolz...The Crysis benchmark and the Chris's starting line...Am sure he would have been forced to post that so that no one start with the infamous tag line "But can it play Crysis ?"
And Chris it would be nice if you could post some benchmarks of games that are CPU taxing like the GTA IV/ FSX...Most of the games used in the above benchmarks dont tax the CPU as much as these...
I hear you there gkay...I used to do more with GTA IV (not sure how prolific FS X still is), but it just depends on how many folks still want to see it. As a *general* rule, $1,000 CPUs aren't going to do much for your high-res gaming. However, it's a good point that there are a couple of titles notorious for hitting graphics far less than host processing power!
wow wow..6 cores already!! Truly is the fastest now. AMD, do keep up!!
NO GTA IV? Should get great gains as it's notoriously CPU limited by the best quad cores. Unforgivable.
I wonder how much AMD's Phenom II X6 will be and how it will compare to 980X...
Why do we bother with iTunes anymore..just get rid of it. I did I don't even know how many years ago.
I hear you there gkay...I used to do more with GTA IV (not sure how prolific FS X still is), but it just depends on how many folks still want to see it. As a *general* rule, $1,000 CPUs aren't going to do much for your high-res gaming. However, it's a good point that there are a couple of titles notorious for hitting graphics far less than host processing power!
FSX would be a perfect gaming title for the CPU benchies. The thing is, it's not a gaming crowd title, but there are still a ton of people who still use it.
Another really good title for CPU benchmarks is Lost planet. From what I remember, it is one of the best cpu scaling games, even today.
FSX would be a perfect gaming title for the CPU benchies. The thing is, it's not a gaming crowd title, but there are still a ton of people who still use it.Another really good title for CPU benchmarks is Lost planet. From what I remember, it is one of the best cpu scaling games, even today.
Wholly agreed.
Alright, so just a bit of speculation, but how does everyone expect these new six-core cpu's to affect prices of the mid-high grade cpus?
Obviously this Intel won't be forcing down any reasonable prices, but I am hoping that AMD's six core will bring down the price of either the i5-750 or the i7-930.
I guess one can always hope...
Well, from a gaming standpoint, there is not much difference between the chips. But in a corporate environment (workstations/servers), the 6-core processors are going to make a HUGE difference, and to say that you can run 2 extra cores with almost the same power consumption, that's priceless.
Great article!
"What’d really be cool for the enthusiast crowd would be a line of quad-core CPUs manufactured at 32nm. Almost certainly scalable to even higher clock rates"
This is exact same thing I've been dreaming of, a high clocked 32nm quad at a reasonable price, maybe even with an unlocked multiplier
Hopefully we don't have to wait until Q1 2011 to be able to buy one.
To be honest the main reason I got an x58 mobo when they came out was the rumor that there was going to be an 8 core version with HT and turbo mode within 2 years of the original launch date. It would seem those reports were right (they were intel's original claims after all) but might be a little late depending on how fast the 6 cores sell. But hopefully by the time the 8 core versions come out I'll have the money to buy one lol.
Great article though I really enjoyed flipping through all the pages of benchies... sort of wish you could have used dual 5970's for the gaming test though since the 5850 seems to have been your bottleneck with all the game tests.
This thing is real and it's FAST. I'm impressed but gamers, you don't need it. Benchmark breakers and Pixar need it though.
This is definatly aimed at business use only. Gamers would be wasting thier money on something like this.
Without seeing numbers, I'd guess AMD will counter with 2/3 of the performance, (possibly more depending on how aggressive they take thier speed boost), but it will be at 1/3 of the price. We may find out as early as April.