Benchmark Results: F1 2010
This is what I was alluding to on the previous page. I simply could not believe that the Phenom II X6 1100T could be so handicapped in F1, especially after seeing slightly better results on Gigabyte’s 890FXA-UD5 in our Sandy Bridge launch. So, I asked Don Woligroski to run the same test on his Phenom II X6 1075T/790XT-UD4P combo, featured in an upcoming shoot-out of sub-$200 processors for gaming. His results confirmed what I was seeing. Mainly, F1 2010 seems to have a problem with AMD’s six-core CPUs. Disable two of the Thuban design’s cores, yielding four active cores, and the benchmark results shoot up. The irony, of course, is that F1 is an AMD-sponsored DirectX 11 title on the graphics side.
Intel’s CPUs flip-flop a bit as you increase resolution. By the time you hit 2560x1600, which is nearly all graphics-limited, our four tested Intel chips fall within two frames per second of each other.
Chris, I think your first conclusion still valid.
Darn, the contest should be open to all Tom's Hardware registered users even from a different country!
My friend just built a new gaming rig with the 980x as the processor... He plays Age of Conan. I busted up laughing when he said he spent $1k on a processor that he'll only use to 1/10th of its potential. Told him he should have gotten an i5, now I'll send him this article as further proof.
This is just a ripoff by intel on those who are not knowledgeable enough that more expensive does not always mean better.
Chris, I think your first conclusion still valid.
Which one was that?
Well, some people just want the best when they buy a PC, regardless of cost efficiency, can't blame 'em. There'll always be that market.
Darn, the contest should be open to all Tom's Hardware registered users even from a different country!
Really wish it could be binoyski. We have specific tax laws, unfortunately, that prevent it. Same reason the folks in RI can't enter :-/
Wow AMD's CPU is just getting plain-ol decimated in this review.
Still, it does hold it's ground even though the architecture is like 4 years old, using the same technology that was around back when the C2Q's we're the high-end (the same as the original phenoms on a die shrink).
Because of this, I can almost guarantee AMD's success with their future CPU's, just like I predicted the 2600K would be faster in most cases than the 980X.
That doesn't mean I'm saying that Bulldozer will outperform the i7's or upcoming 8-core Intel CPU's I'm just saying that there's going to be some serious decisions for upgraders this year.
I mean look at Magny corus 12 core (2.2GHz) vs i7 980x, it's almost as fast and 1GHz slower (but 12 physical cores) and cost's the same.
Wow AMD's CPU is just getting plain-ol decimated in this review.
i wouldnt say decimated, and its cheaper also. That benchmark of metro 2033 is interesting, particularly the better lowfps the AMD chip managed. But i agree they have flogged this horse as far as it will go and they need bulldozer ASAP to be competitive.
This is just a ripoff by intel on those who are not knowledgeable enough that more expensive does not always mean better.
I thought that's what Intel is doing with all of their CPUs :-)
Darn, the contest should be open to all Tom's Hardware registered users even from a different country!
I agree, an think of the publicity Toms, spotty 17yr old kid in africa wins 2 x Combo Intel Core i7-990X and Intel DX58SO2 Motherboard: Value of $1261...
In this age of globalisation and almost non-existent boundaries on the net to your customers...I think you could afford to encompass anyone any where..
I have a reason to stay with a LGA 1336 chip instead of upgrading.
My feature rich motherboard cost me $300.
I know it's the nature for electronics to evolve, but going from my 2.66GHz i7 quadcore to looking at a 3.46 sexacore at the same TDP, I find it impressive.
I'm waiting for LGA 2011 to upgrade again, thank you.
I purchased the I7 920 at launch, 2 years on in 2010 i was looking for a upgrade even though it wasnt really needed. So it was either waiting for sandy bridge getting a new motherboard and CPU or going for the I7 980x.
New mother board and CPU would end up costing me 700usd anyways, so i decided to go for the I7 980x. Oced it to 4.5ghz, i think i will stick with this setup until a game actually comes up and needs more, i dont see that happening for the next few years atleast or atleast until next consoles turn up.
AMD gettin the business like always.
I check probably 10 times a day hoping that the egg gets 1155 back online. They activated the procs last week so they should be getting the mobos back in soon I hope!
Which one was that?
[citation]Two months ago, when I finished testing Intel’s Core i5-2500K and Core i7-2600K, I came to the conclusion that you’d have to be battier than Charlie Sheen with a suitcase of blow to spend $1000 on a Core i7-980X Extreme Edition in the face of Sandy Bridge-based CPUs. I was so convinced, in fact, that I didn’t bother benchmarking the super-exclusive chip, and instead focused on drilling deep into Quick Sync and Intel’s HD Graphics engines.[/citation]
YIPES! The cpu costs more than the pc's I build.
I'll get the 990x just because I can and I'll use it for web browsing and e-mail.
So 6 cores are sometimes better than 4, and Intel might still be able to sell their stock of i7-9x0X's, especially where people already have LGA 1366 motherboards.
I do database work which DOES benefit from extra cores, but I think I'll wait until they bring out 6 or 8 core Sandy Bridge chips.
Really wish it could be binoyski. We have specific tax laws, unfortunately, that prevent it. Same reason the folks in RI can't enter :-/
What tax? U get all hardware for free, right? Anyway, I am more than willing to pay for all the tax + delivery expenses, you just send the combo, np. Or don't giveaway at all, cause this is just pure discrimination.