We recently published a review of Cyberpower's Gamer Dragon, a Phenom II 955-based gaming PC equipped with DDR3 RAM and a pair of Radeon HD 4890s in CrossFire. The Cyberpower Gamer Dragon was delivered to us with a nice 3.6 GHz overclock, and when we considered what we should compare this system to, our first thought was our recent $1,300 System Builder Marathon (SBM) machine. With an Intel Core i7-920 and two GeForce GTX 260s in SLI, the cost of the components for the two builds was similar.
The comparison also addressed one of the primary complaints we received when we chose the i7 over the Phenom II for our SBM build: that the Phenom II would have been a better choice for a gaming rig, because its lower price tag would have enabled us to add better graphics cards with the budget available. Since the graphics subsystem is often the limiting factor for game performance, a cheaper AMD processor coupled with a higher-powered graphics card would have offered a better fit for gaming, according to the reader feedback.
On paper, two Radeon HD 4890s best a pair of GeForce GTX 260s, so I was satisfied that the scenario would make for a great comparison of Phenom II versus Core i7 gaming value. I merrily proceeded to take benchmarks, record the findings, and form conclusions based on the data. It seemed like the perfect opportunity to investigate the matter, and after all was said and done, my conclusion was that the Core i7-920 beat the Phenom II by a fairly substantial margin. When a budget allows for a powerful dual-graphics card setup, the Core i7 appeared to be the ideal choice, while the Phenom II was a better pick for machines in a lower price range, which the Core i7 can't touch.
Well, the Cyberpower Gamer Dragon article probably generated more forum feedback than any other piece I've written. Normally this would be a good thing, but this time my testing and subsequent conclusion left a lot of people upset. According to a number of folks, there were three main sins I committed in my review of the Phenom II machine:
1. Different Graphics Card Manufacturers
This ties in directly with concern number two below. As both of the test systems used different brands of graphics cards (one sporting Radeon GPUs and the other with GeForce GPUs), the results depended on games that demonstrated a performance preference for one of these architectures.
2. Selection of Game Benchmarks
We use four game benchmarks in our SBM series, which we selected using a number of factors, including popularity, significance, and variety. Those games are Crysis, Far Cry 2, World in Conflict, and Stalker: Clear Sky. Keep in mind, games are only a small part of the PC performance that we test in our SBMs, so up until this point we haven't noticed any problems with this selection of titles.
However, as mentioned, we pit Radeons against GeForces, opening ourselves up to any preference a specific game title might have for either architecture. It has also been suggested that our game selections are overly CPU-dependent, thus giving the Core i7 an edge.
3. The Cyberpower Gamer Dragon May Not Represent Ideal Phenom II Performance
It has also been suggested that our Cyberpower Gamer Dragon test sample wasn't working up to snuff. Concerns have been raised that the memory performance results as tested by the SiSoft Sandra benchmark were lower than they should have been. The Gamer Dragon also uses the Gigabyte GA-MA790XT-U4DP motherboard, which is equipped with AMD's 790X chipset limited to one x16 and one x8 PCI Express (PCIe) 2.0 slot. The AMD 790FX would better represent ideal Phenom II performance, as it has two full PCIe x16 slots--one for each of the graphics cards in CrossFire.
I do believe these three points cover most people's concerns with the Cyberpower article, and since these issues deserve to be investigated further, we came up with a more even-handed plan to use in this follow-up review. Instead of looking at the Cyberpower Gamer Dragon, we'll concentrate specifically on Intel Core i7 versus AMD Phenom II gaming value using our own builds.
- Introduction: A Little Background
- Phenom II Versus Core i7-920: Competing System Cost Analysis
- Test Systems And Benchmark Setup
- Synthetic Benchmarks
- Game Benchmarks: Crysis
- Game Benchmarks: Far Cry 2
- Game Benchmarks: World In Conflict
- Game Benchmarks: Stalker Clear Sky
- Game Benchmarks: Tom Clancy's H.A.W.X.
- Game Benchmarks: Fallout 3
- Game Benchmarks: Left 4 Dead
- Game Benchmarks: Prototype
- Conclusion
Umm have you taken any time to read any Tom's articles? This is their bread and butter, the reason the site exists. People read these articles because they want to know what to do with their money, the THG authors know what they are doing. The reason for these articles is to show performance differences, and this article does that very well.
I grew tired of defending your findings in the forums, and I was looking forwards to this, and its paid off.
Great read, and Toms should be thankful for having you
Adding in nvidia cards would be interesting to see, yes, but then we're moving more into engine optimizations and such, and things get less exact. Maybe the effect of software preferences on hardware architecture can be a future writeup? Nice article, here, though.
As I expected on the numbers, but I now want to see if the 790X chipset is to blame, or the Gigabyte board itself, or perhaps the memory controller onboard the CPU is to blame?
Did you read the conclusion at all? AMD lost by the numbers. That's not pro-intel, it's pro-logic. It's pro-science. That's the way the world works.
Wow. You take things way too seriously.
Ahslan .... buy your own pc ...not your daddy
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.209473
I still love AMD, though. I don't need the extra muscle that Intel gives. I'm happy with what AMD's processors give me, in terms of gaming.
I love supporting the underdog! I just can't help it. =] Intel might make great processors, but I just don't like their arrogance. That's why I support AMD. =]
you realize that with this kind of articles you play with peoples money?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813130227 mobo= 169
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820220378 ram = 85
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121291 4870 1gb times 2 =320 total =1083
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.209473 phenom 2 940+mobo =204
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227289 ram =65
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102809 4850x2 times two = 420
total=919 so thats the truth but if you want you could switch out the graphics for two gtx 285 or a 4870x2 or a gtx295 its up to you.
VERY MANY people buying I7 only pair it with one graphics card and save money everywhere in the system to be able to buy the I7 (talking about gaming systems).
Of course if you put in 2 great Gpu's, you need a very strong Cpu to handle them. Most people throw the I7 at 1 4890.
It would be very intresting to compare a PhenomII x3 720 system with Two 4890's to an I7 build with only one. (same price or amd even cheaper^^)
You compare the most expensive and not much overclockable 955 to the cheapest I7 with most overclocking headroom. Why don't you compare it to the cheaper PhenomII which also reach the 3.6 Ghz the 955 reached? Maybe even the x4 810.
After that Article I agree that If you have the money for two 4890 and still can afford an I7 it's the best choise.
But what if you dont have the money for an I7 and Two high end cards? Whats if you have to make compromises in you I7 build just for the sake of having an I7?
I think that's were the Phenom II shows its strength.
You Take the I7 best price/perfomance point and give the same budget to an Amd system. It's clear that Amd can't compete that well. It seems that you first build the I7 system you think is best and then take the money to build an Phenom II system.
Please try it the other way round once! Build a Phenom II gaming system (720/810/940 with two graphics)and THEN take the money you used and build an I7 system (maybe sacrificing the second card? or just Xfiring two lower end cards? I don't know where but you then will have to save some money)
Most benchmarks show that the X3 720 overclocked shows performance numbers on par with the 955 (oc) so why spend all the money for the 955?
Umm have you taken any time to read any Tom's articles? This is their bread and butter, the reason the site exists. People read these articles because they want to know what to do with their money, the THG authors know what they are doing. The reason for these articles is to show performance differences, and this article does that very well.
WOW thats rude.
They made a great article comparing two cpus. Its good to know which one performs better in gaming.
Again the article was very helpful good work
i read at least 10 reviews from different sites before a buy something ..and for me is more important the opinion of end user, about a product ....if 1000 people says the p2 x3 is great in games with similar performance with a 250 $ intel i will buy p2x3 and tom articles has no value for me because they are 5 people and they don't use a cpu like an end user ... they use a cpu just for rating and i spent my own money not their money ......open your eyes