Trending

The Intel Core i7-990X Extreme Edition Processor Review

By

We were impressed enough with Intel’s Sandy Bridge architecture that we awarded the Core i5-2500K our coveted Recommended Buy award. Just north of $200, that’s a solid value. But it’s not Intel’s flagship. That honor goes to the new Core i7-990X Extreme.

Benchmark Results: Metro 2033

We’ve been down on just about every benchmark with the Phenom II X6 in it up until now, due to AMD's performance deficit compared to Intel’s processors. The six-core Phenom flagship still falls into last place across the board. However, the difference is much smaller. More important, pay attention to the minimum frame rates, which are much higher on the AMD chip than any of the Intel options.

But before we crown AMD a go-to for gamers, let’s have a look at some of the other tests.

In other news, the Core i7-990X performs well in Metro 2033 on average. But the results are far too close to justify spending $1000 specifically for excellent gaming frame rates.

116 Comments Comment from the forums
  • kikireeki 25 February 2011 13:47
    Chris, I think your first conclusion still valid.
    Reply
  • binoyski 25 February 2011 13:55
    Darn, the contest should be open to all Tom's Hardware registered users even from a different country!
    Reply
  • Saljen 25 February 2011 14:03
    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.
    Reply
  • HansVonOhain 25 February 2011 14:14
    This is just a ripoff by intel on those who are not knowledgeable enough that more expensive does not always mean better.
    Reply
  • cangelini 25 February 2011 14:18
    kikireekiChris, I think your first conclusion still valid.
    Which one was that? :)
    Reply
  • adamboy64 25 February 2011 14:19
    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.
    Reply
  • cangelini 25 February 2011 14:19
    binoyskiDarn, 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 :-/
    Reply
  • joytech22 25 February 2011 14:20
    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.
    Reply
  • iam2thecrowe 25 February 2011 14:47
    joytech22Wow 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.
    Reply
  • haplo602 25 February 2011 14:56
    HansVonOhainThis 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 :-)
    Reply