Core i5, i7 - Gaming Benchmarks for Crysis, Far Cry 2, Left 4 dead

J

Jamin43

banned
warhead.gif


farcry2.gif


wolfenstein.gif


l4d.gif


The Core i5 does seem to lose it's MOJO in various rendering benchmarks. More Complete Info at Tech Report linked below

Tech Report Conclusion said:
The Lynnfield chips' combination of price, performance, and power efficiency effectively clears the field in the desktop CPU market, leaving little room for competition from the Phenom II or older, cheaper Core 2 Quad processors—or even faster, pricier Core i7s.

Not only does the Core i5-750 outperform its like-priced would-be competitor, the Phenom II X4 955, but it also beats out the Phenom II X4 965 overall. That reality hit home most acutely, perhaps, in our gaming tests, where the Lynnfield chips simply excelled. Nah, you don't need the fastest CPU to run most games well these days, but Intel's new processors have a distinct advantage on this front. AMD will have to slash its prices further to remain competitive from a price-performance standpoint, but even then, the Phenom II X4 965 has a 140W TDP and the i5-750 has a 95W TDP. That 45W difference is reflected almost precisely in our peak system power draw results. At idle, the Phenom II X4 965 draws 22W more, as well. AMD is unlikely to field a truly attractive alternative to this $199 processor without dipping below the $150 mark. Otherwise, how could one avoid the temptation to step up?

Meanwhile, the Core i7-870 performs at least as well as the Core i7-950 overall, and it does so on a cheaper, more power-efficient platform. I could see Intel killing off everything in the Core i7-900 series except for the 975 Extreme, leaving the LGA1366 socket as an ultra-high-end, botique kind of offering. I doubt anyone would mind. The Core i7-870 is all the processor any enthusiast needs, except for the crazy people with credit card limits much higher than their IQs. (No offense, crazy guys. Just joshing, you know. No stalky-stalky, please.)

Speaking of crazy things, after seeing our test results, I'm puzzled by the fact that Intel didn't choose to put its best foot forward by offering us a peek at the Core i7-860. I think its higher Turbo Boost speeds, faster uncore clock, 1600MHz memory capability, Hyper-Threading, and $285 price tag are likely to make it the best overall value of the nascent Lynnfield lineup. One way or another, we'll have to get our hands on one soon. You may have to, as well, if you know what's good for you.

http://techreport.com/articles.x/17545/1
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Who cares?

You can get an i5 for $209 and a P55 mobo with a single PCI-E slot for around
$100

Perfect builds for people who could not care less about SLI or Crossfire.
 
True,

For gaming - initial looks look like a great value for performance. Just pointing out - for those who don't follow the additional Link to the full review article - that the core i7 still has some advantages outside of gaming.
 
I meant no disrespect, I was just saying. :)

Thanks for keeping us updated. I can't wait to build
one. :good:
 
I am impressed that they are even with the 1366 i7's in gaming. The only thing though is that having the northbridge on the CPU seems to not have given any boost so that is disappointing.
 
So glad I didn't buy I7 when I had the chance....id be so pissed so see a cheaper chip perform on par with gaming.

Thanks for the update.
 
Twist86 said:
So glad I didn't buy I7 when I had the chance....id be so pissed so see a cheaper chip perform on par with gaming.

Thanks for the update.
Click to expand...

I'm not upset in the least. That's the way it goes.

There's no disappointment in owning an i7 system, I assure you.
 
I want to see how AMD responds to these new intel processors. They will probably be able to design something a little bit better for a little bit cheaper, that's always how it goes with AMD. :)
 
linkin93 said:
I want to see how AMD responds to these new intel processors. They will probably be able to design something a little bit better for a little bit cheaper, that's always how it goes with AMD. :)
Click to expand...

Eventually I suppose.

They're only one generation behind. :D
 
Although they are on par in gaming there are many other things that the 1366 i7 performs much better in than the i5. It is awesome that they introduced this line. AMD will not have much going for them now as these will be priced very competitively.
 
THERMAL-REACTOR said:
Although they are on par in gaming there are many other things that the 1366 i7 performs much better in than the i5. It is awesome that they introduced this line. AMD will not have much going for them now as these will be priced very competitively.
Click to expand...

they may be priced similar, but they have 0 upgradability what with there now being what, 5 different chipsets?
 
THERMAL-REACTOR said:
Although they are on par in gaming there are many other things that the 1366 i7 performs much better in than the i5. It is awesome that they introduced this line. AMD will not have much going for them now as these will be priced very competitively.
Click to expand...

I would still buy a Phenom II over a i5 and wouldn't think twice about it. Intel has probably just ruined the sales of the i7. If the i5 performs so close to the i7 in games then why would any body buy an i7.
 
Bodaggit23 said:
Now you can go from an i5 to an i7 on the same board.

How is that not upgradeable?
Click to expand...
Who would upgrade to a I7 from I5 though ^-^


I think it was a stupid move to make the I5 even remotely close to the I7...destroy AMDs current to keep the business but don't make your most advanced chip worthless for half the price or more.
 
I am still trying to figure out why Intel called it the i5 processor. Why didn't they just call it the i7 with a lower model number?
 
benchmarks do not reflect real world performance, so your mileage may vary on many different configurations. However, benchmarks do give you a focal point of comparisons. Just keep that in mind, and take some of them with a grain of salt.

If you can run a game on max settings and get 100fps versus 150fps the difference is nil. If you are doing some photoshop rendering that is a different story.
 
Fatback said:
I would still buy a Phenom II over a i5 and wouldn't think twice about it. Intel has probably just ruined the sales of the i7. If the i5 performs so close to the i7 in games then why would any body buy an i7.
Click to expand...

You have to understand the workings of the chip to really understand the difference. The non-core parts of the i5 are clocked slower than that on the i7. Keep in mind that the PCIe controller on the 1156 i5/i7 is on the CPU and is part of the 'non-core' clock group.

Another feature of i7 over i5 is hyperthreading. I know that's not a big deal yet, there's very few places for 8 threads to be running right now but they'll come in time I'm sure. And one more thing: turbo mode. The i7s can disable unused cores on the fly and get a higher single (or dual or triple) core clock speed than the i5.
 
Cromewell said:
You have to understand the workings of the chip to really understand the difference. The non-core parts of the i5 are clocked slower than that on the i7. Keep in mind that the PCIe controller on the 1156 i5/i7 is on the CPU and is part of the 'non-core' clock group.

Another feature of i7 over i5 is hyperthreading. I know that's not a big deal yet, there's very few places for 8 threads to be running right now but they'll come in time I'm sure. And one more thing: turbo mode. The i7s can disable unused cores on the fly and get a higher single (or dual or triple) core clock speed than the i5.
Click to expand...

I believe they have different L1 and L2 cache sizes as well, which makes a huge difference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top