Download the Tom's Hardware App from the App Store
The reference for current tech news
Yes No

Test Setup And Benchmarks

by
Test Hardware
Processors
Intel Core i7-980X (Gulftown) 3.33 GHz, LGA 1366, 12MB L3, Hyper-Threading enabled, Power-savings enabled

Intel Core i7-975 Extreme (Bloomfield) 3.33 GHz, LGA 1366, 8MB L3, Hyper-Threading enabled, Power-savings enabled

Intel Core i7-920 (Bloomfield) 2.66 GHz, LGA 1366, 8MB L3, Hyper-Threading enabled, Power-savings enabled

Intel Core i5-750 (Lynnfield) 2.66 GHz, LGA 1156, 8MB L3, Power-savings enabled

AMD Phenom II X4 965 BE (Deneb) 3.4 GHz, Socket AM3, 4 GT/s HyperTransport, 6MB L3, Power-savings enabled
Motherboards
Gigabyte X58A-UD5 (LGA 1366) X58 Express, BIOS F4

Gigabyte P55A-UD7 (LGA 1156) P55 Express, BIOS F4

Asus M4A79T Deluxe (Socket AM3) 790FX/SB750, BIOS 2304
Memory
Corsair 6GB (3 x 2GB) DDR3-1600 7-7-7-20 @ DDR3-1333

Corsair 4GB (2 x 2GB) DDR3-1600 7-7-7-20 @ DDR3-1333
Hard Drive
Intel SSDSA2M160G2GC 160GB SATA 3 Gb/s

Intel SSDSA2MH080G1GN 80GB SATA 3 Gb/s
Graphics
Sapphire Radeon HD 5850 1GB
Power Supply
Cooler Master UCP 1100W
Heatsink
Intel DBX-B Thermal Solution
System Software And Drivers
Operating System
Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit
DirectX
DirectX 11
Platform Driver
Intel INF Chipset Update Utility 9.1.1.1015
Graphics DriverCatalyst 10.2

Benchmarks and Settings

Audio Encoding

iTunes

Version: 9.0.2.25 (64-bit), Audio CD ("Terminator II" SE), 53 min., Default format AAC

Video Encoding

TMPEG 4.7

Version: 4.7.3.292, Import File: "Terminator II" SE DVD (5 Minutes), Resolution: 720x576 (PAL) 16:9

DivX 6.8.5

Encoding mode: Insane Quality, Enhanced Multi-Threading, Enabled using SSE4, Quarter-pixel search

XviD 1.2.2

Display encoding status=off

MainConcept Reference 1.6.1

MPEG2 to MPEG2 (H.264), MainConcept H.264/AVC Codec, 28 sec HDTV 1920x1080 (MPEG2), Audio: MPEG2 (44.1 KHz, 2 Channel, 16-Bit, 224 Kb/s), Mode: PAL (25 FPS), Profile: Tom’s Hardware Settings for Qct-Core

HandBrake 0.9.4
Version 0.9.4, convert first .vob file from The Last Samurai to .mp4, High Profile

Applications

Autodesk 3ds Max 2010 (64-bit)

Version: 2009 Service Pack 1, Rendering Dragon Image at 1920x1080 (HDTV)

WinRAR 3.90

Version 3.90 (64-bit), Benchmark: THG-Workload (334 MB)

7-Zip

Version 4.65, Built-in Benchmark

Adobe Photoshop CS4
Radial Blur, Shape Blur, Median, Polar Coordinates filters
AVG Anti-Virus 9
Virus scan of 334MB of compressed files

Synthetic Benchmarks and Settings

3DMark Vantage

Version: 1.02, GPU and CPU scores

PCMark Vantage

Version: 1.00, System, Memories, TV and Movies, and Productivity benchmarks, Windows Media Player 10.00.00.3646

SiSoftware Sandra 2010

CPU Test=CPU Arithmetic/Multimedia, Memory Test=Bandwidth Benchmark, Cryptography

Games
Crysis
High Quality Settings, No AA / No AF, 4xAA / No AF, vsync off, 1280x1024 / 1680x1050 / 1900x1200, DirectX 10, Patch 1.2.1, 64-bit executable
Left 4 Dead 2
High Quality Settings, No AA / No AF, 8xAA / 16xAF, vsync off, 1680x1050 / 1920x1200 / 2560x1600, Tomshardware Demo, Steam Version
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2
Ultra High Settings, No AA / No AF, 4xAA / No AF, 1680x1050 / 1920x1200 / 2560x1600, The Gulag, 60 second sequence, Fraps
DiRT2
Ultra High Settings, No AA / No AF, 4xAA / No AF, 1680x1050 / 1920x1200 / 2560x1600, In-Game Benchmark, Steam Version
Share:
13
Comments
X
Submit

Comments
Read the comments on the forums
Fox Montage 11/03/2010 13:12
Hide
-4+

Impressive chip. I believe we have a new King.

Two things:
I find these graphs cluttered. In my opinion, a graph should give you one piece of information. Including AA results in with every gaming benchmark makes it hard to see what the graph is trying to illustrate. From the looks of things, enabling AA just brings things to a GPU limited situation anyway so why have them in a CPU review in the first place? I think that Tom's graphs need to be simplified. These graphs show a progression or trend across a number of products. One should be able to get this information at a glance and not have to spend 2 minutes rereading the graph heading to see what the data are actually telling us.

Quote :But a recent shift to 32nm manufacturing results in transistors with decreased oxide thickness, reduced gate length, and, ultimately, less leakage current.

Just FYI, thinner oxide thickness will increase leakage current. However, using thinner gate oxides will allow for lower gate voltages to be used which will decrease the amount of leakage current.

mi1ez 11/03/2010 13:30
Hide
-2+

Pretty much exactly the performance we expected, impressed by the lower peak power though!

cypeq 11/03/2010 13:33
Hide
-2+

Yes we have a king in terms of productivity but on gamming field woops...
it's not worth that money at all we are back with this old conclusion that most of games are rather gpu heavy and cpus are far from being bootleneck here.If you want to pay 5 times more to get 5-10% boost in games it's your call.

One could ask why tom's hardware isn't using at least pair of 5850 ?
thanks to that we see only gpu bootleneck and graphs without quality information.

LkS 11/03/2010 15:08
Hide
-1+

I must say Chris Angelini that your articles are a pleasure to read. Knowledgeable, well-written and well aware of the realistic needs of most readers.

I have a Phenom II X4 and its fine for gaming. I7s are way more than I need or can afford. Still an interesting read; its always nice to see how far tech is being pushed these days.

weefatbob 11/03/2010 19:32
Hide
-2+

I agree with Fox Montage here, why on earth are TH benchmarking the procs with games at settings that can only give scores that can be accredited to the gpu's capabilities.

I know it is to give some "REAL" world situations, but it is a test of the cpu's capabilities and limitations, not how easy it is held back by a graphics card.

andybird123 12/03/2010 13:23
Hide
-1+

to a certain extent it is fine, because the game graphs are supposed to show just that, that this CPU IS NOT FOR GAMERS

a decent dual core or low cost quad core is more than enough for games, and that's exactly what the game graphs show

sph70 12/03/2010 22:42
Hide
-1+

All us FSX 'gamers' are dying to know how this performs

chechak 12/03/2010 23:17
Hide
-1+

this new Intel cpu is awesome but its too much of power that we don't need it in our day life (maybe you need it if u wana make nuke rocket in your home :P ) ,and to much expensive ...that amd 965 black has almost same results but Intel is better so intel problem is to cost of cpu compared to amd .....(o.O by the way im intel fan boy O.o so don't u intel-guys mad of me .|.)

wild9 13/03/2010 02:13
Hide
-1+

Interesting read.

Hmm, nice chip..but for games? Like some of the other comments I don't see much point in getting this CPU beyond bragging rights. What also strikes me is just how well that AMD chip keeps up - and at a much lower cost.

So that leaves all the other things you'd want to do with six cores. In the case of video transcoding, is it actually practical to spend this amount of money on a CPU, or is it better to go the GPU route? Perhaps THG could provide a follow-article..

Also looking forward to seeing AMD's new CPU's in the near future :)

SevenVirtues 13/03/2010 15:14
Hide
-0+

$1000 for speed gains of 8-30 seconds in most areas? No thanks.

Buy yourself an AMD 965, and if gaming is your thing, spend the extra cash you have left on your GPU[s].

Anonymous 15/03/2010 12:52
Hide
-0+

Well we all know that for most games out there its the graphics card that makes it and yet we keep seeing these tests repeated on Crysis etc.

Please bring back the fsx tests. The game may be 4 years old but I've yet to see a proceesor that can run it yet.



aje21 17/03/2010 13:30
Hide
-0+

Quote :And it will become the fastest processor you can buy (it's technically not available yet)

Today Aria are claiming to have them in stock (though the link to the product page says they're on pre-order), but at £881 I don't think I'll be buying one anytime soon (it more than twice what I'd want to pay for a complete system given I have no heavy processing needs).

SevenVirtues 17/03/2010 13:51
Hide
-1+

aje21 wrote :

Quote :And it will become the fastest processor you can buy (it's technically not available yet)

Today Aria are claiming to have them in stock (though the link to the product page says they're on pre-order), but at £881 I don't think I'll be buying one anytime soon (it more than twice what I'd want to pay for a complete system given I have no heavy processing needs).




I don't think most of us here would buy it - it's simply not needed and the gains it gives are not worth the price.

To be honest I think AMD are playing it smart here - they're letting Intel do all the legwork, advertising things like this 6-core.

I have been an Intel user since I started using PCs, but I'm switching to AMD on my new build. Their 965 does everything I need and is half the price of the i7.

Intel is far too overpriced right now. Yes they have the newest releases, but is it worth the price?

Best offers

Newsletters


OK