Intel Core i7-990X Extreme Edition Review
Table of contents
- 1. Core i7-990X: Fast Enough To Be The New King?
- 2. Stepping Back In Time For A New Champion
- 3. Test Setup And Benchmarks
- 4. Benchmark Results: PCMark Vantage
- 5. Benchmark Results: 3DMark11
- 6. Benchmark Results: SiSoftware Sandra 2011
- 7. Benchmark Results: Content Creation
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.
Editor's Note: We have some extra hardware here in the lab, as you can see from the shot below. To be exact, I'm talking about a pair of Core i7-990X processors, a Core i7-980X, and a Core i7-950, and five Intel DX58SO2 motherboards (one to go with each CPU). We also have 50 cases of Sparking ICE water. And we're giving it all away. Read through and enjoy today's review and, on the last page, click the link to enter our random drawing.
Introduction
The Sandy Bridge architecture launch early last month had me scratching my head, wondering if there is still room in Intel’s desktop portfolio for Core i7-900-series processors. After all, why spend up to $1000 on a six-core stunner based on last-generation’s architecture if a quad-core CPU with significant per-clock improvements could come close around the $300 price point?
Had Intel not run into problems with its H67 and P67 chipsets, there’s a fair chance that LGA 1155-based motherboards would already be flying off the shelves. Enthusiasts would be buying Core i5-2500Ks en masse, overclocking them like mad, and seeing serious performance from a modestly-priced platform.
But even then, Intel imposed some ghastly limitations on its Sandy Bridge-based platforms, and I simply don't approve of them. When you buy P67, you lose access to Quick Sync entirely. When you buy H67, you lose the ability to overclock a K-series SKU the way it was meant to be overclocked. Either way you go, you lose some important piece of the Sandy Bridge-based feature set. I hate to get greedy, but that’s enough to make an enthusiast want to wait for Z68, isn’t it?
Core i7-9xx: A Family In Crisis?
Back to the Core i7-900s. Intel recently revamped the lineup, and it now consists of fewer models: Core i7-990X Extreme Edition, Core i7-970, and Core i7-960. Anything lower and you’re treading on Sandy Bridge territory. So, processors like Core i7-950 are going away.
Of course, the company also had to reevaluate its pricing. With Core i7-2600K selling for $330, the value equation got flipped on its head. The quad-core i7-960 dropped to $294 and the six-core i7-970 dropped to $583. Not surprisingly, Core i7-990X remains a $1000 unicorn.
With the motherboard industry ramping production of LGA 1155-based platforms back up, is there still a reason to consider X58 Express and the Core i7-900 family?
We’ve suggested that the chipset’s 36 lanes of second-gen PCI Express connectivity could be a reason for anyone with two, three, or four graphics cards. But then we showed that, using Nvidia’s NF200 bridge chip, even 16 lanes can demonstrate exceptional three-way SLI scaling (ECS P55H-AK: P55/NF200 Versus X58 In 3-Way SLI). So, it sounds like gamers can safely look elsewhere.
Then, in our Sandy Bridge launch coverage (Intel’s Second-Gen Core CPUs: The Sandy Bridge Review), I set up a clock-for-clock performance comparison and found that Intel’s newest CPUs run significantly faster at the same frequency—never mind the fact that they overclock extremely well, given a honed 32 nm manufacturing process. There goes any possible way we could ever recommend a Bloomfield-based Core i7-960, -950, or -930.
What’s left? Core i7-970 and Core i7-990X—both Gulftown-based CPUs with six cores, manufactured at 32 nm. For a very specific, limited, and niche market most generally defined as workstations, there’s potential here for performance in excess of what the fastest Sandy Bridge-based chip (limited to four cores) can serve up.
At $583, the -970 still feels overpriced. At $999, the -990X is even more so. But at least the -990X guarantees the fastest possible frequencies and sports an unlocked clock multiplier—a feature we so dearly coveted until AMD started arming gobs of its chips with the Black Edition moniker and Intel answered back with the K-series.
As one vendor of very expensive motherboards told me recently, there are folks out there who’ll pay to own the fastest of anything, though. Our mission today is to figure out if the Core i7-990X is indeed the fastest processor out there. Or, does the Core i7-2600K oust it using a more efficient architecture?
Latest CPU News
- 24/05 – Nvidia to Push Tablet Prices to $199 With Kai Platform
- 23/05 – AMD Backing Out of CPU Speed Wars Against Intel
- 22/05 – AMD Hitting The Casino Floor With Embedded R-Series
- 22/05 – Does Your AMD FX Platform BSOD with Steam? Read This.
- 20/05 – Intel To Support Cheap Ultrabooks With Low-Cost Celerons
Latest CPU reviews
- 24/05 – Overclocking Core i7-3770K: Learning To Live With Compromise
- 22/05 – Core i5-3570K, -3550, -3550S, And -3570T: Ivy Bridge Efficiency
- 15/05 – AMD A10-4600M Review: Mobile Trinity Gets Tested
- 14/05 – Core i7-3720QM: Ivy Bridge Makes Its Mark On Mobility
- 23/04 – Intel Core i7-3770K Review: A Small Step Up From Sandy Bridge



What a shock , yet another USA competition only
When will ever see EU competitions ???
So not only is the competition US only, but you don't even get a 990X (unless it's a typo)
US only competition on the British website. Great.
crap US competition only ! Are we behind that far ?
Btw nice review but can we still compare that to lower shelf CPU's like E8400 etc ?
You guys need to take a leaf from Liliputing, when they sdo a contest it's open to all but they ship to US only, so if you want to entwer from anywhere else then be prepared to pay the shipping (if you win). Go for it!!!
read terms dude there is no word about shipping
What a shock , yet another USA competition only When will ever see EU competitions ???
Hmm, how to increase one's chances. Should I change my nationality to Mexican, sneak under the border easily(!), and vote for Obama, Inc? Maybe if I applied for Canadian citizenship..excuse me whilst I get a list of (British) entry requirements as long as my arm..
Well if that is true and can be backup up with suitable benchmarks, I think it's appalling. The Phenom II range is after a widely popular, competitive product. If I pay this much for software I don't see why they can't optimise it for my hardware.
Also, I wonder what the situation will be when AMD's Bulldozer hits the shelves. From what I've read Bulldozer is set to quite a big hitter, and could potentially flatten Intel's crown very quickly indeed. I just hope the price is right
Well if that is true and can be backup up with suitable benchmarks, I think it's appalling. The Phenom II range is after a widely popular, competitive product. If I pay this much for software I don't see why they can't optimise it for my hardware.Also, I wonder what the situation will be when AMD's Bulldozer hits the shelves. From what I've read Bulldozer is set to quite a big hitter, and could potentially flatten Intel's crown very quickly indeed. I just hope the price is right
Well if that is true and can be backup up with suitable benchmarks, I think it's appalling. The Phenom II range is after a widely popular, competitive product. If I pay this much for software I don't see why they can't optimise it for my hardware.Also, I wonder what the situation will be when AMD's Bulldozer hits the shelves. From what I've read Bulldozer is set to quite a big hitter, and could potentially flatten Intel's crown very quickly indeed. I just hope the price is right
I don't doubt the price will be right. AMD has a long tradition of reasonably priced products.
But I don't think it will flatten Intel's offerings. Phenom II was an answer to the Core 2 Quad and Core 2 Duo, meaning that AMD is in effect a full two generations behind Intel in both performance and power efficiency (the latter being clearly shown by all mobile AMD Phenom CPU's).
I don't believe AMD can make up so much lost ground, especially given they don't have the practically unlimited R&D funds Intel have.
If anything, I think Bulldozer will be competitive, but not mind blowing. I predict a solid CPU that can compete with Intel's mid end offerings in both price and performance.
I think (hope) AMD is going to do what its daughter ATI did for many years: not taking the performance crown, but making up for that by carrying the price/performance crown.
(not spam)


[IMG]http://i56.tinypic.com/j9asfr.jpg[/IMG]
alert(" ")
Can't blame Adobe for Amds pathetic IMC. Adobe is optimize to make use of your pc to the fullest. Adobe can't turn slower performing cpus to excellent ones.
Can you just clarify a couple of things? What do you mean by IMC..Integrated Memory Controller? Also, you're saying Adobe optimises their software to take full advantage of any PC..well, that seems to be the exact opposite of what Tom's is saying. Perhaps you could elaborate
Why does the UK review have links attached to an USA entrants only competition?.......again!
Every comment removed?
That USA competition thing is really upsetting. Is it that difficult to hit backspace a few times while copypasting? Shows a lot of disrespect to your loyal readers
Yeah! A chance to win somet---

Never mind, Yankees only, again!