Benchmark Results: Media/Transcoding Apps
We start things off with iTunes 9, which is not optimized for threading and will most likely reward the most efficient architecture with the highest clock rate.
The fast Core i5-661 CPU gets an extra kick from Turbo Boost in this single-threaded application to take the win in our CD conversion test. It’s followed by the Core i5-750, which also gets Turbo’ed into second place, and the Core 2 Duo E8500, which doesn’t need Turbo.
It’s important to remember that, while our comparison here covers Intel’s architecture powering its newest entry-level processors, the Core i5-661 is priced to compete against the fastest CPU that AMD sells: its Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition.
The flagship Phenom II exerts itself in our MainConcept test, taking a first-place finish. Without Hyper-Threading to help it, and with Turbo Boost lending minimal benefit, the Lynnfield-based Core i5-750 takes second place. The Core 2 Quad Q9400 shows that four true cores trump two Hyper-Threaded cores as it takes third.
HandBrake has been popularly requested by our readers, so we’ve added it to our 2010 benchmark suite, converting a .vob from The Last Samurai to .mp4 format.
AMD’s Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition repeats its victory, besting Intel’s Core i5-750 by one second. The Core 2 Quad Q9400 takes third place, beating out the Core i5-661. Nevertheless, Intel’s Clarkdale-based CPUs demonstrate the benefits of Hyper-Threading by finishing the job more than five minutes faster than the 3.16 GHz Core 2 Duo E8500.
The Lynnfield-based Core i5-750 wins in the DivX and Xvid codecs, breezing past the Phenom II in both cases. The Clarkdale CPU takes second place in Xvid, which isn’t well-optimized for threading and instead gets by on its higher clock rate and Turbo Boost acceleration. The Phenom II does take second in DivX, though, by virtue of the codec’s threaded nature.
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
It could be a silly question, but what if i would like to use one of those new CPUs on P55 motherboard, but I don't have a discrete graphic card in my system. Where do I plug in the vga/dvi cable? ;]
You will need a discrete card to use a P55 motherboard regardless of the CPU present.
What makes it worse for Intel I think, is AMD's longevity: a lot of budget AMD systems including those intended for HTPC use, are already capable of being upgraded to the similar performance levels - and without breaking the bank. For example an AM3 (AM2+ compatible), Athlon II paired with a 780G/785G chipset. Even a low-power Sempron could be an option, thanks to the 7xx series chipsets picking up the tab in terms of solid HD hardware acceleration, stream processing and even half-decent gaming.
Other than that these new it's seem to offer decent performance and good overclocking, despite the limited number of cores. Wouldn't mind seeing the core cranked up a bit
we’ll be seeing remarkably powerful mini-ITX platforms with 73W Clarkdale CPUs taking care of processing and graphics in one compact (affordable) package.
