Conclusion
This article looked at the power consumption and efficiency of Intel’s new mainstream dual-core processors, the Core i3 and Core i5 for LGA 1156. All of them now integrate a new graphics unit called HD Graphics, regardless of whether you want it or use it. The graphics core delivers decent performance, but it certainly can’t beat any discrete graphics solution above the ultra-low budget level. The new processors are extremely strong when it comes to encrypting or decrypting AES (we’ll have another article dealing with this), but they also outperform both Core 2 Duo and today’s dual-core AMD offerings in every benchmark.
Processor and system power consumption have decreased significantly. Low power requirements that were only within range for high-efficiency, low-performance solutions can now be reached with mainstream components. Last but not least, Intel has again implemented Turbo Boost, which accelerates one or both cores to up to 3.73 GHz under peak load conditions (3.6 GHz in the case of our Core i5-661) as long as the speed boost fits into the processor’s thermal power envelope. The only weaknesses we found were that this principle doesn’t apply to graphics (save for mobile Core i5 solutions) and Intel’s pricing remains well above AMD’s offerings.
It almost seems like nothing can rain on Intel’s parade. The introduction of the Nehalem architecture with Core i7 on LGA 1366 secured the high-end for Intel. Core 2 Duo has been expensive but dominant in the mainstream, and the recently-introduced LGA 1156 platform will be taking care of today’s and future systems in between the budget and upper-mainstream. Intel’s new Core i5 and i3 processors must be a nightmare for AMD, which continues to lose ground in the mainstream. Intel dominates performance, and it clearly rules power efficiency now. The only factor left in AMD’s hand is price and effective value, but this won’t last forever without some major changes.
If anyone has good suggestions for AMD, now would be the time to make them. What do you think of efficiency? Where do you think AMD should improve to get back into the game?
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
at the moment there is only one thing amd can do... cut prices a lot lol, but i think they already where expecting this... i think the next generation of CPU's is still gona be "dominated" by intel's offerings. but the one after that amd should start giving intel a run for its money, dont forget amd has been filling a financial hole for some time, but due to recent events, and because of very strong releases in the graphics department they have been that very steadly... give amd a little time...
One can only hope that Bulldozer turns out to be a MAJOR win for AMD...
I thought this article really missed the point comparing Intel's new $200 CPU against AMD's $95 part (regardless of core count). I read the bit about the Athlon 240e having the lowest power consumption vs the 3/4 core variants, which is only partially true according to the data in Anandtech's review of the Athlon 435.
At idle the 605e only looses 2.4 watts to the 240e, but at load the 605e runs a full 10.5 watts leaner than the 240e. The lower clock speed will likely be the reason, which would also result in lower single threaded performance, but at the same time the doubling of cores would improve well threaded apps such as video encoding.
When considering that the 605e comes in about $20 cheaper than the i5-661 (not including the board and more expensive DDR3), I think it borders on dishonest to not include the 605e in the comparison.
If you add the 605e into the picture then things are much less clear cut. Still a big win for Intel, but possibly not in all situations.
To maintain the journalistic integrity that have kept me reading Tom's for the last 13 years, you should always be looking to compare equally priced solutions. Whereas in my opinion, this article seemed to be tipped in Intel's favor.
I'd also question the use of a 785G when touting Intel's low power numbers, because in your own review you observed the Nvidia 8200 runs 10 watts leaner. With the 8200 equaling and beating the G45 in your 785G review in game performance I can't see why you didn't include it, other than to tip the scales in Intel's favor for MCE use.
Assuming that Intel abides by its latest agreements and terminates its predatory and monopolistic efforts aimed at destroying AMD's access to markets, AMD should have a chance at making a comeback. Their choice to go with a combined cpu/graphics package that pretty much dominates intel's onboard graphics offerings at substantially lower price points, appears to have been a good one. Until Intel comes up with a decent igp, opportunities for AMD will remain open-assuming the relevant watchdog governmental authorities keep a tight leash on Intel's unlawful predatory behaviors. One could argue that Intel's history in this regard reflects a deep seated fear of AMD's potential.
Not fair. You can't compare Amd's processors with doble-priced intel's ones.
Also, don't forget you are comparing apps that were compiled to be of generic use. In the open source world things are not that way since you can compile a given app to be optimized specifically for your cpu model. I get to handle quite some computers in my work, and realized that, if optimized, i usually find amd processors to be faster than intel ones.
I also agree that it is NOT FAIR to compare double priced intel processors with amd just because they are of different brands. Its like comparing the best car fiat has to offer, with the best car porsche has to offer... yeah... right...