Categories:

Conclusion: Less Noise, More Efficiency, More Speed and More Overclocking Potential

05:01 - Monday 29 October 2007 by Bert Töpelt
Source: Tom's Hardware UK – Keywords: intel, core2, penryn
Categories: Hardware

Table of content:
40 – Conclusion: Less Noise, More E...
  1. 1 – Revamping the Core 2 Architecture – New Flagship: Extreme QX9650
  2. 2 – New Dielectric Minimizes Leakage Currents
  3. 3 – 45 nm – Higher Yield, Smaller Die Area
  4. 4 – 12 MB L2 Cache and SSE 4
  5. 5 – The Processor – Intel Core 2 QX9650
  6. 6 – Overclocking I – 3.33 GHz
  7. 7 – Overclocking II – 3.66 GHz
  8. 8 – Overclocking III – 3.8 GHz
  9. 9 – Overclocking IV – 4 GHz at very high Voltage
  10. 10 – Overclocking V – 4 GHz at FSB 1600
  11. 11 – Overclocking – Up to 19% more Performance
  12. 12 – Overclocking to 4.0 GHz – FSB1600 Offers no Advantage
  13. 13 – Sensational: Idle Power Consumption of only 3.79 Watts
  14. 14 – Very Good - 73 Watts for Four Cores
  15. 15 – Lower Core Voltage – 1.250 Volts
  16. 16 – Operating Temperature – 12°C Lower
  17. 17 – Penryn-Based Core 2 CPUs – Models, Prices and a new Boxed Cooler
  18. 18 – Performance Comparison Old vs. New – 6.9% Better Performance
  19. 19 – Intel 45% faster than AMD
  20. 20 – Test Setup
  21. 21 – Software Configuration
  22. 22 – Benchmarks and Settings
  23. 23 – 3D Games: UT2004, Prey
  24. 24 – 3D Games: Quake 4, Warhammer
  25. 25 – 3D Games: Supreme Commander, Serious Sam 2
  26. 26 – 3D Rendering: Cinema 4D, 3D-Studio Max
  27. 27 – Applications: AVG, WinRAR
  28. 28 – Applications: Photoshop, PDF
  29. 29 – Applications: Deep Fritz
  30. 30 – Audio Encoding: iTunes, Lame
  31. 31 – Synthetic: Sandra CPU
  32. 32 – Synthetic: Sandra Memory
  33. 33 – Synthetic: Sandra Multimedia
  34. 34 – Synthetic: PC-Mark
  35. 35 – Synthetic: 3D-Mark
  36. 36 – Video Encoding: Xvid, Pinnacle Studio
  37. 37 – Video Encoding: Premiere, MainConcept
  38. 38 – Video Encoding: HDTV, DivX
  39. 39 – Video Encoding: CloneDVD
  40. 40 – Conclusion: Less Noise, More Efficiency, More Speed and More Overclockin...

Conclusion: Less Noise, More Efficiency, More Speed and More Overclocking Potential

Ad

Traditionally, Tom’s Hardware is very comes when it comes to using superlatives. However, our first review sample of the new Core 2 Extreme QX9650 based on the Penryn architecture proves that Intel has done a good, nay a great job. The new quad-core processors which will soon be available now lead the ranks of the most energy efficient processors. An idle power consumption of merely 3.78 Watts is an extraordinary achievement for a high-end processor. Even AMD’s entry-level Semprons can’t match that – and they have only a single core.

The thermal dissipation has dropped so dramatically that new systems based on the Penryn will be quieter and easier to cool even when overclocked. We can say without reservation that Intel kept the promise it made at the IDF regarding the overclocking potential of its 45 nm parts. The Penryn’s potential is classes beyond that of the previous Core 2 generation.

Incorporating the High-K Metal Gate technology into the fabrication process enabled Intel to improve on the already very good Core 2 (Conroe) processor, making it much more energy efficient while at the same time giving it more overclocking headroom. With the new SSE4 instruction set, this generation of processors can accelerate upcoming video editing applications by at least 40%. At the same clock speed, the QX9650 is faster than its predecessor, the QX6850. The Penryn-based Core 2 CPU is not just a simple die-shrink, it is a completely new CPU, literally from the transistors up.

As always, the Extreme Edition comes with the extreme price tag of €1000. Potential buyers looking for cheaper models with lower clock speeds will have to wait until next year, as those are set to become available in the first quarter of 2008.

The performance gap between Intel and AMD has widened even further. Now, the top models of the two big players are separated by almost 50%. Currently, AMD is completely unable to respond. The IT world is still waiting with bated breath for AMD’s first quad-core desktop part, the Phenom, which is slated for release in December. Meanwhile, Intel is already waving goodbye to its first generation of quad-core parts and launching the next. AMD has to achieve nothing short of a technological miracle if it wants draw level with Intel in only one step. Even the tri-core parts, essentially quad-cores with a defective or disabled fourth core, are also nowhere to be seen. In theory, we could have used AMD’s 4x4 platform for this comparison, as it also consists of four cores, albeit in two individual sockets. Such a system, consisting of two Athlon X2 FX 74 processors and a motherboard, costs only €880. However, we ended up deciding against this platform in order to concentrate on single-socket, mass market systems.

Taking a closer look at the current Penryn core, an eight-core system seems feasible. Using the upcoming 3 MB versions, Intel could easily combine four dual-core chips into a single CPU package. Even the power dissipation would remain within the specified limits.

Intel Penryn 45nm


  • Print
  • Send to a friend
  • Comment
  • Content also available in:
Ad
Talkback
Bik3r 29/10/2007 03:09
Hide
-0+
Bik3r

Just a small typo on the first line on thelast page... i'm sure the word that is meant to be there is "reticent". Other than that an excellent, informative and thorough review, thank you :D

spuddyt 29/10/2007 06:11
Hide
-0+
spuddyt

wow... poor amd :(

leexgx 29/10/2007 10:42
Hide
-0+
leexgx

the green bars are getting smaller for AMD :(

i still going to get an AMD64 5000+ Black edition as my server needs an new cpu, mobo and ram

i do not want to replace my motherboard just yet as it performs Fully stable for me and i not looked into stable/good OC boards for Intel yet

but darn that CPU has some power behind it lol

Bik3r 30/10/2007 12:30
Hide
-0+
Bik3r

Yup.... AMD seems pwned for the time being :( Bad for them and surely bad for us :( I hope their quadcore (on a single chip) solution is a success...

bobwya 30/10/2007 08:57
Hide
-0+
bobwya

Are THG listening to the readers? This is a lot better than articles of recent times!! Now what about the follow up article... 'Penryn Hitting 5Ghz on ambient watercooling!!'.

Thanks guys!!

Bob

PS Like the detail on the new SSE4.1 instructions + history of SSE instructions - nice touch!!

mi1ez 30/10/2007 10:00
Hide
-0+
mi1ez

I agree with Bob- It's nice to get a decent, in depth technical article, the likes of which got me reading THG in the first place!

thechevron 31/10/2007 07:37
Hide
-0+
thechevron

I like the picture at the bottom of page 9. Nice toastie air blowing right into the arse end of that video card, just as well its not a scorchy pentium 4 :))

crackez 02/11/2007 03:49
Hide
-0+
crackez

Yes indeed it will be nice to see how well it performs with a watercooling system, who knows even liquid nitrogen will be nice.. If they reach with Intel Pentium 4 more than 5GHz I wonder how much GHz might give a 45nm processor heheh

P.S. With liquid nitrogen I'd like to see how well it performs TOO!! [of course a more simple solutions like a watercooling overcloking still is a good thing, especially if it's in a video to see exactly what is going on]

godman 04/11/2007 11:34
Hide
-0+
godman

Sounds like a 805 ... only more expensive, faster and twice the cores :P

crackez 06/11/2007 03:32
Hide
-0+
crackez

I thought I left some feedback a few days ago.. oh well I was just saying why not a review of an overclocked intel processor reaching lets say 5Ghz? or even 6GHz with some liquid nitrogen perhaps. I currently have an Athlon 64 X2 5000+(running on more than 3.1GHz on water from 2.6GHz and planning for some peltier stuff soon to reach over 3.5-4 GHz)

anqe 17/11/2007 08:57
Hide
-0+
anqe

I think 4GHz is slightly disapointing and production samples will rapidly push past 4GHz once they hit their second spin.

If we're already seeing 3.6GHz+ air cooled on Q6600's @ 65nm then another 20% hike in speed should be pushing it to 4.2GHz easily.

The scary thing for all should be what the hell happens when Intel take away AMD's only defense in the way of adding a memory controller to the die. Low latency access with a shared L2 and ridiculously scalable frequency leaves AMD looking a rather poor second choice.

With Intel sandbaging already and enjoying healthy margin that is only going to be worse for AMD later on.

Danny24 21/03/2008 12:31
Hide
-0+
Danny24

Whilst the article makes for very interesting reading why did TH choose to test the QX9650 CPU? This is one of the most expensive processors on the market today and well beyond the reach of all but the most well off users.

I understand that you want to achieve the best results possible and therefore chose the best performing processor for the job. However, this particular processor is the only one available with an un-locked multiplier. The majority of users don't have this luxury and only have an option to increase the FSB if they want to overclock their system. This sort of makes the test you've performed redundant for the majority.

A much better processor to test would have been the Q9550. While it's eventual clock speed wont match that of the QX9650, percentage wise it should be near as damn identical.

Otherwise, great article :-)

bobwya 21/03/2008 10:52
Hide
-0+
bobwya

Danny24 :
Whilst the article makes for very interesting reading why did TH choose to test the QX9650 CPU? This is one of the most expensive processors on the market today and well beyond the reach of all but the most well off users.... Blah Blah



Wakey, wakey idiot... This thread is months old and thats all that was out at the time...

Bob

Google Ads
Ad
The CPU Articles and reviews
News
Reviews
Videos