 |
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||
For something a little different today we are taking four quad-core series and comparing how they perform when operating at the same frequency. This clock for clock article features the Phenom II X4, Core 2 Quad, Core i7 and the new Core i5 series. Not only will we be comparing them at 2.80GHz but also at 3.60GHz to give overclockers an idea of what they can expect... Almost two years ago now we set out on a quest to determine who had the better processor architecture, AMD or Intel. Merely pitching the fastest AMD processor against the fastest Intel processor did not give us that answer. This was because the Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 operated at 3.0GHz and the Q6600 at 2.4GHz, while AMD’s flagship processor at that time, the Phenom 9600, worked at just 2.3GHz, placing it at a natural disadvantage.  Therefore in an effort to try and level the playing field to better determine who possessed the outright best architecture, we compared these processors on a clock for clock basis. All processors were tested at 2.2GHz and the results were interesting to say the least. Since then we have not published an article of this kind, but with the recent arrival of the new Intel LGA1156 platform, we saw a real reason to do it again. The release of the LGA1156 platform last week answered a lot of questions for us, but in doing so it created a few more. Priced at just $200 US the Core i5 750 is a killer processor, there is no question about that. The Core i7 860 on the other hand is an odd ball at $280 US; it costs roughly the same amount as the Core i7 920 which utilizes the full blown LGA1366 platform. The specifications of both the Core i7 920 and 860 are very much the same, with the exception of the memory controller, as the Core i7 860 drops a channel. When all is said and done consumers stand to save up to $150 by going for the cut-down Core i7 860 version, as P55 boards are cheaper and require one less stick of DDR3 memory. In terms of performance we have not seen a great deal of it separating the Core i7 920 and 860 processors, though while the Core i7 920 has a bandwidth advantage, the Core i7 860 is clocked 140MHz higher. Then we have the Core i5 750 which is also clocked 140MHz lower than the Core i7 860 and lacks Hyper-Threading technology. This also means that although the Core i5 750 is clocked at the same frequency as the Core i7 920, it lacks triple-channel memory support and Hyper-Threading technology. So you see, while all three processors share similar specifications, comparing them is quite difficult as only the Core i5 750 and Core i7 920 work at the same frequency. Nevertheless, our preliminary testing did indicate that all three processors do deliver a similar level of performance. There is also the question of overclocking, as many of you will or have overclocked your Core i7/i5 processors. With all three processors reaching similar overclocking heights on our test bed, what would the difference be between overclocked Core i7 920, 860 and Core i5 750 processors? Another interesting question is how does the AMD Phenom II X4 series compare on a clock for clock basis? One would assume not well, and therefore we are going to find out for sure by including the Phenom II X4 in our clock for clock comparison. This time we are not going to test all the processors at just one frequency. Rather this time they will be tested at 2.80GHz and then again at 3.60GHz. The processors, which include the Core i7 920, Core i7 860, Core i5 750, Core 2 Quad Q6600 and Phenom II X4 965, are more than capable of obtaining this overclock and while they will go further, we saw 3.60GHz as being high enough to make our point... |
|||||
|
|
krzemo |
Posted on: 04/20/2010 02:30 PM
Good job! very interesting and useful comparison. |
|
nazuzed |
Posted on: 09/13/2010 09:19 PM
Q6600 with budget DDR2, gives at 9 x 400 Mhz ( 3,6 Ghz ), 61,6 latency and 8244 MB/s memory read performance ( Everest ) on a X48 ( P5E - Deluxe ) motherboard.......So, this article gives a falls perception on the Q6600 capabilities after OC. |