Core i5 / P55 Lab Update
by Gary Key on September 11, 2009 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Gary's First Looks
This has been an interesting week to say the least for those of us stuck in the labs and not at AMD's DX11 GPU press briefings. Based on feedback from the Lynnfield launch article we have spent the last couple of days running additional benchmarks to address overclocking and clock for clock requests. Yes, we do listen and respond to the comments no matter how outlandish (you know who you are) some may be at times.
I will interject a personal note here, the emails/private messages that outlined a strong case for additional research and testing certainly held a lot more weight than comments like "You are on Intel's payroll...", "Worst review ever...", and the moonshot , "Illegal benchmarking methods..". First off, if we were on Intel's payroll we would not be working here (a logical conclusion, right? ;) ) As for the other comments, everyone is entitled to their opinions. We do our best to keep an open forum and let the comments fall where they may, but offering constructive criticism and facts to back up those comments is what actually causes change, not endless shock posts or attention grabbing statements. I still have hope in people abiding by the rules of Internet Etiquette, but apparently we are still a long ways off from that happening. I will step off the soap box, well, until the next article....
Just to set this up now, our overclock comparisons will be at 3.8GHz for the Core i5/i7 and Phenom II x4 965BE processors. Why 3.8GHz, well it is an easy number for all of our processors to hit on fairly low voltages with retail or mid-range air coolers. It is also an ideal clock range for the "set it and forget crowd" interested in 24/7 overclocking. Certainly we could go higher on air or water cooling and actually ran most of our Core i5/i7 numbers at 4.2GHz for the motherboard roundups. Our Phenom II x4 965BE is the hold up for higher numbers in our clock for clock comparisons.
AMD continues to have serious problems with their Phenom II processor range clocking above 3.8~4GHz on air with a 64-bit operating system. Unfortunately, there is nothing AMD can do to correct this in the current stepping, but they are actively working on improvements with each processor release. In fact, the latest Athlon II x2 processors are the first products we have that allow for 24/7 stable operation at 4GHz under Windows 7 x64. The quad cores are still lagging although our latest retail 965BE is showing promise around 3.92GHz in early testing. I state this now so it does not come as surprise later.
I will post several benchmark results later today based on our motherboard test suite. Anand will provide a more in-depth analysis next week along with an updated look at the Core i7/860. He might even have a surprise announcement from AMD. In the meantime, I have just about completed this additional testing and will return my focus on completing the first (of many) P55 motherboard article(s) that will be up in a couple of days. Our first review will cover the Gigabyte GA-P55M-UD2 among others. We recently received several other micro-ATX P55 motherboards and will look at those shortly. For now, this board is a perfect match for the Core i5/750 for our mainstream audience looking to upgrade an older platform.
Our graph below is an example of the information we will provide late today. Hopefully, this type of information will be useful for your purchasing decision along with our commentary about the results. I know there is not a Core 2 product listed, that will be forthcoming in the near future.
9/11 Update - I am still working on the FarCry 2 and H.A.W.X. benchmarks so the short update will be delayed until tomorrow morning.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
159 Comments
View All Comments
ssj4Gogeta - Saturday, September 12, 2009 - link
It's what performance you're getting for the money moron, not what the processor is doing to get you that performance.Mattus27 - Friday, September 11, 2009 - link
Turbo is overclocking?It's an Intel-endorsed feature that's enabled by default, you ignorant moron. If you had brains, you'd be dangerous.
Etern205 - Friday, September 11, 2009 - link
Let me just say that I've build quite a few of AMD's based system going back to the K6-2 era and they are pretty good processors, but your comment is just simply idiotic.And I bet if AMD has this feature, you'll say it's a fair comparison.
GET A LIFE!
fantoosh420 - Sunday, September 13, 2009 - link
be it OVERCLOCKING (according to you) or an innovation called turbo boost (according to rest of us))oops... this line was meant for snakeoil.
fantoosh420 - Sunday, September 13, 2009 - link
true... i agree...we don't hate AMD. they are pretty good CPU manufacturer.... but having said that, we are also end user... and all of us want the worth of our every single penny which we spend on CPUs. now there are ways.... poor people who can't afford a $280 cpu + $150 motherboard + $120 RAM and so on, will go for a AMD. it gives nice performance for its price. People who can afford that much cost will definitely go for intel.
At the end of the day, it is your pocket which becomes deciding factor rather than what really you want. I want to buy a Dual Xeon 5580 based system but can i afford it ?? NO. so what do i do ?? may be go for a Xeon 3550 or something... can i afford that too ?? no. so what do i do? may be go for a AMD 955BE or something....doesn't matter what i want. but if i can't afford it i'll choose the next one downside the list until i reach the affordable limit.
in current world situation, most people can afford a good $1000 system, since in that range, i7/860 gives best performance (no matter how that performance is achieved... be it OVERCLOCKING (according to you) or an innovation called turbo boost (according to rest of us)). the bottom line is what Gflops people are getting for the money that they are going to spend and as long as intel is fitting in that meter better people will go for it. when the time will come (and it has come in past once), people will go for AMD as well.
jonup - Friday, September 11, 2009 - link
...people are stupid, maybe?Btw cheating is not illigal. If it was, you could take AT to court and win (if they were cheating).
After all, do I need to remind you that the 965BE is an OC 955BE?
And do you really want to see OC (24/7 or max) 965BE destroyed by and OC (24/7 or max) i5 750.
JackPack - Friday, September 11, 2009 - link
If you think Turbo Mode is overclocking, then you might as well point to the sun and say it's dark.wizzlewiz - Friday, September 11, 2009 - link
do you think people is stupid?I believe this statement speaks for itself. However, turbo is an innovation designed by Intel to increase performance. If that is cheating, how have we made it as far in the computer industry as we have? It is like comparing a single core to a dual core, and saying for the test to be fair that the dual core has to shut off one of its cores.
densetsu612 - Friday, September 11, 2009 - link
... and what about the auto under-clocking and under-volting when the Lynnfield CPU is running idle?perhaps the Phenom II BE needs to be undervolted and underclocked when it is running at idle to measure power consumption.
(just to be fair)
jonup - Friday, September 11, 2009 - link
Wow, you are so predictable.BTW, are you referring to the "turbo on" as auto OC? In that case you want to compare a Stock 965 to cripled (worse than stock) i5. I mean, do you prefer an article that says "Intel today introduced its new attempt to detrone AMD from its dominant position. However, the new i5 is a more expensive, slower processor that is waste of time testing at stock configuration (or overclocked to stable 24/7). Instead of wasting your time reading a pointless article, just go get yourself 965BE and live happily ever after."
If you ask Gary, I am sure he could e-mail you this massage every morning and you would not have to ever come to AT or any other site on Intel PR.
Just before you go all out with your AMD Fanboyism at me, all three of my computers have AMD CPUs. (I built two and the third is a laptop).