• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Comparison of 1156/1366/AM3 clocked at 3.8

Soldato
Joined
2 Sep 2006
Posts
13,483
Location
Portland, OR
Interesting, I sort of wish they would have thrown in a Yorkfield at 3.8GHz as well...I understand it's not a new chip but it would put the numbers into better perspective for prospective buyers IMO.
 
Associate
Joined
18 Feb 2009
Posts
1,356
The bit that intrested me in that link was

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
Wonder what the surprise announcment could be. 975 maybe or a new stepping release to get past the elusive 3.8 on air barrier.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
19 Oct 2002
Posts
29,509
Location
Surrey
I have spent the better part of the last twenty four hours trying to figure out our FarCry 2 numbers and it also happens in other games by the way. ;) The only conclusion I have right now is that with the latest NV drivers, Win7, and certain games, the Phenom II 965 is faster now.

Not only against Lynnfield but also against Bloomfield in the tests we utilize for the motherboards. The CPU oriented action test we use in the processor benchmarks tells another story. So something is happening along the graphics path at this point, what exactly is something we are trying to isolate.

I'm sure this is just a driver issue but I didn't expect that.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
19 Oct 2002
Posts
29,509
Location
Surrey
Article has now been updated.....the AMD and GTX 275 performance is downright stunning :eek:

http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=3639&p=1

Wow, impressive. It's interesting that AM3 with AMD gfx is not so hot but AM3 with nV beats the I5/I7 with nV. Unless this is a glitch somewhere then AM3 seems the best current platform for single GPU gaming (as long as you get an nV).
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Aug 2009
Posts
10,712
How very embarrassing.

AMD CPU + it's competitors GPU works better than with its own. More to the point it works unbelievably better than all the rest.
 
Caporegime
Joined
26 Dec 2003
Posts
25,666
How very embarrassing.

AMD CPU + it's competitors GPU works better than with its own. More to the point it works unbelievably better than all the rest.

It doesn't work better it's just the GTX275 is faster in those games at those particular settings.

The reason the Intel's lag behind is because they're still at stock settings and are CPU limited, that's why on the Intel systems the GTX 275 isn't showing any significant gains compared to 4890.

Wow, impressive. It's interesting that AM3 with AMD gfx is not so hot but AM3 with nV beats the I5/I7 with nV. Unless this is a glitch somewhere then AM3 seems the best current platform for single GPU gaming (as long as you get an nV).

At stock yes, Phenom @3.4ghz is 7-10fps faster than i7 [email protected] in those benchmarks.
 
Last edited:
Man of Honour
Joined
19 Oct 2002
Posts
29,509
Location
Surrey
It doesn't work better it's just the GTX275 is faster in that game at those particular settings.

The reason the Intel's lag behind is because they're still at stock settings are CPU limited, that's why on the Intel systems the GTX 275 isn't showing any significant gains compared to 4890.



At stock yes, Phenom @3.4ghz is 7fps faster than i7 [email protected].


Yes, fair point about the stock speed.
 
Caporegime
Joined
26 Dec 2003
Posts
25,666
The game benchmarks are a mixture between CPU and GPU limited so you can't really tell anything from them with such varying cpu speeds, will they be adding 3.8ghz results later?
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Aug 2009
Posts
10,712
They should really have done the gaming tests with the same stock/ht/turbo/oc options as on the rest.

Still, it is showing that on stock the AMD chip is a decent performer for gaming.
 
Permabanned
OP
Joined
15 Nov 2008
Posts
6,968
And I wonder how well AM2 or S775 would run on those tests with a GTX 275?

Interesting, I sort of wish they would have thrown in a Yorkfield at 3.8GHz as well...I understand it's not a new chip but it would put the numbers into better perspective for prospective buyers IMO.

"Last, but not least, I only ran the i5/750 without turbo enabled and the P45/C2Q setup is missing. I am still completing those numbers"

Why didn't they do the game tests with all CPU's at 3.8ghz I thought that was the point of the article?

What gives you the impression they reset everything to stock for the game benchies? as far as I can tell these were run at 3.8 too, I think it doesnt specify on the graph purely because of lack of space, but Id be very suprised if they werent run at 3.8 seen as as you say its the point of the article
 
Caporegime
Joined
26 Dec 2003
Posts
25,666
What gives you the impression they reset everything to stock for the game benchies? as far as I can tell these were run at 3.8 too, I think it doesnt specify on the graph purely because of lack of space, but Id be very suprised if they werent run at 3.8 seen as as you say its the point of the article

Well the most obvious reason is that the Phenom would not be so far in front without an 800Mhz advantage.

Also, unlike the rest of the tests it doesn't state 3.8Ghz for any of the results and also Turbo is used on all Intel CPU's, if it was a 3.8Ghz test then turbo would be disabled as it is on all the other tests.

I'm 100% certain that they have simply neglected to do the game tests with any CPUs at 3.8Ghz, instead running all at stock which as we all agree defies the point of the article (unless he got slipped some cash from AMD :p).
 
Last edited:
Permabanned
OP
Joined
15 Nov 2008
Posts
6,968
bit of a late reply, lol

Techreport have since done some tests comparing platforms with gpu for in game performance, as can be seen from the chart below, at low res (cpu dependant situation) intel wins, however at higher res (gpu dependant situation) AMD and old 775 outperform new i5/i7, seen as how most people use a res around 1920x1200 this is more sgnificant

farcry2-scaling.gif
 
Caporegime
Joined
26 Dec 2003
Posts
25,666
bit of a late reply, lol

Techreport have since done some tests comparing platforms with gpu for in game performance, as can be seen from the chart below, at low res (cpu dependant situation) intel wins, however at higher res (gpu dependant situation) AMD and old 775 outperform new i5/i7, seen as how most people use a res around 1920x1200 this is more sgnificant
...

Ye I was doing a search and came across it. :p

With all the CPUs at 3.8Ghz and in high resolutions I would expect all to perform similarly in games due to the GPU bottlenecks you mentioned, but in situations such as low resolutions or when the CPU's aren't being held back by other compnents the i5/i7 should excel as with almost every other application.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom