The Dark Knight: Intel's Core i7
by Anand Lal Shimpi & Gary Key on November 3, 2008 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Gaming Performance
We have already teased you with the results of our gaming benchmarks, but sometimes charts are easier to look at than tables. I should stress that to get any of these modern games to be even remotely CPU bound I had to drop resolution and image quality, which is fine for this as we're trying to evaluate whether or not Nehalem is architecturally faster. In the real world however, you'll not see any performance difference in any of these titles with Nehalem over Penryn.
We start off with our Age of Conan benchmark. This is a fraps test, we take our character and swim him to shore and back measuring performance during the process.
Note that to get this game to be at all CPU bound we had to drop to medium quality and run at 1280 x 1024:
This is the only game where we see Nehalem boast such a tremendous performance advantage. I suspect that it's extremely sensitive to memory latency for some reason, resulting in the i7-920 being faster than the QX9770.
Our GRID benchmark is a fraps test that measures frame rate at the very beginning of a race with our car starting at the back and then crashing into a wall:
While racing games are usually great physics tests, GRID just wasn't CPU bound enough to show serious differences between the CPUs. Nehalem and Penryn are basically no different here.
For Crysis we ran the built in CPU2 benchmark on version 1.21 of the game:
Like GRID, Nehalem offers nothing over Penryn in the performance department.
Far Cry 2's built in benchmark tool using the Ranch small test brings us our next set of numbers:
Here we have another game that favors the Core i7's architecture, but as we just saw it's not an across the board sort of win as some games miss Penryn's larger L2 cache.
Our last benchmark is a walk towards Megaton in Fallout 3:
The edge goes to Intel's Core i7 once again.
Overall in gaming tests the situations where Nehalem was faster than Penryn outnumbered those where it didn't, but upgrading to Nehalem for faster gaming performance doesn't make sense. We were entirely too GPU bound in all of these titles, if you want Nehalem it should be because of its performance elsewhere.
73 Comments
View All Comments
Kaleid - Monday, November 3, 2008 - link
http://www.guru3d.com/news/intel-core-i7-multigpu-...">http://www.guru3d.com/news/intel-core-i...and-cros...bill3 - Monday, November 3, 2008 - link
Umm, seems the guru3d gains are probably explained by them using a dual core core2dou versus quad core i7...Quad core's run multi-gpu quiet a bit better I believe.tynopik - Monday, November 3, 2008 - link
what about those multi-threading tests you used to run with 20 tabs open in firefox while running av scan while compressing some files while converting something else while etc etc?this might be more important for daily performance than the standard desktop benchmarks
D3SI - Monday, November 3, 2008 - link
So the low end i7s are OC'able?
what the hell is toms hardware talking about lol
conquerist - Monday, November 3, 2008 - link
Concerning x264, Nehalem-specific improvements are coming as soon as the developers are free from their NDA.See http://x264dev.multimedia.cx/?p=40">http://x264dev.multimedia.cx/?p=40.
Spectator - Monday, November 3, 2008 - link
can they do some CUDA optimizations?. im guessing that video hardware has more processors than quad core intel :PIf all this i7 is new news and does stuff xx faster with 4 core's. how does 100+ core video hardware compare?.
Yes im messing but giant Intel want $1k for best i7 cpu. when likes of nvid make bigger transistor count silicon using a lesser process and others manufacture rest of vid card for $400-500 ?
Where is the Value for money in that. Chukkle.
gramboh - Monday, November 3, 2008 - link
The x264 team has specifically said they will not be working on CUDA development as it is too time intensive to basically start over from scratch in a more complex development environment.npp - Monday, November 3, 2008 - link
CUDA Optimizations? I bet you don't understand completely what you're talking about. You can't just optimize a piece of software for CUDA, you MUST write it from scratch for CUDA. That's the reason why you don't see too much software for nVidia GPUs, even though the CUDA concept was introduced at least two years ago. You have the BadaBOOM stuff, but it's far for mature, and the reason is that writing a sensible application for CUDA isn't exactly an easy task. Take your time to look at how it works and you'll understand why.You can't compare the 100+ cores of your typical GPU with a quad core directly, they are fundamentaly different in nature, with your GPU "cores" being rather limited in functionality. GPGPU is a nice hype, but you simply can't offload everything on a GPU.
As a side note, top-notch hardware always carries price premium, and Intel has had this tradition with high-end CPUs for quite a while now. There are plenty of people who need absolutely the fastest harware around and won't hesitate paying it.
Spectator - Monday, November 3, 2008 - link
Some of us want more info.A) How does the integrated Thermal sensor work with -50+c temps.
B) Can you Circumvent the 130W max load sensor
C) what are all those connection points on the top of the processor for?.
lol. Where do i put the 2B pencil to. to join that sht up so i dont have to worry about multiply settings or temp sensors or wattage sensors.
Hey dont shoot the messenger. but those top side chip contacts seem very curious and obviously must serve a purpose :P
Spectator - Monday, November 3, 2008 - link
Wait NO. i have thought about it..The contacts on top side could be for programming the chips default settings.
You know it makes sence.Perhaps its adjustable sram style, rather than burning connections.
yes some technical peeps can look at that. but still I want the fame for suggesting it first. lmao.
Have fun. but that does seem logical to build in some scope for alteration. alot easier to manufacture 1 solid item then mod your stock to suit market when you feel its neccessary.
Spectator.