Fallout 3 Game Performance

Bethesda’s latest game uses an updated version of the Gamebryo engine (Oblivion). This benchmark takes place immediately outside Vault 101. The character walks away from the vault through the Springvale ruins. The benchmark is measured manually using FRAPS.

Fallout 3 - 1680 x 1050 - Medium Quality

Gaming performance is a mixed bag with the Core i7 980X. In some cases it'll be a bit faster than the 975 due to its larger L3 cache, but in some cases it'll be slower because of the L3 cache's higher latency. This is one of those cases.

Left 4 Dead

Left 4 Dead - 1680 x 1050 - Max Settings (No AA/AF/Vsync)

The tables are turned in Left 4 Dead where the 980X's 12MB L3 cache gives it a 6% performance advantage over the Core i7 975.

FarCry 2 Multithreaded Game Performance

FarCry 2 ships with the most impressive benchmark tool we’ve ever seen in a PC game. Part of this is due to the fact that Ubisoft actually tapped a number of hardware sites (AnandTech included) from around the world to aid in the planning for the benchmark.

For our purposes we ran the CPU benchmark included in the latest patch:

Far Cry 2 - 1680 x 1050 - Playback (Action Scene) - Medium Quality

Even today's most threaded titles aren't enough to occupy the Core i7 980X's six cores, it falls slightly behind the 975 in FarCry 2.

Crysis Warhead

Crysis Warhead - 1680 x 1050 - Mainstream Quality (Physics on Enthusiast) - assault bench

Windows 7 Application Performance Windows 7 Gaming Performance
Comments Locked

102 Comments

View All Comments

  • - Thursday, March 11, 2010 - link

    how are you getting your productivity numbers/percentages ???
  • Anand Lal Shimpi - Thursday, March 11, 2010 - link

    Also note that I limited my voltage to a ~15% increase. I believe with more voltage it's possible to go higher, but you really start driving power consumption up at that point.

    Take care,
    Anand
  • zartok - Thursday, March 11, 2010 - link

    I saw on tweakers.net they were able to run it 3.45GHz on 1V and on 4.26GHz on 1.38V (or 1.33V can't tell that well due to the image size), without even trying hard. So are sure that it's the CPU that's limiting the OC and not something else eg the motherboard?
  • Bolas - Thursday, March 11, 2010 - link

    How does this cpu compare to the 6-core 32nm Xeon server chips that are launching around the same time? Any cost information on those yet? I mention this because I'm seriously considering EVGA's new dual socket W555 motherboard, which requires the dual QPI cpu's.
  • goinginstyle - Thursday, March 11, 2010 - link

    Is Intel offering 18 months no interest no payment plans for this? I really want one but I also want to eat and live in something besides a box for the next six months. Good article and nice to know the X58 boards we already have should work with nothing more than a BIOS upgrade.
  • JonnyDough - Thursday, March 11, 2010 - link

    This processor isn't for you then.

    It's for people who have nothing better to blow money on AND have money.
  • DrMrLordX - Thursday, March 11, 2010 - link

    This is mostly a paper launch since few people will pay $1k for a CPU. As has been said so many times in the CPU/OC forums, keep your eyes out for the 32nm Xeon quads that will be appearing for LGA1366. They won't be 920 d0 cheap but they will be cheaper than the 980 and probably OC pretty well.

  • erwos - Thursday, March 11, 2010 - link

    If it's in the channel, it's not a paper launch. Period, end of story. Just because you can't afford it doesn't mean others can't.
  • DrMrLordX - Friday, March 12, 2010 - link

    It's not that it's unaffordable . . . it's just that I'm not that crazy. Close, but not quite.
  • JumpingJack - Friday, March 12, 2010 - link

    Maybe a career change that pays more :) ... j/k.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now