Core i7 vs. Phenom II X2 vs. X4 scaling performance analysis
Conclusion
This has been quite an enjoyable exploration for us in comparing our Core i7 with Phenom II 550 X2 and 955 X4. We finally do see that higher performing graphics make more of a difference then they did with our last testing setup for the previous review with the GTX 280, HD 4870, HD 4870-X2 and even HD 4870-X3 Tri-Fire.
As you can see from our benchmarks, if you want absolutely the very fastest frame rates with HD 5780 CrossFire – and cost is no object – you will chose the fastest quad-core CPU you can afford and overclock it as far as you can. We also see that as your graphics gets more powerful, generally your CPU needs to also be progressively faster to match it. We noted that there was generally less difference with varying clock speeds and the amount of CPU cores needed with our single HD 5870; results similar to the review we did last year. We also can see that often the differences are magnified by using the faster GTX 480 and they become even more noticeable with the HD 5870 CrossFire setup. So, future and more powerful video card purchases should always be considered whenever you upgrade your CPU.
However, this fact is to be noted. If you are looking for bang for buck now with a single video card of the HD 5870 or GTX 480 class of card, Core i7 is generally overkill for gaming and sometimes it not the fastest solution when compared to our relatively low-budget Phenom IIs.
Since last year, a few more new games have joined our benchmarking list along with World in Conflict that seem to really benefit from a quad-core so as to make a practical difference to the game play – and Core i7 is now generally also the fastest. The rest of the benchmarks still demonstrate that our three CPUs run fairly close in performance to each other and the results are satisfactory once they are overclocked a bit. We even note that overclocking is not always necessary if you don’t mind sacrificing just a few frame rates or lowering details or anti-aliasing.
Our current conclusion from this and past testing would still confirm that your graphic cards are the single most important factor for determining the most game frame rates at maximum detail – not the CPU. As long as you have a decent dual-core, you are not really losing much by not having four CPU cores in many games.
Our current performance versus value series has drawn to a close – for now. We will revisit it again and again in the future when we have faster graphics than our HD 5870 CrossFire setup – perhaps with GTX 580 SLI or with HD 69×0 CrossFire, next year. Stay tuned, there is a lot coming from us at ABT including a GTX 460 Showdown between Galaxy and EVGA this week.
Mark Poppin
ABT Senior Editor
Please join us in our Forums
Become a Fan on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
For the latest updates from ABT, please join our RSS News Feed
Join our Distributed Computing teams
- Folding@Home – Team AlienBabelTech – 164304
- SETI@Home – Team AlienBabelTech – 138705
- World Community Grid – Team AlienBabelTech
Flat-out amazing!!! I’ve never seen anything so epic like this. So, there was not any microstuttering in any of the above games, where the “measured” 40 fps appeared to look more like “perceived” 25 fps? I guess microstuttering is not noticeable if the measured fps is above 70-80, since half of this (45 fps) would still appear to be relatively smooth. Anything below 30 fps becomes really noticeable, so were there ever 40-50 fps instances with 2x 5870 CF that felt like 25fps or so? I’ll take your word for it, if you were actually watching 10,000 hours worth of benchmarking, ha (just kidding, don’t shoot my head off)!
Surprised there are not more comments. For a single video card it does look like a dual core is more than enough. Sure there are a few games that take advantage of four cores, but the fact remains they remain in the minority.
Bobert, I’ve been saying the same thing for months now.
Wow, very thorough and detailed article. It’s one thing to test CPU performance using a single video card, but it must take some brawn to do it for three different video configurations.
There’s so much data here to look at in so many ways. I suppose if you would have included an SLI setup we would then be able to determine how CPU speed affects SLI vs. Crossfire. If I’m looking at this data right, though, it seems Crossfire sees benefits from quad cores more than single video cards do.
Far Cry 2 seems to be a good example of this. Also Far Cry 2 shows interesting relationships between CPU and the GTX 480. The single HD 5870 doesn’t really react to CPU speed and cores the same way dual 5870s and the GTX 480 do. That’s pretty interesting.
So well done. If I only had one suggestion is that I would like to see GTA4 benched, mainly because I own it and good, thorough, and updated benchmarks of it are not easy to come by.:)
Concerning the Far Cry 2 numbers, despite being beaten with faster processors, the HD 5870 paired with the 2.6 dual core is actually outperforming the Crossfire and Nvidia setup. That’s what I find a bit interesting here.
AWESOME REVIEW.
This is EXACTLY what review websites ARE NOT putting out.
A non GPU-bottlenecked review showing how i7 really does have a significant gaming lead over Phenom II.
God you’d be surprised how many AMD fanboys still believe (and spread rumors) that Phenom II is plenty for 5870 crossfire. Psh. Plenty on today’s games maybe, but that is due to the PC gaming community being SNARED by the noob console community and their half a decade old setups.
Ok I’m ranting.
Two Thumbs!!
Raidur means it shows how Phenom II bottlenecks 5870 crossfire.
Everyone knows i7 is faster in games.
PS. I’m not Raidur.
PSS. I’m Raidur.
PSSS. Or am I?
Awesome review GJ.
Please let me know if you’re looking for a article writer for your
site. You have some really good articles and I believe I
would be a good asset. If you ever want to take some of the load off, I’d love to
write some material for your blog in exchange for a link back
to mine. Please shoot me an email if interested.
Thank you!