Performance Meets Value – Core i7 vs. Penryn vs. Phenom II
Conclusion
This has been quite an enjoyable exploration for us in comparing our Penryn Core2Quad Intel PC with Intel’s highest performing CPU Core i7 and also with Phenom II 720 X3. We will continue to expand on it in the weeks to come by testing Phenom II X4 versus X3 versus X2, compared with Q9550S and Core i7. We will also up the graphics performance with HD 4870-X3 TriFire and perhaps also GTX 280 SLI, to see if higher performing graphics make more of a difference then they do with our current testing setup for this review.
As you can see from our benchmarks, if you want absolutely the very fastest frame rates with your HD 4780-X2 or your GTX 280 – 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 video card 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 GTX 280; often the differences were magnified by using the faster HD 4870-X2. So, future and more powerful video card purchases should 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 class of card or HD 4870 CrossFire, Core i7 is absolutely overkill for gaming and often it not the fastest when compared to either our (now midrange) Q9550S or even the decidedly budget Phenom II 720 X3.
Of our fifteen gaming benchmarks, only World in Conflict seems to really benefit from a quad-core so as to make any practical difference to the game play – and Core i7 was also the fastest. The rest of the benchmarks demonstrate that all three of our 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 necessary if you don’t mind sacrificing just a few frame rates.
Our current conclusion from this and past testing would have us believe that the video card is the single most important factor for determining most game frame rates at maximum detail. As long as you have a decent tri- or dual-core, you are not really losing much by not having four CPU cores – other than bragging rights – in most games.
We intend to return again to this subject in a couple of weeks as we add our brand new Phenom II X4 955 to the benching mix so that we can directly compare with our Phenom II 550 X2 and 720 X3. We are also expecting to add SLI to the mix in that same review. We will update to the next set of drivers as we continue to benchmark our CPUs with even faster graphics. Stay tuned. The fun has just begun.
In the meantime, feel free to comment below, ask questions or have a detailed discussion in our ABT forum. We want you to join us and Live in Our World. It is fast expanding and we think you will like what you progressively discover here.
Mark Poppin
ABT Senior Editor
Please join us in our Forums
Follow us on Twitter
For the latest updates from ABT, please join our RSS News Feed
very thorough and informative, i glanced over it but i will read it later. looking at the graphs and conclusion good stuff look forward to seeing more cpu’s put to the test.
The almost constant flat-lining from the different processors yet again proves the GPU is by far the most important factor for gaming.
I agree that the cpu bottlenecks that people talk about so much are very very overblown.
But they still do matter in gaming. Of course not as much as a video card but they are still very important.
The games you tested are older games. They don’t take use of more than 2 cores decently.
Just about every recent release however is coded to use more than 4 cores. And there are some very LARGE performance differences even when playing at good resolutions and high settings. Recent Source games, Capcom games will make use of more cores because the engines they use have been updated for multi core support.
I’m going to show a couple of examples.
Reisdent Evil 5
http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,690488/Processor-benchmarks-with-Resident-Evil-5-Core-i7-reigns-Phenom-strong-Update-Lynnfield-results/Practice/
A 2.4GHz Q6600 beats a 3.0GHz e8400
The 3.1GHz Phenom II X2 550 gets 54.2FPS and the Phenom II X4 945 @ 3.0GHz gets 81.5
The settings were at 1680 x 1050 all settings max.
DiRt 2
http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,700780/Dirt-2-CPU-benchmarks-with-DirectX-9-and-DirectX-11-Phenom-doing-well-quad-cores-rule/Practice/
Max Details @ 1680 x 1050
62% increases for Quad Cores over Dual Cores
e8400 @ 3.0GHz gets 37FPS
Q9650 @ 3.0GHz gets 63FPS
Dragon Age Origins
http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,698761/Dragon-Age-Origins-CPU-benchmarks-75-percent-boost-for-quad-cores/Practice/
e6600 @ 2.4GHz gets 28FPS vs the Q6600 @ 2.4GHz that gets almost double the fps at 49FPS.
The infamous Grand Theft Auto 4
http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,669595/GTA-4-PC-CPU-benchmark-review-with-13-processors/Reviews/?page=2
Prototype
http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,688240/Prototype-CPU-Benchmarks-System-Requirements-and-Screenshots/Practice/
Left 4 Dead 2
http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,699110/Left-4-Dead-2-CPU-benchmarks-Phenom-II-very-strong/Practice/
ARMA 2
http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,687620/ArmA-2-tested-Benchmarks-with-18-CPUs/Practice/
Batman Arkham Asylum
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/batman-arkham-asylum,2465-9.html
All of these games has been tested with high settings at decent and very common gamer resolutions like 1680 x 1050.
There are lots and lots more but I don’t feel like posting any more links. I think that I’m able to make show my point with these games. Just about every recent release comes with great quad core support. I’d be more surprised if a recent game didn’t come out with quad core support.
Thanks for you comments. Let’s look, one at a time at each of your examples:
RE5, they do not test with AA or AF and only at 16×10. Of course, the bottleneck is shifted to the CPU.
Dirt 2, same issues. I test everything with 4xAA/16xAF. The author agrees with me:
” In most systems, especially with DirectX 11, the graphics card is the limiting factor. ”
Prototype. Ph II 940-X4 is barely 3 FPS behind i7. Watch that difference disappear at 19×12 and with faster clocks.
L4D. As with with all Source engine games, the practical difference is minimal. Again, they do not test with AA/AF – which is silly.
ARMA2, I also test; except that I use the highest details and with different results.
Batman AA. Here is what THG concludes:
“We now see that a dual-core Phenom II CPU at 2.5 GHz can handle a minimum frame rate of over 40 FPS. This means that even a sub-$100 CPU should be able to deliver excellent performance with Batman: Arkham Asylum.” Dropping the CPU core speed to 2.0 GHz; why don’t they go to 1 GHz to make a point?
GTA4. They test at 10×12. Ridiculous. Enough said.
You may like Part 2 of my review. It is greatly expanded to include the same 3 CPUs and also now with Ph II 550 X2 and Ph II 955 X4. I am also now testing with HD 4870-X2 and HD 4870-X3 TriFire to up the graphics ante.
It takes me a few weeks to run over 1,000 benchmarks on 17 games for 5 CPUs at three clock speeds and at two resolutions for my upcoming article. –Look for it December 21st.
My test games are certainly not old. However, look for me to add Dragon’s Age: Origins, Left4Dead, Wolfenstein, Borderlands, Dirt2, and CoD MW2 in the coming weeks.
Quad core is becoming more useful for brand new games. Eventually it will be necessary. But not yet.