Platform upgrade: Core i7-920 vs i7-3770 at 4.2GHz featuring ECS Golden Series Motherboard and Kingston

15 Responses

  1. Bo_Fox says:

    No offense, but there are two main summary charts that are identical to each other. Is the second one supposed to show different games?

    Don’t forget about the “[insert chart]” part! 😛

  2. apoppin says:

    None taken. Thanks for pointing it out!


  3. Bo_Fox says:

    Never mind my previous comment, as it’s now fixed, thanks!

    Of course, Civilization V does better with Ivy Bridge than with Bloomfield, all clocked the same. At 4.8GHz (IB), CivV is like 30% faster than Nehalem (Bloomfield) at 4.2GHz.

    BUT what amazes me is that Nehalem still seems to be doing just as well as IB overall, clock-for-clock. In Crysis 2, Nehalem is like 15% faster than IB. At 4.2GHz, Nehalem still beats IB at 4.8 GHz in DX11 mode, by around 15%!! I was thinking of blaming it on the system memory bandwidth (with Nehalem using triple channel), but even at only 1200MHz, Nehalem still shines pretty much just as much as it does at 2000 MHz.

    The case reverses in the favor of IB but only by a few percentage points for Crysis 1, LP2, HAWX2.

    It goes to show that unless one is a serious Civilization V gamer, an overclocked Nehalem would be just fine for even a GTX 690. I would guess that Starcraft 2 and Skyrim (other CPU-limited games not tested here) are the only other games that show a noticeable improvement on the Ivy Bridge.

    Thanks, apoppin for all of this benchmarking that pretty much nobody else on the ‘net have done with all of these games, on the still mighty Nehalem!!

  4. Yomismo says:

    Amazing work!

    It would be one of these, but with an Athlon II X4 OC with maximum range and I7 3770K OC max.

    Athlon X4 ~ 3.5Ghz vs 5Ghz i7 3770K for example :)

    It would be interesting to see one of these with a single GPU both as a dual system which is where I think you will notice more.

    Sorry for my English.

  5. raj says:

    I have a 3770k and a I7 920. Its was a nice review because many people with older i7s are itching for an upgrade. I do think this review is biased in its language. The non scientific language of “Way Faster” vs saying its 8 percent faster is a dead give away. “What faster is subjective where a percentage is objective. Way faster to them seems to be any test that the Ivy beats the bloomfield in.

    USB 3.0 ports are nice but can be installed in an older X58 board (they fail to mention)

    For gaming its not worth the upgrade at all. For most windows tasks its not worth it.

    For tasks that take hours then it might be worth it. Ie encoding, but here a 6 core would be better than a quad. So an upgrade to a 6 core might be cheaper on x58 than doing entire MB/RAM swap.

    Not trying to rain on the parade but this review seems to want to justify the upgrade by using subjective wording rather than just stating the percentages.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.