• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Anandtech: P2, i7, i5 weirdness: Intel/ATI, AMD/Nvidia Oddities

95thrifles said:
interesting, I bet all the "gamers" who bought 920s are feeling a bit peeved atm, seen as how theyre the worst performers, lol
Click to expand...

I think most of the gamers who bought 920s have them sitting at far higher clocks than the stock 2.66GHZ that last page of tests was run at.

As clock for clock tests from numerous sites show, they're actually the best performers. A 3.8 920 is faster than a 3.8 860, i5 750, Phenom II or Core 2 Quad. 'Course, if you have no balls and don't wish to overclock then yeah, buy one of the other chips.

Your ultimate performance will be worse, though.
 
Rapido! said:
I think most of the gamers who bought 920s have them sitting at far higher clocks than the stock 2.66GHZ that last page of tests was run at.

As clock for clock tests from numerous sites show, they're actually the best performers. A 3.8 920 is faster than a 3.8 860, i5 750, Phenom II or Core 2 Quad. 'Course, if you have no balls and don't wish to overclock then yeah, buy one of the other chips.

Your ultimate performance will be worse, though.
Click to expand...

Really? Dont know what tests youre reading, probably tomshardware, afaik theyre the only ones showing this, if you read this other article from anandtech which compares them all at 3.8GHz in gaming youll see the results reproduced, also check out techreport and pretty much any other respected hardware site
 
95thrifles said:
this other article from anandtech which compares them all at 3.8GHz in gaming youll see the results reproduced
Click to expand...

No, I won't, because that shows the 920 beating the i5 750 and Phenom II, with the exception of their very suspicious Phenom II + Nvidia card performance results. Which to re-iterate, are VERY, VERY SUSPICIOUS, but that's not really the point here.

You do know that the i7 920, i7 860, and i5 750 are the same CPU, right? Clock-for-clock, they perform very similarly but the 920 takes the narrow win due to it's triple-channel ram/other ancillary features. There's no way it can lose; the 860/750 have no architectural benefits over it at all.

Clock-for-clock tests at 2.8 and 3.6, low resolution and high

Equally clocked 920 winning at everything. Tbh, mere logical thought would tell you as much.
 
Rapido! said:
You do know that the i7 920, i7 860, and i5 750 are the same CPU, right?
Click to expand...

Nope. Different. Off the top of my head,

Different memory controller, as one runs three channels and one two.
P55 uses the DMI interconnect. Intel X58 uses the QPI interconnect.
X58 offers two x16 lanes while P55 offers two x8 lanes.
Different turbo modes implemented.

Pretty confident there are more. Whether you consider triple channel memory and pci-e bandwidth useful or not doesn't change that they are different processors.
 
No in the article I linked, for gaming the 750 beats both the 920 AND 950, for pure encoding then yes the 920 wins, but for actual gaming the 1156 socket is superior, probably due to the fact it has on an chip PCI-E controller where as the 1366 doesnt and still has to communicte with the NB/SB hybrid, another difference ;) in addition to hyperthreading and most importantly number of pins, I wouldnt try one in anothers socket for example, lol
And as I say, thats just the 750, they didnt even test the 860 which wil be even better
Edit: actually I jst rechecked the article and youre right, the results appear to of changed from when they were initially posted, however theyre still vastly different chips
Edited again: It was techreports article I was thinking of, here, though Im sure initially anandtech agreed, strange, they now also only include 2 games, where as initially Im sure they had 6-8
 
Last edited:
JonJ678 said:
Nope. Different. Off the top of my head,

Different memory controller, as one runs three channels and one two.
P55 uses the DMI interconnect. Intel X58 uses the QPI interconnect.
X58 offers two x16 lanes while P55 offers two x8 lanes.
Different turbo modes implemented.
Click to expand...
You know what's better than being a pointless pedant? Reading between the lines; they are essentially the same CPU, born of the same silicon, which some differing features here and there. Seeing as I had already alluded to said differences, your GOTCHA moment is denied.

Away with you.
 
The differences are significant enough that saying they are essentially the same CPU is not really accurate.
 
Rapido! said:
You know what's better than being a pointless pedant? Reading between the lines; they are essentially the same CPU, born of the same silicon, which some differing features here and there. Seeing as I had already alluded to said differences, your GOTCHA moment is denied.

Away with you.
Click to expand...

so as all CPUs are made from silicon theyre all essentially the same???? that makes no sense
Theyre massively different with hugely different architectures

Edit: to highlight

Lynnfield

lynnfield.jpg


Bloomfield

bloomfield.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom