i7 performance compared to previous quad cores - Page 2 - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > New Systems | Building and Buying
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 07-01-2009, 01:50 PM   #11 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
Hefemeister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Sweden
Posts: 9,093
Default Re: i7 performance compared to previous quad cores

above 220 bclk is tough on most boards.
__________________

__________________
ASUS P6T Deluxe V2 :: INTEL i7 920 @3.4 :: XFX GTX260 :: 6gb Corsair 1600 :: Corsair 750TX :: TRUE 120 :: Samsung T240 24" :: Windows 7 X64

I do not accept support questions via PM

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Hefemeister is offline  
Old 07-01-2009, 04:36 PM   #12 (permalink)
True Techie
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 161
Default Re: i7 performance compared to previous quad cores

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hefemeister View Post
Well from our superpi thread comparing clock for clock at 4.1ghz

q6600: 12.45
i7: 9.72

q9300 @ 4ghz: 10.94
http://www.techist.com/forums/f10/te...p-list-169586/

4.1 was about the top end for the q6600 while we have i7's running at 4.6

21,131 | Dainius | Q6600 @ 3.904GHz | GTX280 SLI @ 715/1500 | XP Pro 32-bit |ORB
20,951 | AP4LIFETN | Core i7 920 @ 4.0GHz | GTX 280 @ 697/1518/2500 | Server 08 64bit | ORB

but keep in mind the q6600 had 2 cards while the i7 just had one.
http://www.techist.com/forums/f10/te...p-list-153414/

thanks for the info, I don't know much about the superpi program/test/benchmark but the 3dmark is kind of surprising. Would you say my friends score of a 16,100 in 3dmark06 with a i7 920 stock with a gtx 260 core 216 at stock is low? There doesn't seem to be any equivalent comparisons.
__________________

VampD is offline  
Old 07-01-2009, 04:44 PM   #13 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
Hefemeister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Sweden
Posts: 9,093
Default Re: i7 performance compared to previous quad cores

That score seems pretty fair.
__________________
ASUS P6T Deluxe V2 :: INTEL i7 920 @3.4 :: XFX GTX260 :: 6gb Corsair 1600 :: Corsair 750TX :: TRUE 120 :: Samsung T240 24" :: Windows 7 X64

I do not accept support questions via PM

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Hefemeister is offline  
Old 07-01-2009, 05:51 PM   #14 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
veedubfreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,979
Default Re: i7 performance compared to previous quad cores

Quote:
Originally Posted by VampD View Post
thanks for the info, I don't know much about the superpi program/test/benchmark but the 3dmark is kind of surprising. Would you say my friends score of a 16,100 in 3dmark06 with a i7 920 stock with a gtx 260 core 216 at stock is low? There doesn't seem to be any equivalent comparisons.
Thats about right. CPU clock makes a HUGE difference in both 06 and vantage. As far as air vs water goes, i had my q6600 at 3.6 on air, but could do 4.0 on water but it took a LOT of voltage. 1.6v to be exact. I'm running my i7 at 4.2ghz (turbo on, hyperthreading off) at only 1.4v (havent really tweaked yet).

Also, 37k 3dmark vantage Long weekend, i think i'm gonna turn off all but 1 core and go for the superPI score
__________________
Nothing to see here.
veedubfreak is offline  
Old 07-01-2009, 07:21 PM   #15 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
Slaymate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 7,946
Default Re: i7 performance compared to previous quad cores

I can run my i7 920 at 4.3Ghz 24/7 but my temps get a little higher than I like. Here is my Bios Template for 4.3Ghz.

Mother Board ( EVGA X58 SLI )
Drivers ( )
Bios ( SZ2D )
CPU ( i7 920 )
CPU Cooler ( Thermalright True Copper )
Memory ( 3x2GB OCZ DDR3 2000 )
PSU ( Cooler Master 1250 )
GPU ( GTX280 X 2 )
Drivers ( 185.68 )
Operating System ( Vista 64)


Frequency Control
CPU Clock Ratio ( 20X )
CPU Host Frequency (Mhz) ( 206 )
MCH Strap ( 1600 )
CPU Uncore Frequency (Mhz) ( 3221Mhz { 16X } )
CPU Clock Skew ( 0 ps )
Spread Spectrum ( Disabled )
PCIE Frequency (Mhz) ( 101 )


Memory Feature
Memory Speed ( Standard )
Memory Control Setting ( Enabled )
Memory Frequency ( 1067Mhz / 2:8 )
Channel Interleave Setting ( 6 Way )
Rank Interleave Setting ( 4 Way )
Memory Low Gap ( Auto )
tCL Setting ( 7 )
tRCD Setting ( 7 )
tRP Setting ( 7 )
tRAS Setting ( 20 )
tRFC Setting ( 54 )
Command Rate ( 1t )


Voltage Control
EVGA VDroop Control ( Without VDroop )
CPU VCore ( 1.350 )
CPU VTT Voltage ( +250 )
CPU PLL VCore ( 1.75 )
DIMM Voltage ( 1.60 )
DIMM DQ Vref ( +0 )
QPI PLL VCore ( 1.300 )
IOH VCore ( 1.375 )
IOH/ICH I/O Voltage ( 1.625 )
ICH VCore ( 1.25 )
PWM Frequency ( 800 )


CPU Feature
Intel SpeedStep ( Disabled )
Turbo Mode Function ( Enabled )
CxE Function ( Disabled )
Execute Disable Bit ( Disabled )
Virtualization Technology ( Disabled )
Intel HT Technology ( Enabled )
Active Processor Cores ( All )
QPI Control Settings ( Enabled )
QPI Link Fast Mode ( Enabled )
QPI Frequency Selection ( 4.800 GT/s )
OC Recorvery ( Enabled )

I normally run mine at 4.2Ghz using the same setting as above but I drop the CPU Host Frequency to 201 and I lower the CPU VCore to 1.3v and the CPU VTT to +150

If your running SLI I recommend you copy my IOH VCore, IOH/ICH/ I/O and ICH VCore Voltage settings. I can run SLI with stability at lower settings but these voltages gave me a couple hundred extra points in the benchies

My last piece of EVGA X58 advise deals with the pci-e bus speed and overclocking. As you change your Host Frequency your pci-e bus is automatically adjusted to stay as close to 100 as possible. You can see your pci-e bus speed in the Overclocking Tab of the EVGA E-LEET Utility. My system runs better when the pci-e bus is at 100 or 101 but it often sets itself to 99. So if your trying to go higher but your pci-e clock is at 99 try bumping it up a notch or two.
Slaymate is offline  
Old 07-01-2009, 10:49 PM   #16 (permalink)
True Techie
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 161
Default Re: i7 performance compared to previous quad cores

whats these new features with the core i7? I know what hyper threading is but is it enabled by default? Also what the heck is turbo mode and what does it do? Is it also enabled by default?
VampD is offline  
Old 07-02-2009, 12:08 AM   #17 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
veg1992's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 19,993
Default Re: i7 performance compared to previous quad cores

Turbo mode no, but it allows the i7 to have a little faster speed via a Mini-OC.

HT is enabled by default though
__________________
I do not accept help requests and/or deleted threads/complaints by PM, Profile or IM/Email. Just ask on the forums! Also, I do have Lockerz invites if you want them, feel free to PM me your email if you want one :0

If I help you, or you just like what I said, rep me by clicking the
or under my avatar; it helps me know that my advice actually helped you.


.. But things don't go according to plan! My Actual Rig, 2009:
veg1992 is offline  
Old 07-02-2009, 09:09 AM   #18 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
veedubfreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,979
Default Re: i7 performance compared to previous quad cores

Turbo switches all 4(8) cores from a multi of 20 to 21 and core 0 to 22 assuming it is within temp specs.
__________________
Nothing to see here.
veedubfreak is offline  
Old 07-02-2009, 11:04 AM   #19 (permalink)
El MŠgico
 
snowsurfer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Spain
Posts: 390
Default Re: i7 performance compared to previous quad cores

I'm happy with my current setup, will go for i7 only after the first major cpu/mobo price cut (that's what I always do). Until then, I'll upgrade the case and buy an LC kit from Petra's to practice with the LC and be prepared for OCing the i7 when I eventually do buy one.
__________________
| i5-4690K@4.4 | MSI Z97 Gaming 5 | 2x8Gb G.Skill Ripjaws@2133/CL9 | Noctua NH-D15 | Fractal Design Define R5 | Samsung Evo 840 500Gb | Dell 3415W | 2xMSI 980Ti Gaming 6 SLI | Corsair RM 850i | Corsair K70 | Proteus Core | Windows 10 x64 Pro | FiiO E17 Alpen as DAC/amp | AKG K551 | Blue Snowball iCE |
snowsurfer is offline  
Old 07-02-2009, 05:40 PM   #20 (permalink)
True Techie
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 161
Default Re: i7 performance compared to previous quad cores

Quote:
Originally Posted by snowsurfer View Post
I'm happy with my current setup, will go for i7 only after the first major cpu/mobo price cut (that's what I always do). Until then, I'll upgrade the case and buy an LC kit from Petra's to practice with the LC and be prepared for OCing the i7 when I eventually do buy one.
hmm I was just wondering what kind of 3dmark06 score you have for a q6600 at 3 ghz with an overclocked 8800 gt?
__________________

VampD is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
GTA 4 - tweaking performance and fixing issues guide Wildside PC Gaming 7 12-22-2008 04:12 PM
Dialup Speed, Tweaking slow performance SpenceQ Overclocking and Modding 8 12-01-2007 03:12 PM
Dual vs. Quad mnelson07 New Systems | Building and Buying 24 09-20-2007 11:28 PM
New AMD/ATI card kicks butt zmatt New Systems | Building and Buying 76 05-22-2007 05:39 PM
Comprehensive RAID performance report Osiris New Systems | Building and Buying 1 05-06-2007 09:42 AM



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.