[REVIEW LUAR] Clock for Clock: Core i5, Core i7, Core 2 Quad and Phenom II X4

[alisundoro]

Tweet

Permisi bos - bos n para senior...

Seorang Nubie mo coba Numpang sharing aja.. browsing internet buat cari review karena bingung mo upgrade ke mana.. antara socket 1156 or 1366...

Setelah ditelaah secara pandang mata awam sy. Sy ambil kesimpulan dari review ini. Dan sy tetep milih i7 920..

Dalam review ini dibahas mungkin semua aspek yg bisa jadi pertimbangan. Dibandingin semua proc di atas dalam speed yang sama n spec hardware yg sama pula.. memang cuma beda di i7 920 krn dia pake memory yg lebih gede (triple channel)..

dibandingin juga dalam speed 2.8 Ghz serta 3.6 Ghz..

segelintir grafik yg ngebandingin neh..

Memory Bandwidth Performance






Synthetic Application Performance






Synthetic 3D Performance






Gaming Far Cry 2

ini kesimpulannya..

Conclusion

Initially this article started off as a clock for clock comparison between the Core i5 750 and Core i7 860 processors. Then we decided to throw in the Core i7 920 for comparison purposes, and that was followed by the Phenom II X4 965. However if we were going to have a Phenom II X4 processor we really needed to include a Core 2 Quad processor, so the Q6600 was added.
The more powerful alternative would have been the Q9650 with its larger L2 cache and higher FSB. However since we are overclocking these processors the FSB is somewhat irrelevant, while the L2 cache does not exactly make for huge performance gains. In the end we chose the Q6600 over the Q9650 for the simple reason that far more of you actually own a Q6600 processor. In a sense the Core i5 750 is the new Q6600, and therefore the comparison makes more sense in our opinion.

For the most part comparing the Core 2 Quad Q6600 and the Core i5 750 is like comparing chalk and cheese, the Lynnfield architecture is just so much more refined when compared to Kentsfield. Clocking both processors at 3.60GHz showed huge performance gains in favor of the Core i5 750 when testing with software such as WinRAR, Excel and Photoshop. Furthermore, when it came time for gaming performance, the Core i5 750 was just as impressive, leaving the Q6600 well behind.

That said, there would be no mad rush for Core 2 Quad Q6600 owners to upgrade to the Core i5 750, as they still have a very capable processor, particularly if they are overclocking it to 3.0GHz or beyond. However, for those building a new system, it is safe to say that you can forget that the LGA775 platform and all its processors even exist.

Perhaps a more important comparison is between the Core i5 750 and the Phenom II X4 processors. Again when clocked at either 2.80GHz or 3.60GHz the Core i5 750 smashed the Phenom II X4 965. While the Phenom II X4 965 was able to dispatch of the Q6600, the new Core i5 750 proved to be far too much. Regardless of whether you plan to overclock a Phenom II X4 processor or not, it has little chance against the Core i5 750 on a clock for clock basis.

The most surprising match up was between the Core i5 750 and Core i7 860, which I mentioned was our original intention for this article. When clocked at the same frequency there is little difference between these two processors, and when pushing them as high as 3.60GHz there really is no difference. Of course the only difference between the two is the Hyper-Threading support of the Core i7 860, which really failed to help it in the majority of our tests.

The Core i7 920 was slightly faster than the Core i7 860 and Core i5 750 processors when comparing clock for clock performance, and honestly if I really wanted Hyper-Threading support this is the path I would choose to get it. The Core i7 920 consistently delivered the best performance, even in our gaming tests.

Of course, while the gaming performance that you saw was very playable on any of the five tested processors, it does give us an indication of how things will turn out in the future, particularly as games become too demanding for older processors such as the Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600. Here the Core i5 750 proved that at just $200 US it can hang with the more powerful Core i7 (LGA1366) processors regardless of clock frequency, whether that be 2.80GHz or 3.60GHz for example.

In the end these results further cement our beliefs that the Core i5 750 is the best value quad-core processor available at the moment, with no exception. They also provide us with evidence that overclockers need not bother with the Core i7 8xx series, as there is nothing to be gained when pushing them to 3.60GHz and beyond.


So bisa diambil sendiri lah kesimpulannya...

menurut sy sih (IMHO y) secara relatif n gamblang urutan nya Q6600 < Phenom II < I5 750 < i7 860 < i7 920

i5 750 < i7 860 krn Hyperthreading nya. tapi bisa dibilang BETI sih..
socket 1156 < socket 1366 krn memory triple channel nya..

ini menurut pendapat sy yg awam tentang masalah beginian y... makanya sy milih i7 920..

tapi kalo price performance masih menang i5 750... tp yg lebih price performance y si phenom XII lah... tp itu terserah individu masing2 kan...

mohon maaf kalo ada yg salah.. CMIIW...

BTW ini link ke tempat aslinya..

Walton S. Clock for Clock: Core i5, Core i7, Core 2 Quad and Phenom II X4 Performance. (Ed) Perrin K. from http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=857&p=0 ;September 2009. Diunduh 31 September 2009.


Thx All..

[d_estroye_r]

Tweet

nice ..memang secara harga kurang lebih begitu kan..ini x4 "jadi2an" kayak x4 B50 belum jadi itungan ya,, amd menang price/perfomance disini

[alisundoro]

Tweet

nice ..memang secara harga kurang lebih begitu kan..ini x4 "jadi2an" kayak x4 B50 belum jadi itungan ya,, amd menang price/perfomance disini

Emang Phenom II menang price - performancenya.... apalagi X4 jadi2n macam X4 B50.. bisa beda $ 100 tp utk kelas i5/i7. yg menang price performance nya si i5 750 bos... bisa beda $ 80 lebih loh. belum lagi dengan memory triple channel nya.. dengan performance yg BETI gt..

oh iya.. n ini Phenom II X4 965 bos... ini ambil dari website aslinya.

[TendouKyu]

Tweet

Kalo dana unli mah mao i7 gpp. Buat saya pribadi Hyperthreading ngga terlalu penting bukankah trik-nya sama kaya P4 dulu? Pada waktu full load ngga membantu kan?

Bagi saya fitur Turbo Boost plg menarik, dgn fitur tsb ga ada kata proc x4 setara ama x2 pada app yg tdk mendukung 4 core.

Kesimpulan saya sich saat ini Dual channel DDR3 buat 4 core masi cukup. Triple channel buat 6 atau 8 core.

Kalo salah mohon dikoreksi.

[Abon Sapi]

Tweet

matap dah intel. cm kira2 kalo di OC pake air cooling mentok dikisaran berapaan ya? coz patokan buat harian kan gak mungkin kalo pake extreme cooling.

[alisundoro]

Tweet

@tendoukyu

setuju bos. Kyknya hyperthreading emang kurang signifikan..

Jd paling worthed y ganti ke i5 750..

Kalo budget terbatas y phenom ii x4.

Imho y.

[alisundoro]

Tweet

@abon sapi..

Kalo pake air cooling dgn i7 920. Di chip Bs kok nyampe 4 ghz. Si jengkol pake megahalem n mugen 2 full load nyampe 71 drjt. Pake kipas kuenceng sih .

Bahkan di forum luar bs nyampe 4.2 ghz.

Kalo punya i7 920 sy default clock n stock cooling mah full load bs nyampe 78 drjt. Idle di 43 drjt.

[Sonto Loyo]

Tweet

@abon sapi..

Kalo pake air cooling dgn i7 920. Di chip Bs kok nyampe 4 ghz. Si jengkol pake megahalem n mugen 2 full load nyampe 71 drjt. Pake kipas kuenceng sih .

Kalo punya sy default clock n stock cooling mah full load nyampe 78 drjt.

He he he ... ike punya dengan kondisi BLCK=166MHz (@3.33GHz), running Prime95 ... salah satu corenya bisa sampe 99ºC ... buru2 di stop dah . Tapi untuk penggunaan sehari2, contoh running WinRAR sampai 8 thread, jatuhnya paling tinggi 85ºC.
FYI, total idle mobo temp udah di 45ºC, core Procie 48ºC, maklum diruangan nggak pake AC temp ruangan bisa sampe 33ºC.

[TIF@NET]

Tweet

ternyata core i7 920 panas ya? jadi kalo mau narik sampe' 3.8GHZ harus nya pake cooler apaan bro?

[radio]

Tweet

ane sdh make PII X4 955 am3...........sangat puas ama kinerja n harganya.............