Intel's LGA1156 and Lynnfield core

CPUs|Motherboards
Viewing page 5 of 6 pages. Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next

Performance

Benchmark Comparison
Test State
i7-965
i7-870
i5-750
QX9650
Q9550
X4 955
NOD32
2:02
2:15
2:31
2:23
2:31
2:27
WinRAR
2:16
2:28
2:38
2:51
2:59
3:05
iTunes
3:11
3:29
3:48
3:20
3:33
4:34
TMPGEnc
2:29
3:10
3:21
3:07
3:14
2:52
PCMark05
10502
8985
8390
9061
8760
9004

The 2.66 GHz i5-750 slightly outpaced the 2.83 GHz Q9550 in two of our timed benchmarks, NOD32 and WinRAR. iTunes and TMPGEnc favored the Q9550, similar margin. PCMark seemed to give the edge to the high-clocked processor, but for all intents and purposes, the two are more or less equal in performance.

The 2.93 GHz i7-870 and 3.00 GHz QX9650 traded blows in a similar fashion. The biggest difference between the LGA1156 and LGA775 processors seemed to be in WinRAR, a very memory-dependent application. The lower latency and high bandwidth provided by integrated memory controllers helped the Lynnfield CPUs take a large lead in this particular test.

It would seem that these LGA1156 processors bridge the performance gap between LGA1366 and LGA775, offering a nice performance boost over Core 2 Quads, but falling short of the Bloomfield i7's. In our most stressful test, video encoding with TMPGEnc, the Core i7-965 EE beat the i7-870 by 22% even though its clock speed was only 66 MHz higher. AMD's second fastest desktop processor, the Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition, is priced similarly to the i5-750 and depending on the application, the i5-750 may be slightly faster.

Average/Total Benchmark Power Consumption

Average Benchmark Power Consumption
Benchmark
i7-965
i7-870
i5-750
QX9650
Q9550
X4 955
NOD32
111W
76W
75W
88W
84W
128W
WinRAR
108W
81W
79W
98W
96W
128W
iTunes
115W
78W
75W
92W
89W
137W
TMPGEnc
155W
108W
109W
118W
113W
167W
Total Benchmark Power Consumption (Watt-hours)
Benchmark
i7-965
i7-870
i5-750
QX9650
Q9550
X4 955
NOD32
3.76
2.85
3.15
3.50
3.52
5.23
WinRAR
4.08
3.33
3.47
4.66
4.77
6.58
iTunes
6.10
4.53
4.75
5.11
5.27
10.43
TMPGEnc
6.42
5.70
6.09
6.13
6.09
7.98

The total amount of power used during our timed benchmarks favored the Lynnfields as well. In watt-hours used, the i7-870 beat out the QX9650 by 15%, while the i5-750 bested the Q9550 by 11%. Both processors were also more efficient than the i7-965. As for the X4 955 BE, well the numbers speak for themselves.

Underclocked Average/Total Benchmark Power Consumption

Average System Benchmark Power Consumption
Benchmark
i7-870
i7-870
i5-750
i5-750
Q9550
Q9550S
Stock
UV
Stock
UV
NOD32
76W
63W
75W
71W
84W
78W
WinRAR
81W
71W
79W
70W
96W
87W
iTunes
78W
75W
75W
73W
89W
81W
TMPGEnc
108W
91W
109W
95W
113W
102W
i7-870 undervolted to 1.025V stable (~1.1375V stock).
i5-750 undervolted to 1.0625V stable (~1.1625V stock).

Total System Benchmark Power Consumption (Watt-hours)
Benchmark
i7-870
i7-870
i5-750
i5-750
Q9550
Q9550S
Stock
UV
Stock
UV
NOD32
2.85
2.36
3.15
2.98
3.52
3.27
WinRAR
3.33
2.92
3.47
3.07
4.77
4.28
iTunes
4.53
4.35
4.75
4.62
5.27
4.79
TMPGEnc
5.70
4.80
6.09
5.30
6.09
5.53
i7-870 undervolted to 1.025V stable (~1.1375V stock).
i5-750 undervolted to 1.0625V stable (~1.1625V stock).

Undervolting shaved 12% off the total power used by the i7-870 during our timed tests and 9% for the i5-750. Being able to run a stressful video encoding application like TMPGEnc on a quad-core processor drawing less than 100W from the wall is superb. Our i7-870 sample was the overall winner in efficiency. It had a fairly low stock operating voltage and it also undervolted further than its lower-clocked cousin.

Even at stock voltages, both Lynnfields edged out the Q9550S, which has a TDP rating of 65W.



Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next

CPUs|Motherboards - Article Index
Help support this site, buy from one of our affiliate retailers!
Search: