In the review of Nehalem CPU we haven’t said anything about gaming performances. Since new X58 chipset has support for nVIDIA SLI and ATi CrossFire, it would be great to see those performances, but that combination would come with hefty price tag at the moment, so we decided to test single graphics card system. If you disagree with our decision you can express your disagreement in our Forum using Discuss link at the end of this review and maybe, if there will be enough interests for this test, we will publish it in a separate review.
We have used Intel DX58SO motherboard in combination with Palit Revolution 700 Deluxe (HD 4870 X2) and Palit GeForce GTX 280. Other configuration was based on ASUS Rampage Formula motherboard as representative of older X48 chipset. We used Windows XP SP3 with all the latest updates because Vista is still not dominant in gaming configurations. ATI was tested in 1920x1200 4xAA 16xAF and nVIDIA in 1680x1050 2xAA 8xAF. These settings were used because they provide decent framerate (fps) for each graphics card in most games.
First graphics card that we tested was Palit HD 4870X2. Particularity of this card is that this is triple-slot graphics card. From the moment you take this graphics card into your hands it will be crystal clear that this is one of the most powerful pieces of hardware at the moment. Second graphics card is nVIDIA GTX 280 also signed by Palit. For synthetic benchmark results we used Futuremark 3DMark05 and 3DMark06. For gaming performances we used most demanding and representative games. Why we used Crysis and Crysis Warhead is perfectly clear because those two (one) games are most demanding at the moment. Unreal Tournament 3 is the game that is known for its good CPU multithread optimizations, while World in Conflict is very demanding game especially after turning on AA and AF filters.
We overclocked both CPUs at 3.8GHz just to avoid bottleneck effect. You will notice different settings for memory in results, which is inevitable because Core i7 uses DDR3 memory standard while older Core2Quad uses DDR2 standard. Memory was set on values that are supported by majority of motherboards on the market because this is test of graphics cards not motherboards and platforms. Choice of CPU was: Core i7 965 Extreme Edition (default: 3.2GHz) and Core2Quad Q9550 (default: 2.83GHz). There are minimal, average and maximum values for FPS in all games except for UT3, because difference between those values in this game was minimal. All games were set on maximum values that DirextX9 allows. All we can say is that gaming experience on these configurations was very smooth. But we are not here to discuss gaming experience. This review should help in resolving dilemma: Is upgrade to Core i7 platform worth it or not.
Results
3DMark05 is famous for its sensibility when it comes to faster RAM and higher CPU frequency. In overall Core i7 is winner and it is clear that this CPU is faster from itself because it showed better performances when we disabled HT and when it worked with “just” four (real) cores. Absurd was result for Core2Quad CPU in case of GTX280 graphics card because overall CPU score was lower than Core i7. This can be explained only with better optimization of nVIDIA drivers for Core2 platform, so we can expect that one of next versions of nVIDIA drivers will improve performances on Core i7 platform. 3DMark06 was always sensitive when it comes to number of available cores, and both, ATI and nVIDIA, proved this by showing better performances on Core i7.
 |
 |
In case of Crysis, ATI showed almost the same performance levels on Core i7 regardless on enabled/disabled HT, but nVIDIA showed different results. In any case Core i7 showed better FPS compared to its older Core2Quad brother. On the other side Crysis Warhead showed smaller differences in case of both graphics cards but nevertheless Core i7 won in that battle also. World in Conflict results are also controversial. In case of GTX280 and Core i7, it is better to disable HT, and in that case Core2Quad showed itself as worthy opponent. WiC is sensitive on memory timings and fast memory controller. Since Core i7 has integrated memory controller, results are better compared to results that Core2Quad achieved. This is obvious if you take a look at minimal FPS for this game. In case of ATI and Unreal Tournament 3 it is better to have Core i7 while in case of nVIDIA it is better Core2Quad. Again we suspect that nVIDIA drivers are not optimized for Core i7 platform and it is interesting that even in this case is better to leave HT disabled.
Test Configuration: Intel DX58SO X58 chipset, ASUS Rampage Formula X48, Qimonda 3GB DDR3 1066 triple channel,
GeIL 2x2GB DDR2 800, Palit GTX 280, Palit HD 4870 X2, Segate 160 GB,
Windows XP Pro SP3, Catalyst 8.12, Geforce WHQL 180.48
Test Configuration: Intel DX58SO X58 chipset, ASUS Rampage Formula X48, Qimonda 3GB DDR3 1066 triple channel,
GeIL 2x2GB DDR2 800, Palit GTX 280, Palit HD 4870 X2, Segate 160 GB,
Windows XP Pro SP3, Catalyst 8.12, Geforce WHQL 180.48
Conclusion
Should you make a transition to 1366 pins or not? Our opinion is that, in this moment, it’s not worth it. It is not good decision to invest so much money into new platform (CPU, motherboard, memory …). We suggest you to invest smaller amount of your budget into new graphics card rather than in completely new configuration and that way you would get better price/performance ratio. Of course Core i7 platform is there for hardcore gamers as ultimate solution. If you want to achieve maximum FPS in games, you should go for Core i7 platform. For all other gamers you should wait a little bit for AMD Phenom II CPU that should be positioned somewhere between Core2 and Core i7 when it comes to gaming performances, but with price tag closer to Core2 CPUs. Also Intel announced Core i5 CPU series that will have integrated PCI-Express controller and that is something really worth to wait. There are rumors that this CPU will be great when it comes to gaming performances. Until then take a look at results, and your wallet, because sometimes it is wiser not to be enthusiast at all costs.
Product HomePage for Palit GeForce GTX 280
Product HomePage for Palit Revolution 700 Deluxe
Discuss this article on the forums. (2 posts)
| Comments |
|