Testbed and Methods
In our today’s tests we want to compare the performance of the energy-efficient Core i5-4670T and Core i5-4670S processors with that of regular quad-core processors of the same class. We will see if the processors with a TDP of 65 and 45 watts are much slower in comparison with their ordinary 84-watt counterparts. Besides the Core i5-4670T and Core i5-4670S, we will test a few ordinary quad-core processors: Core i5-4670, Core i5-4590 and Core i5-4460. We’ll also throw in a dual-core i3-4360 which has a specified TDP of 54 watts.
Trying to put our energy-efficient Haswell-core processors under real-life conditions, we don’t use a discrete graphics card. Instead, we use the processors’ own integrated graphics cores.
So here is the full list of the hardware and software components we’re using for today’s test session.
- Intel Core i5-4670 (Haswell, 4 cores, 3.4-3.8 GHz, 4x256KB L2, 6MB L3, HD Graphics 4600)
- Intel Core i5-4670S (Haswell, 4 cores, 3.1-3.8 GHz, 4x256KB L2, 6MB L3, HD Graphics 4600)
- Intel Core i5-4670T (Haswell, 4 cores, 2.3-3.3 GHz, 4x256KB L2, 6MB L3, HD Graphics 4600)
- Intel Core i5-4590 (Haswell, 4 cores, 3.3-3.7 GHz, 4x256KB L2, 6MB L3, HD Graphics 4600)
- Intel Core i5-4460 (Haswell, 4 cores, 3.2-3.4 GHz, 4x256KB L2, 6MB L3, HD Graphics 4600)
- Intel Core i3-4360 (Haswell, 2 cores + HT, 3.7 GHz, 2x256KB L2, 4MB L3, HD Graphics 4600)
- CPU cooler: Noctua NH-U14S
- Mainboard: ASUS Z97-Pro (LGA1150, Intel Z97)
- System memory: 2x8GB G.Skill [TridentX] F3-2133C9D-16GTX DDR3-2133 SDRAM (9-11-11-31)
- Storage: Intel SSD 520 240GB (SSDSC2CW240A3K5)
- Power supply: Corsair AX760i (80 Plus Platinum, 760 W)
We carry out our tests in Microsoft Windows 8.1 Professional x64 with the following drivers:
- Intel Chipset Device Software 10.0.14
- Intel Management Engine Driver 10.0.0.1204
- Intel Rapid Storage Technology 126.96.36.1998
- Intel HD Graphics Driver 188.8.131.5252
As usual, we use the Bapco SYSmark suite to estimate performance in everyday computing tasks. It emulates a user working in popular office and digital content creation and processing applications. The test produces a single score indicative of the computer’s average performance across different applications. SYSmark has been updated recently, so we use the latest version, SYSmark 2014, for our tests.
As expected, the energy-efficient Core i5-4670S and Core i5-4670T processors are slower than the full-featured 84-watt Core i5-4670. This shouldn't come as a surprise because this performance is what we could expect considering their lower clock rates. The more interesting fact is that the Core i5-4670S is close to the Core i5-4590 in practical performance, which is quite an achievement. The Core i5-4670T, on the contrary, is inferior to the Core i5-4460, one of the junior 84-watt quad-core models. In fact, the 45-watt Core i5-4670T looks more like a Core i3-class processor in its general performance.
Now let’s take a closer look at the performance scores SYSmark 2014 generates in different usage scenarios. The Office Productivity scenario emulates typical office tasks, such as text editing, spreadsheets, email and web-surfing. This scenario uses the following applications: Adobe Acrobat XI Pro, Google Chrome 32, Microsoft Excel 2013, Microsoft OneNote 2013, Microsoft Outlook 2013, Microsoft PowerPoint 2013, Microsoft Word 2013, and WinZip Pro 17.5.
The Media Creation scenario emulates the creation of a video clip out of prepared materials (digital images and videos) using Adobe Photoshop CS6 Extended, Adobe Premiere Pro CS6 и Trimble SketchUp Pro 2013.
The Data/Financial Analysis scenario is devoted to statistical and market analysis. It processes a lot of numerical data in two applications: Microsoft Excel 2013 and WinZip Pro 17.5.
The performance of the energy-efficient processors may vary greatly depending on how high the Turbo Boost technology raises their clock rate. That's why the Core i5-4670S and Core i5-4670T look better relative to the other quad-core models in the office applications than at the computing or multimedia tasks. Well, you don’t really need four cores for an office computer, so you may even prefer a Core i3 which would be as economical as the energy-efficient Core i5 models.
Besides the integrated benchmarking suite, we will check out our processors in a few popular applications.