Information

Did you know you could become an X-bit labs fan on Facebook or follow us on Twitter?



Discussion

Discussion on Article:
Intel Core i7-975 EE and Core i5-750 in Contemporary Games

Started by: mascotzel | Date 05/15/10 06:39:52 AM
Comments: 12 | Last Comment:  05/21/10 12:19:23 PM

Expand all threads | Collapse all threads

[1-5]

1. 
Very comprehensive and useful test. Congrats for your hard work!
It would be great if possible to test some more with the CPU's at the same clock...
The reasonable difference in clock speeds surely affects the framerates.
0 0 [Posted by: mascotzel  | Date: 05/15/10 06:39:52 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
The reasonable difference in clock speeds surely affects the framerates.


Of course, but our video team already gave back LGA1156 motherboard and CPU. Perhaps, in the future... And, of course, it would be interesting to add some AMD CPU's.
0 0 [Posted by: Vader@Xbit  | Date: 05/15/10 08:24:29 AM]
Reply
 
I second to that.
Very nice review. Job well done, lads!
0 0 [Posted by: jonup  | Date: 05/15/10 04:49:26 PM]
Reply
 
Yeah. It would be nice if Xbits could do test with i5 overclocked to i7's speed so we can see the benefits of LGA 1366, extra memory bandwith and Hyper-Threading. If I'm not mistaken, Hyper-Threading slows some games down actually consumes more power when enabled.
0 0 [Posted by: shady  | Date: 05/15/10 10:42:46 PM]
Reply
 
Not necessarily overclocking. The EE could be underclocked just by multiplier to the frequency of i5 750 I think. It's common sense that a higher clocked CPU will perform better than a lower clocked one, even on the same architecture, more so if the architecture is considered superior.
0 0 [Posted by: mascotzel  | Date: 05/16/10 01:59:15 AM]
Reply
2. 
Your Quake 1 glide screenshots are taken at much higher resolution then the software screenshots, so it's not a fair comparison. I think it's 640x480 vs 320x200, or something like that. Pentium pro 200's were available before Quake 1 was released and they could run Quake 1 in software at 640x480, so there's no reason not to compare software vs glide at the same resolution.
0 0 [Posted by: Jasked  | Date: 05/15/10 10:28:46 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
These are screens from the Internet. It's pretty hard to find working Pentium I with 3dfx Voodoo these days, you know.
0 0 [Posted by: Vader@Xbit  | Date: 05/15/10 03:58:39 PM]
Reply
 
It's not the glide shots that need to be re-done but the software ones. New software shots at 640x480 could easily be taken today.
0 0 [Posted by: Jasked  | Date: 05/15/10 10:40:38 PM]
Reply
 
LOL! nit-pick much?

Either way, the glide should be superior, eh?
0 0 [Posted by: lh3nry  | Date: 05/18/10 08:42:36 AM]
Reply
3. 
I have to disagree with the conclusions. the tests showed a difference in only a few games, but:

1. the CPU tested were both very high end, most would attempt with lower end CPUs. Where CPU bottlenecking is more pronounced.
2. even though games where the CPU is a problem are rare, they do exist. And lowering your graphic settings has significant impact on the GPU utilization, but very little on the CPU.
0 0 [Posted by: taltamir  | Date: 05/19/10 09:41:00 PM]
Reply
4. 
The only way to compare graphics cards from different vendors with AA enabled is pure MSAA not Transparency or SSAA composite modes. Nvidia-labs.ru will be proud of your last few reviews...
0 0 [Posted by: recidivist  | Date: 05/19/10 11:12:57 PM]
Reply
5. 
Your message is dont buy overprice gulftown (1000 $)no need for game,other dilemma is which GPU for gaming ? grill named Fermi or Ati HD5xxx series, in fact that is not dilemma ,because Nvidia have problem with Windows 7 driver.
0 0 [Posted by: Blackcode  | Date: 05/21/10 12:19:23 PM]
Reply

[1-5]

Back to the Article

Add your Comment


Our Sponsors

Crucial.com Western Digital G.Skill