Intel Core i7 Extreme Edition 980X

[Spy$Eyes]

Introduction

1.17 billion transistors difficult is the new flagship from Intel. This high number of transistors, as usual, for the most part on the cache server - cache - is falling, Intel packed in a 248 mm². The order of the six-core processor is much smaller than that of a "Lynnfield" quad-core CPUs, which brings it to 296 mm². But as easy as it almost always in life, but then again not. For Intel the new six-core processor is based on the high-end platform for the Socket LGA1366, Bloomfield and Lynnfield while trust in the new mainstream base 1156. The 210 base contact areas larger linking promises of triple-channel DDR3 memory. This is addressed at the factory, however, as in Bloomfield with a maximum of 1066, DDR3-1333 is absent in the new flagship remains unaccounted for. However, this seems first to be the only blemish. Purely on the platform there is to her, according to Intel and various board partners no problems with the six-core processor. were here for several X58 motherboards corresponding for several months already updated BIOS versions.

The first hexa-or six-core processor starts with rich 3.33GHz. He is purely from the clock as fast as the previous flagship based on the same shelf. But the 32-nm newcomer brings with some additions. Because of the cores increases, the entire L2 cache to 1.5 Mbytes of L3 cache, even to a whopping 12 MB. Thus the line of the first 32-nm CPUs based on the "Bloomfield" will continue, which may also be per core 512KB L2 cache and two cores show 4 MB L3 cache. The QPI-stroke of the new flagship is the 6.4 GHz also set to the highest clock that Intel currently offers in the processors. Also, the latest addition to Intel relies on the turbo mode and support for Hyper-Threading. The turbo acts with an increase of up to 266 MHz with the load of a single core, all cores, depending on the design of the cooling solution permanently working at 133 MHz higher clock rates. As a result, the processor is under load or less permanently working at 3.46 GHz, and in certain applications that are tailored to only one core, even 3.6 GHz are available. The comparably minimal differences, which represents an activated or deactivated, Turbo, we display in our benchmark course.

Hyper-Threading is a still more often ridiculed technology, which promises for a six-core processor with a total of twelve threads, but some performance gains. According to Intel Hyper-Threading for only about five percent more transistors on the whole, the necessary, which flows here and there in performance increases of more than 30 percent in theoretical tests and still up to 20 percent in real applications. The differences between activated and deactivated Hyper-Threading, we also show separately in each test.


Benchmarks

In addition to the newly designed from the ground test system, we have also carried the benchmark course an update. Still, some theoretical tests of the party, as they usually are one step further than any real application. There are new features that have found a place in processors, first tested in their performance. Since these theoretical tests use the user on the PC but not much, we are also many practical applications for help. These are now the main variety of multimedia applications, but also everyday things like packaging of files. Rounding out the test a few games. The test track, we have divided on this point. Once we rate the games in low resolution at high details with no quality-enhancing agents (AA / AF), the second part uses the currently most used resolution of 1,680 x 1,050 pixels and is the performance, as in actual use at least quadruple AA / AF on the agenda. As is customary in the past, each benchmark is performed several times to meet with any outliers in performance can. This happens in almost all applications, unfortunately, more often than expected, both the negative and the positive direction.

[Spy$Eyes]

3DMark Vantage

After the veteran 3DMark06 a few years under his belt and is therefore not only the graphics become a little dusty but looks beyond the CPU limit for fast graphics card is more noticeable, it was high time for a successor. The Finnish company Futuremark has accordingly after a long wait, the 3DMark Vantage on the market, which had been programmed in advance for the Direct3D 10 API.

Cinebench

The popular, originating from Germany Maxon Cinema4D is represented in our benchmark course in the form of Cinebench R10. The software uses raytracing to up to 16 processors, and thus benefits from all currently on the market desktop processors from AMD or Intel. In our test, we present the mid-2007 published version of Cinebench R10. As usual, the charts show the one hand, the test with only one processor core, on the other, the multi-core test, which also uses Hyper-Threading.

SiSoft Sandra 2010

No matter whether it's motherboard, memory, hard drive, peripherals, expansion cards, processor, network interfaces, BIOS, Windows or DirectX is, SiSoft Sandra has extensive answers. For much of the hardware in the PC, there are also benchmark tests that can test the PC to its performance in comparison with some reference computers. All these values are almost purely theoretical and have little relation to practice, however, processors can compare well in their theoretical possibilities. Also offer programs like Sandra usually much more likely to test possibilities, new built-in features of processors before they are integrated in months or years in real programs. We chose from the extensive repertoire for tests arithmetic, cryptography, and for the memory bandwidth.

Applications

Autodesk 3ds Max 2010

Autodesk 3ds Max is a comprehensive solution for 3D modeling, animation and rendering of the leading companies in game development, film and television industry and is used in digital publishing. In our test, we combine the latest version of 3ds Max 2010 with a benchmark from SPEC, the Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation. SPEC provides for 3ds Max provides a separate area, which is SPECapc for 3ds Max 9 calls.

[Spy$Eyes]

Games

Call of Duty 2

Just over two years, Ward was Infinity with "Call of Duty 4 - Modern Warfare" (computer base test) new genre standards and published a real top seller, the general public was, and most reviews extremely good evaluation points was able to in. No wonder then that the publication of the sequel to several months in advance hit huge waves. Overall, the successor is ultimately exactly what one might expect to begin with: A game that has filled the large footprints due. We use the first mission of the second act, "Wolverine", for an analysis of performance on current processors.

Far Cry 2

Power consumption

The power is in our test track are given for the entire system. In this discipline, all power-saving characteristics of the platforms are in use, which includes Cool'n'Quiet, EIST, C1E and other things. Thanks to the modern 40-nm graphics card, which in the idle also a very low power requirements, in some cases significantly lower values than in years previously permitted, even if one combines the fastest processors with the currently best single-GPU graphics. In the test under full load, the processors we rely on the good old Prime95 in the latest version. The Clarkdale, however move to the 0.9 volts, but usually slightly higher - up to 0.93 volts in it. The Harpertown in idle takes a little more than the Clarkdale, usually 0.97 volts. According to Intel, the power consumption of the Core i7-980X Extreme Edition is with all enabled features and power saving in idle way, at 12 watts, but the motherboard, more memory and other things as they stand there the entire platform, much worse. In the end, this means that the Lynnfield cut in this discipline at best. Six and twelve cores threads need a lot of energy, even in the 32-nm manufacturing. With just over 250 watts but it is only minimally above the Core i7-975 Extreme Edition, which again shows that you can use the same cooling solution. Therefore, the TDP is identical in both processors and 130 watts.


Temperature

In parallel to measuring power, the determination of the maximum temperature. This is read on both tools, and reviewed again by means of infrared thermometers.


Overclocking

Six cores to overclock could not promise so some performance improvements. Since the multiplier is set at 25-27 very high, you only have a little screw on BCLK and promptly added more than 4 GHz. On 160 MHz BCLK for example, then one has in any case, a processor at 4.0 GHz, with maximum turbo even above 4.3 GHz. We have added yet more tension even 0.1 volts, exhausted the maximum possible but not yet. The Turbo and Hyper-Threading course, were still operating.

How much the voltage increase already impacts on the energy needs alone, the next section shows again on better. Together with more than 4 GHz, we can go with the six-core processor more than 330 watts from the wall outlet, and this in pure processor load. As usual, a higher processor clock is rewarded primarily on theoretical tests and applications, while games in the fields of quasi depend only on the graphics card.


Value rating

We have picked out the current selling prices for all processors in the test represented at the cheapest online retailers and captured in a snapshot. Here, the price of only deliverable boxed CPUs, including cooler and full manufacturer's warranty is included. As with the overview is the famous motto: If a processor in the price, it is moved in the chart above and its rating increased as a result. For this price / performance ratio, the overall rating is divided by the price and multiplied by 1,000. The result then represents the performance that is, rounded replaced, this time for one euro. We expressly point out again that can change the price of processors every day, so a permanent correctness of the list can not be guaranteed. Traditionally, the field is led by the competitive two-core processors, which have taken in recent weeks, however, company with three and four cores to do so. The Athlon with two, three or four cores and for introductory prices of 50 to 70 euros lead the statistics confident - even at the current rising CPU prices. As is often illustrated by the chart that you get a very high basic performance for a very low price. After that, the spiral slowly upward - slide the processors in the rating decreases significantly. The 32-nm processors from Intel are settling in the lower middle, only the small Clarkdale for prices around 100 euro in the discipline can stand quite well.

[Spy$Eyes]

Performance-Power Rating

In the last CPU test rating for the first time we introduced this, as it has many readers wanted to. It is still in testing status, because you can just take into account many variables in this discipline. We opted for the final performance rating, because there the power is shown, which present the processors in the entire system as well. As this happens naturally under appropriate load, we set the maximum power as a reference point. This may apply in some tests, not sure, but it is intended to provide only an approximate indication. As an example, once the Core 2 Quad Q9550, which ends in our performance rating of 81.1 percent. At eye level of performance is 80.4 percent and the core i5 661, so that at this point there is almost a tie. What decides now is the power consumption. The Core i5-661 draws a maximum of 119 watts under full load of our complete system significantly less than the Core 2 Quad Q9550, which consumes a maximum of 178 watts.

What you already could read between the lines in advance, just pointing to that rating. The 32-nm processors deliver a good performance and low consumption pushes them in the discipline in front. The competitors are all processors from Intel, however, until the second half of the AMD processors are in the spotlight. On request, we give the maximum performance from today compared to the idle value. There, however, the error rate is much higher since, for example, the chosen motherboard affects much more. If it does, for example, five watts difference, from 150 watts under full load with only a negligible fraction. In only 60 watts at idle, the factor was, however, a significantly greater role.


Conclusion

Intel's new processor heralds the next generation for the desktop. With six cores to create here and there, what you could previously accomplish only in a much longer time. At the same time you get with the twelve threads, provided by the Core i7 Extreme Edition-980X, sometimes true luxury problems. Because the software is not optimized enough, then bring one the many threads nothing. This can even lead to something is not because the manufacturers have simply not believed that as fast for more than eight threads could be ready for their software. Armed Assault 2 (ArmA II) is one of those examples that are modern Intel CPUs are a little on a war footing. But the Core i7-980X breaks this point is not his neck, because with more than 3.3 GHz, it is well prepared for an application with the support of four, two or only one core. Many of the applications achieve nearly the value that is seen otherwise only in the theoretical part. There scaled in SiSoft Sandra everything as it should be - even if the AES benchmark with more than 200 percent increase over the Clarkdale, the first CPUs feature support as, once again, the scale goes beyond fast. Cinebench is in the multi-CPU test with more than 28,000 meters, nearly a 40 percent increase recorded also the 3DMark CPU test , and the tool wPrime scale with an increase of 49 percent and nearly perfect.

Where we know a lot of light seems to fall, but usually also a big shadow. This is the Intel Core i7 Extreme Edition-980X naturally look directly at the price which is $ 999. Thus, the model is faster than anything has so far been there, but can probably be bought by almost anyone. Rumor has it that Intel brings in the third quarter, an offshoot of six cores for the same socket, not the Extreme Edition and thus for an expensive, but maybe it is for many a person affordable price in the market. For customers who primarily work and need a whole lot of processor performance, are expected with this model, then open up an affordable alternative with probably 3.2 GHz with almost identical features.