Windows 7 Gaming Performance

Our Bench suite is getting a little long in the tooth, so I added a few more gaming tests under Windows 7 with a new group of processors. We'll be adding some of these tests to Bench in the future but the number of datapoints is obviously going to be small as we build up the results.

Batman is an Unreal Engine 3 game and a fairly well received one at that. Performance is measured using the built in benchmark at the highest image quality settings without AA enabled.

Gaming performance is competitive, but we don't see any huge improvements under Batman.

Dragon Age Origins is another very well received game. The 3rd person RPG gives our CPUs a different sort of workload to enjoy:

Dragon Age on the other hand shows an 11.6% gain vs. the i5 760 and equal performance to the Core i7 880. Given that the i5 2400 is slated to be cheaper than the i5 760, I can't complain.

World of Warcraft needs no introduction. An absurd number of people play it, so we're here to benchmark it. Our test favors repeatability over real world frame rates, so our results here will be higher than in the real world with lots of server load. But what our results will tell you is what the best CPU is to get for playing WoW:

Performance in our WoW test is top notch. The i5 2400 is now the fastest CPU we've ever run through our WoW benchmark, the Core i7 980X included.

We've been working on putting together Starcraft II performance numbers, so here's a quick teaser:

A 12% advantage over the Core i7 880 and an 18% improvement over the Core i5 760.

Archiving Performance Power Consumption
Comments Locked

200 Comments

View All Comments

  • wut - Sunday, August 29, 2010 - link

    Yep. I bet AMD is really wondering about that right now.
  • greenguy - Saturday, August 28, 2010 - link

    I bought basically what is an i5-750 based on Anand's review here. Or at least, the Xeon version with hyperthreading (needed ECC RAM).

    From what I can tell, you get about a 20%-30% improvement over the i5-750, with the same power consumption. That's pretty good. Not only that, you get some competent entry level graphics... which would have good open source drivers. That's somewhat exciting, though I wonder whether it would do multiple monitors. Any idea on that Anand?

    Maybe I'll just stick to the cheapest Nvidia discrete cards I can buy, a couple G210s do the trick (to get 4 1920x1200 monitors). Unless Intel can make those G210s redundant, it represents just an incremental bump in performance, as the only thing that is of interest is the increase in CPU. One thing that is nice is that Intel is reputed to have the best open source support for their GPU drivers, which makes things really interesting now they are producing stuff that will compete with the entry level discrete market. It could be really good for Linux/BSD people like myself.

    The other thing of interest for me is in the low power, low cost, high numbers of SATA connections space, with ECC. I wonder if Bobcat will have something there, as AMD don't seek to arbitrarily differentiate their markets like Intel does with the ECC RAM.

    Also not really sure what the big thing is with the motherboards and same CPU. I tend to keep the same computer as a build. By the time you want to upgrade the CPU, there is invariably other stuff that needs upgrading, e.g. USB3, graphics, SATA, RAM, whatever. So you end up wasting the old parts for not that much benefit. Better to just re-purpose the old machine, and when you have enough money, buy the most performant parts that are still good bang for buck. A good example was the i5-750 about 8 months ago or so. So I don't fault Intel for this.
  • wut - Sunday, August 29, 2010 - link

    Intel's going after the mid range market, where most of the money is. We'll have to wait and see how good AMD's Fusion mid range ends up being. Even if it catches up all the way and achieves performance parity so AMD can make more money by raising prices, Intel would have their newest gen on the market first. Fusion had better be really, really, good...
  • Hrel - Sunday, August 29, 2010 - link

    I'd say if that 2500K is 215 or less it'd be a fair buy. I'd still wait for the price to drop below 200 cause that's my absolute cap on a CPU. I am a little annoyed that it doesn't have hyper threading though, from a moral standpoint, I mean, from a raw material standpoint how much does adding hyperthreading cost? nothing! yeah, that's what I thought.
  • Hrel - Sunday, August 29, 2010 - link

    Those are some impressive integrated graphics. I've thought this for a while now, but we really don't need a card any lower than the HD5670, and maybe the 5650 in discrete graphics. Prefferably just the 5670 though. If mobo makers start setting aside a single DDR3 slot for the integrated GPU to use and dedicated GPU only memory, like a discrete GPU, so the integrated GPU doesn't have to share system RAM we really won't need low end graphics in laptops at all anymore.
  • mino - Sunday, August 29, 2010 - link

    Adequate.

    5450 is the LOWEST END card from 2008, A facelifted 4350.
    And 780G, it FINALLY manages to out-pace, in 2011, is the mainstream part of 2008 too.
    In 2011 there will be a 10W Ontario with 5450-class GPU on 40nm bulk ...

    On the other hand it seems Intel is thaking the GPU side seriously. Finally.

    But they are still where ATI/NV were in 2004 ...
  • LuckyKnight - Sunday, August 29, 2010 - link

    I would have liked to have seen a better comparison when it comes to idle power consumption? How much has it improved since moving to a 45nm->32nm GPU?

    Also, has Intel addressed the Clarkdale issue of not outputting industry standard 24fps? (23.976 hz)
  • Miggleness - Sunday, August 29, 2010 - link

    I was planning on purchasing an i5-760 in 2 weeks but looks like I'll have to settle for 2nd hand, low end parts instead and wait for the i5-2400's release.

    Great job Intel. I for one no longer have that much interest in overclocking when I have Turbo boost to compensate for that.

    Hope we hear about the official pricing soon.
  • jfelano - Sunday, August 29, 2010 - link

    Intel could have hit one out of the park with this one if it worked on existing s1155 motherboards....unfortunately it doesn't and it screws over everyone who bought into s1156 or s1366.....yet again.
  • siberian 3 - Sunday, August 29, 2010 - link

    Hi everyone i've read the preview and i am not so impresed by the performance of SB.The IGP
    is great but it make sense only for the mobile section of the pc not the desktop!!
    From the preview i understand that this is not a real fusion product but an evolution off clarkdale and arandale products.
    So i will wait for Llano to see what Amd has to offer!!!

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now