Gaming Performance

Next up was gaming performance, and of course using our own game demos.  We tested everything at 1024 x 768 since we only had a single 7900 GTX per system at our disposal.

We already knew to expect solid Quake 4 performance out of Intel's Core architecture, and the Core 2 Extreme X6800 does not fail us - offering just under 24% better performance than the FX-62.

Quake 4 1.2 Performance - 1024x768 High Quality

We've also already seen Conroe's performance under F.E.A.R., and with the latest 1.05 patch performance is in line with our expectations:

F.E.A.R. 1.5 Average Frame Rate - 1024 x 768

Core 2 Extreme boasts a 17.8% performance advantage over the FX-62 in average frame rate. 

The minimum frame rate is significantly higher at 50.9%, and even after multiple runs the performance advantage was consistent:

F.E.A.R. 1.5 Minimum Frame Rate - 1024 x 768

Finally the Core 2 Extreme system was able to boast a 14.2% higher maximum frame rate under F.E.A.R.

F.E.A.R. 1.5 Maximum Frame Rate - 1024 x 768

Our final gaming benchmark during our short but sweet testing period with the Core 2 Extreme was Battlefield 2, and its performance was in line with what we've seen in the previous two titles:

Battlefield 2 1.21 Performance - 1024 x 768

Intel's holding on to a 20.3% performance advantage under Battlefield 2. 

We're still wary of crowning Intel the new gaming performance champion, especially without having run other very important titles such as Oblivion and Half Life 2: Episode 1, but until we can things are definitely looking extremely promising for the Core architecture. 

Content Creation Performance Final Words: Conroe Availability and Pricing
Comments Locked

134 Comments

View All Comments

  • fikimiki - Wednesday, June 7, 2006 - link

    You are right except 2 points:
    - Motherboards for 2 CPUs are expensive, 4x4 should cost no more than standard motherboard
    - 4x4 is aimed also for X2, so two X2 3800+ means cheap monster!

    From AMD side I don't see any panic, they are executing their plan and nothing more.
  • gramboh - Wednesday, June 7, 2006 - link

    quote:

    What a 4x4 AM2 system will let you do is obtain a reasonably fast system initially using ONE fx2, and LATER spend a bit more and you have a MONSTER.


    Are you serious? I can't see AMD pricing FX62 much under $800 it would screw up the rest of their pricing scheme too much, spending $1600 on CPUs to best a $500 CPU is insane. If you need to wait month to month for free cash flow to build a computer, you really don't have enough wealth to afford $1600-$2000 on cpu alone.
  • rqle - Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - link

    if 2.6ghz beat out FX62, then a 2.4ghz conroe should equal the same, i rather take a $300 2.4ghz then a $1000 FX2.
  • ShapeGSX - Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - link

    So you are willing to buy $2000 worth of processors to beat an Intel processor?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now