Final Words

I'll start this conclusion with what AMD must do in response to Lynnfield. The Core i5 750 is a great processor at $196, in fact, it's the best quad-core CPU you can buy at that price today. In nearly every case it's faster than AMD's Phenom II X4 965 BE, despite the AMD processor costing almost another $50. Granted you can probably save some money on an integrated 785G motherboard, but if you're comparing ~$120 motherboards the AMD CPU is simply overpriced.


Lynnfield (top) vs. Phenom II (bottom)

Luckily, the solution isn't that difficult. AMD needs to lower prices. The problem is that AMD has too many products below $200 already. The Phenom II X3 and X4 series both exist below $200 and rumor has it that AMD is also going to introduce a quad-core Athlon II somewhere down there. Lynnfield's arrival causes a lot of price compression on AMD's side. The most AMD should sell the 965 BE for is $199, but if it is to remain competitive the chip needs to be priced much lower. That doesn't leave much room for other AMD CPUs. On the bright side, this could force AMD to simplify its product lines again (similar to what it has quietly been doing already).

The next thing that the Core i5 750 does is it finally ends the life of LGA-775. Just as was the case with AMD, the Core 2 Quad Q9650 is easily destroyed by the Core i5 750 and at a lower price. With significantly lower motherboard costs than the LGA-1366 chips, the Core i5 750 can actually compete in the high end LGA-775 space. It's only a matter of time before the sub-$200 LGA-775 parts are made obsolete as well.

Lynnfield power consumption is just excellent, these are the most power efficient quad-core CPUs we've ever tested. They use less power at idle than similarly clocked dual-core processors and under load they deliver better performance per watt than any of their closest competitors. Later this year we'll see 32nm dual-core Westmere start to ship for notebooks. I don't have performance data but I'd expect that early next year will be the perfect time to buy a new notebook.

Can you tell that I like the Core i5 750? Again, at $196 you can't find a better processor. Intel did its homework very well and managed to deliver something that kept AMD in check without completely upsetting the balancing of things. There's no technical reason that Intel couldn't have enabled Hyper Threading on the Core i5, it's purely a competitive move. A Core i5 750 with HT would not only defeat the purpose of most of the i7s, but it would also widen the performance gap with AMD. Intel doesn't need to maintain a huge performance advantage, just one that's good enough. While I'd love to have a 750 with HT, I'd still recommend one without it.

The Core i7 870 gets close enough to the Core i7 975 that I'm having a hard time justifying the LGA-1366 platform at all. As I see it, LGA-1366 has a few advantages:

1) High-end multi-GPU Performance

2) Stock Voltage Overclocking

3) Future support for 6-core Gulftown CPUs

If that list doesn't make you flinch, then Lynnfield is perfect. You'll save a bunch on a motherboard and the CPUs start at $196 instead of $284. We didn't have enough time with our Core i7 860 to include performance results here but my instincts tell me that at $284 that'll be the Lynnfield sweetspot. You get excellent turbo modes and Hyper Threading, without breaking $300.

Speaking of turbo, I'd say that Intel is definitely on to something here. The performance impact was small with Bloomfield, but turbo on Lynnfield is huge. My tests showed up to a 17% increase in performance depending on the workload, with most CPU-influenced scenarios seeing at least 9 or 10%. The turbo mode transitions happen fast enough to accelerate even simple actions like opening a new window. OS and application responsiveness is significantly improved as a result and it's something that you can actually feel when using a Lynnfield machine. It all works so seamlessly, you just always get the best performance you need. It's like Intel crammed the best single, dual and quad-core processors all into one package.

Perhaps that's what kept me from falling in love with Bloomfield right away. It was fast but in the same way that its predecessors were fast. If you didn't have a well threaded application, Bloomfield wasn't any better than a similarly clocked Penryn. Lynnfield's turbo modes change the game. Say goodbye to tradeoffs, the Core i5 and Core i7 are now fast regardless of thread count. It speed that is useful, it speed that you can feel, it's what truly makes Lynnfield the best desktop microprocessor of 2009. It's not just faster, it's smarter, it's better. It's why today's title borrows from Daft Punk and not Star Wars; it's not more of the same, it's something futuristic and new.

Lynnfield shows us the beginning of how all microprocessors are going to be made in the future. Even AMD is embracing turbo, we'll see it with Fusion in 2011. Extend turbo to its logical conclusion and you end up with something very exciting. Imagine a processor made up of many different cores, large and small, CPU and GPU. Each one turning on/off depending on the type of workload, and each running as fast as possible without dissipating more heat than your system can handle.

My only two complaints with Lynnfield are that the chips do require additional voltage (above stock) to overclock and of course the lack of Hyper Threading on the Core i5. It doesn't ruin the processor, but it gives us something to wish for.

Our work is never over.

Overclocking Lynnfield at Stock Voltage: We're PCIe Limited
POST A COMMENT

343 Comments

View All Comments

  • Supershanks - Thursday, September 10, 2009 - link

    Great Article Anand, I read it with great interest.
    However I found somthing that was strange and unexpected today
    My I7-860 was running at 30x133 3990 when running nucleus, that's according to cPU-z I have a link , but can't post http in this comment ?
    http://www.clunk.org.uk/forums/reviews/24295-asus-...">http://www.clunk.org.uk/forums/reviews/...-deluxe-...

    I'd appreciate your insight ?
    thanks
    Reply
  • Gary Key - Thursday, September 10, 2009 - link

    You need to change your version of CPU-Z. I have a screenshot somewhere around here of 48x133. ;) Reply
  • Scali - Thursday, September 10, 2009 - link

    On a slightly related note... With these new P55 boards I see that especially Asus uses a new line of onboard audio chips from VIA.
    I haven't really been able to find much info on these chips. I'd like to know how they compare to Realtek and other onboard offerings.
    Could you guys spend some time on reviewing the onboard audio next time you review one of these boards? Eg, what does the control panel for these chips look like, what features does it have (eg, can you have realtime encoding like DTS connect or DD Live?), what is the general driver quality like (proper support of 3d/eax effects etc)?

    I think that's what's been missing in general, the past few years. Onboard audio has gotten quite advanced, to the point where most people no longer use a separate soundcard (some boards actually come with some sort of X-Fi card). However, I rarely see onboard audio reviewed, only audio cards.
    Reply
  • agawtrip - Thursday, September 10, 2009 - link

    for me, i find this review is misleading if you are not a gamer - for i5-750 and PII x4 965.

    why?

    1. motherboard and video card - non-gamer dont buy sli/xfire board. onboard graphics is fine(780g/785g). for now, boards for i5 setup doesn't have onboard graphics. what will you do? you will be forced to buy a video card (maybe 4550/9400gt for $40).

    i5-750 - $195, GIGABYTE GA-P55M-UD4 - $150, nvidi 9400gt - $40
    --- TOTAL -------- $385

    PII x4 965 - $245, GIGABYTE GA-MA785GMT-UD2H - $90, no video card
    --- TOTAL -------- $335

    AMD setup is actually cheaper but slower. it's all up to you.

    2. power consumption - since you are forced to buy video card, it will consume additional power while AMD setup (780/785G) won't.

    well that's just my opinion.
    please inform me and the others if i given up wrong informatin
    Reply
  • chrnochime - Thursday, September 10, 2009 - link

    Or you can get a motherboard that's quite a bit cheaper:


    MSI P55-CD53

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...">http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...

    which is 120..

    or

    GIGABYTE GA-P55M-UD2

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...">http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...

    And yes I know these are NE prices, and that it might be more expensive/cheaper somewhere else
    Reply
  • Hrel - Wednesday, September 9, 2009 - link

    It DOES NOT have hyperthreading. Enabling it wouldn't increase the cost of the chip, it purely a political move. I HATE that! If a CPU maker has something that can increase the performance of my cpu, at no cost to them, then should enable it, at no cost to me. EVERY CPU should have unlocked multipliers. EVERY CPU should have hyperthreading. Reply
  • jnr0077 - Friday, July 27, 2012 - link

    hyperthreading steal ram from your pc i have a i5 750 + radeon hd 4850 it plays crysis 2 maxed the witcher 2 maxed skyrim maxed i think you need to read up on it before you comment :) Reply
  • PhilTaylor - Wednesday, September 9, 2009 - link

    FSX is well known as a CPU-limited game, it might be more interesting to test it then a GPU limited game like Crysis. For instance, the difference between 2 and 3 memory channels might have a greater impact on FSX, again due to its CPU-limited nature. Reply
  • cactusdog - Wednesday, September 9, 2009 - link

    A very good, detailed bunch of tests but there is a surprising lack of information regarding temps? Other review sites have done the same thing but there IS temp issues with these CPUs as with i7 1366 ones. That CPU at 4.0 Ghz on air will be around 90 degrees but little is said.

    Anandtech is more honest than most review sites (most of which are really just advertisements) but sometimes i get the impression that nobody wants to upset Intel.

    Reply
  • araczynski - Wednesday, September 9, 2009 - link

    ...bottom line to me, my E8500/crossfire setup still has plenty of gaming life left. I'll check back in a year. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now