FarCry 2

We utilize the Ranch Small demo file along with the Playback Action demo to see the differences between GPU and CPU centric benchmarks. The Ranch demo is GPU centric while the Playback demo tends to be CPU centric. We run each benchmark five times and report the median score.

FarCry 2

First off, FarCry 2 has always performed extremely well on the X58 chipset compared to other chipsets with the ATI video cards. This game responds very well to PCIe bandwidth, something the X58 has in droves. The stock HD 5870 single card x8 configuration is 6% slower in average frame rates and 10% slower in minimum frame rates in this particular benchmark. Even the 4.2GHz single card result is slower than either the stock P55 or X58 setups.

The stock single card HD 5870 P55 platform is 3% slower than the X58 even with a 100MHz processor advantage in turbo mode. At 4.2GHz, both platforms are about even although minimum frame rates are about 4% better on X58. However, even with this benchmark advantage, there was no difference in actual game play, especially considering minimum frame rates are above 70fps in each instance.

FarCry 2

The P55 results improve slightly as we move to a more CPU centric benchmark. The stock HD 5870 single card x8 configuration is only 2% slower in average frame rates and only 1% in the overclocked results. Comparing single card results between the P55 and X58, we see a 2% difference in favor of the X58 at stock speeds while at 4.2GHz the P55 finishes slightly ahead of the X58.

The pertinent data for CrossFire scaling is in the tables below. What we are looking for is the percentage speedup going from one to two HD 5870s on X58 and P55. In theory, X58 should have improved percentages because each GPU gets 16 PCIe 2.0 lanes while Lynnfield only provides 8 PCIe 2.0 lanes per GPU.

FarCry 2 CrossFire Scaling – Average Frame Rates


ATI HD 5870 CF Scaling FarCry 2 – Ranch Small FarCry 2 – Playback Action FarCry 2 – Ranch Small 4.2GHz FarCry 2 – Playback 4.2GHz
Intel Core i7 920 (X58) 66.8% 9% 81.8% 42.5%
Intel Core i7 860 (P55) 59.8% 10.6% 75.8% 44.4%

Based on our single card results, there are not a lot of surprises here. At stock speeds, the X58 has a 7% scaling advantage over the P55 and 6% when overclocked in the GPU centric Ranch demo. In the Playback Action benchmark, the results favor the P55 by almost 2%.

FarCry 2 CrossFire Scaling – Minimum Frame Rates


ATI HD 5870 CF Scaling FarCry 2 – Ranch Small FarCry 2 – Playback Action FarCry 2 – Ranch Small 4.2GHz FarCry 2 – Playback 4.2GHz
Intel Core i7 920 (X58) 41.1% 3.6% 77.9% 30.5%
Intel Core i7 860 (P55) 32.4% 3.6% 78.4% 28.3%

Minimum frame rates and scaling heavily favor the X58 in our stock clock speed results using the Ranch demo. Although frame rates still favor the X58 in this demo when overclocked, the scaling on the P55 is slightly better. The stock results in the Playback Action demo are a dead heat with a 2% advantage to the X58 when overclocked.

When it came to actual game play, there were no differences between either platform in the game. In fact, it was very difficult to discern which system was being utilized. The key giveaway was the foot warming heat coming from our case with the X58 overclocked. Our ambient temperature in the test room rose 2.1C over the course of testing with the X58 installed compared to 0.7C with the P55.

Index H.A.W.X. takes flight on the 920
Comments Locked

85 Comments

View All Comments

  • GeorgeH - Tuesday, September 29, 2009 - link

    Wow, you're totally right:

    Lynnfield: 12-28 min FPS
    X58: 8-26 min FPS

    Talk about a crippled platform!

    We all already know that you're a moron, but in the future please try to make it less obvious. Thanks.
  • philosofool - Tuesday, September 29, 2009 - link

    The result of this test is really clear to me: if you are even remotely close to on a budget, P55 w/ a great card is the way to go. The $100 you save on a P55 mobo invested into graphics will get you way more than the same invested in X58 and a $100 cheaper graphics card. If money is no object, get X58. Perhaps more importantly, once we're dealing with cards and games that drop things well below the 60Hz refresh rate of our monitor, the additional bandwidth in X58 will probably make an even smaller difference.

    The fears regarding the integrated PCIe controller on Lynnfield are wildly exaggerated.
  • strikeback03 - Wednesday, September 30, 2009 - link

    I'd say a $100 difference in motherboards is largely an exaggeration depending on exactly what features you are looking for, the power consumption differences are far more interesting to me.

    Now if we could only find out whether 8x PCIe would be a bottleneck for a SATA3 card.
  • UNHchabo - Wednesday, September 30, 2009 - link

    In terms of theoretical bandwidth, there's plenty in a PCIe slot. The SATA 6Gbps standard gives about 600MB/s of effective bandwidth, and PCIe 2.0 has 500MB/s per lane. This means that with PCIe 2.0, your motherboard slot is only limiting your card's performance if you give one lane per port.
  • yacoub - Tuesday, September 29, 2009 - link

    Sure, and the power consumption savings are a nice plus. Then consider that 90+% of us don't even care about CF/SLI because we only ever one run GPU card, and there's really no reason to bother with X58 over P55.
  • ekoostik - Tuesday, September 29, 2009 - link

    Agreed. Really enjoyed reading this on my new single-GPU powered 860 sitting silently next to me.
  • yacoub - Tuesday, September 29, 2009 - link

    "Does that mean the integrated dual x8 PCIe 2.0 logic on Lynnfield is a poor choice compared to the dual x16 PCIe 2.0 sporting X58, absolutely not based on our initial tests."

    The comma after "X58" should be a question mark and "absolutely" should be the beginning of a new sentence. ;)
  • the zorro - Tuesday, September 29, 2009 - link

    almost 10% penalty because of the lynnfield crippled northbridge.
    its not just that but in the more interesting part of the game when there is more congestion, lynnfield stutters.
    if you are going to buy a new spanking 3.72 tflops directx ati card don't commit the mistake of using lynnfield.
  • Griswold - Monday, October 5, 2009 - link

    You're an idiot regardless of what you buy - so it evens out.
  • DominionSeraph - Wednesday, September 30, 2009 - link

    "x58 is 1fps faster than lynnfield!!" as he sits behind his 33ms input lag, 3 frame ghosting, 60Hz LCD using a 600dpi mouse on a free mousepad.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now