The Core i7 980X Review: Intel's First 6-Core Desktop CPU
by Anand Lal Shimpi on March 11, 2010 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
DivX 8.5.3 with Xmpeg 5.0.3
Our DivX test is the same DivX / XMpeg 5.03 test we've run for the past few years now, the 1080p source file is encoded using the unconstrained DivX profile, quality/performance is set balanced at 5 and enhanced multithreading is enabled:
Our DivX and WME tests are getting long in the tooth. Most serious encoding is done using H.264 now, but I included these results to show that even in lighter workloads the 980X can still manage to pull ahead of the 975. The 980X is 30% faster in our DivX encode test, and it completes the encode in less than a quarter of the time of the old Pentium EE 955.
x264 HD Video Encoding Performance
Graysky's x264 HD test uses the publicly available x264 codec (open source alternative to H.264) to encode a 4Mbps 720p MPEG-2 source. The focus here is on quality rather than speed, thus the benchmark uses a 2-pass encode and reports the average frame rate in each pass.
To see what 6 cores and 12 threads can do we needn't look any further than the second (encoding) pass of our x264 benchmark:
The Core i7 980X is nearly 50% faster than the Core i7 975, 76% faster than the i7 870 and over twice the speed of the QX9770. This is a greater performance jump than we've seen from any single architectural shift. If you are serious about video encoding, you want Gulftown.
Windows Media Encoder 9 x64 Advanced Profile
In order to be codec agnostic we've got a Windows Media Encoder benchmark looking at the same sort of thing we've been doing in the DivX and x264 tests, but using WME instead.
Our Windows Media Encoder 9 test is the lightest of our video encoding tests. Without stressing the additional cores, the 980X performs no different from the 975.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
102 Comments
View All Comments
Meghan54 - Thursday, March 11, 2010 - link
[QUOTE]where are you getting your xeon pricing info from?all i can find from any solid source is the current xeon quad core processors which are running about $2000 on newegg at the moment. [/QUOTE]
Well, I question your search skills at Newegg, then, if that's all you can find there.
Just an FYI, Newegg has MANY, MANY sub-$700 Xeon processors for socket 1366, like the W3520, a Bloomfield, for $310, or the W3550 for $600--both Bloomfield quad-core cpus.
Learn to use search, (ps....main page, cpu/processors, processors-servers, power search, check box socket 1366, look at results. I'm hoping you do understand that there are mouse clicks between step.)
formulav8 - Thursday, March 11, 2010 - link
grow up...softdrinkviking - Thursday, March 11, 2010 - link
no, i saw all of that stuff. i was looking at the six core chips and i typed quad instead.but thanks for getting all nasty and sarcastic anyway.
i'll try to remember about those mouse clicks next time.
the point i was trying to make is that the xeon line is going to be more expensive than the comparable home desktop CPUs and that it won't be a simple matter of non-server customers just buying xeons that will outclass the current i7 line-up. (specifically to compete against the 6 core model that this review is about)
Drag0nFire - Thursday, March 11, 2010 - link
I think the point was that you could get 2x cheap quad core Xeons, and run with 8 cores (16 threads) at a small price premium over the $1000 Gulftown.vol7ron - Thursday, March 11, 2010 - link
I will keep my eyes open for the Xeon, but for some reason, those typically are quite pricey. This $1k price will fall, hopefully sooner, rather than later.I am looking forward to both.
Thanks for the read, Anand,
vol7ron
DrMrLordX - Friday, March 12, 2010 - link
Here's a list of Gulftown quads for LGA1366:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_future_Intel_...">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fu...rocessor...
The information isn't complete, but you should be able to do searches on the part that interests you most and get the information that you want.
iamezza - Thursday, March 11, 2010 - link
it won't be dropping in price any time soon. Check the chart on Pg 3 - this is the top intel CPU until 2011 and I can't see AMD releasing a CPU that will compete performance wise with it before then.DarkUltra - Monday, May 3, 2010 - link
I also miss memory and cache performance tests, and memory overclock results.Kn0xx - Monday, May 17, 2010 - link
well, this new 6 core comer, will be ( probably ) the entry design for 128 -bit processors that Intel are already working on it.128 bit need new multi-core structures. so ..980X is an example of how can a 128-bit core would be =)
unmaskedtruth - Sunday, May 23, 2010 - link
does anyone know if protools le 8.0 is multi-threaded? for recording pro music, is it going to be able to take advantage of "6cores" if i was to go i7-980x route? or is quad-core more than sufficient? cause there is i7-930 which is cost like 80% less than the 980x. what do you guys suggest?