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
SYSMark 2007 Performance
Our journey starts with SYSMark 2007, the only all-encompassing performance suite in our review today. The idea here is simple: one benchmark to indicate the overall performance of your machine.
With more cores and cache, the Core i7 980X inches ahead of the Core i7 975 in SYSMark 2007. Most of the SYSMark tests show the two Extreme Edition processors trading blows. Sometimes the higher latency cache penalizes the 980X, sometimes its size helps. In lightly threaded workloads, you can expect the 980X to perform like a Core i7 975 - in other words, not bad at all.
Compared to the QX9770, the 980X only 16% faster. That's not terrible given that the QX9770 is 2 years old at this point. There may just be some value in these Extreme Edition parts.
The old Pentium EE 955 can deliver around 40% of the performance of today's 980X. While its two cores and 4 threads were impressive for their time, these days you get the same core/thread count out of a $100 CPU.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
102 Comments
View All Comments
Anand Lal Shimpi - Thursday, March 11, 2010 - link
That depends on the board I believe. Intel's DX58SO may not post without the BIOS update.Take care,
Anand
Jammrock - Thursday, March 11, 2010 - link
One small title error. Intel's Xeon X7000-series CPUs are the first hex-core processors from Intel. Those are server only, but they are out there.http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=36947&cod...">http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=36...16M+Cach...
Gulftown is the first desktop hex-core though.
Anand Lal Shimpi - Thursday, March 11, 2010 - link
Corrected :)Take care,
Anand
artifex - Thursday, March 11, 2010 - link
3x cores and threads for less than 2x the TDP of their dual cores? sexy!Isaac the k - Thursday, March 11, 2010 - link
I must say, I do find this rather exciting.But since I'm running a poorly threaded data-simulation app with extremely high throughput, I'm debating whether the extra latency vs. the larger shared cache could potentially harm performance.
If it wouldn't, I might actually request one for what my office is doing right now...
mikeblas - Thursday, March 11, 2010 - link
Aren't the Xeon E7450, Xeon L7455, and Xeon X7460 all six-core Intel processors that were released before this processor?semo - Thursday, March 11, 2010 - link
If I understand this right Nahalem is the name of the micro architecture and not any CPU in particular. On page 2, the first die shot is captioned Nehalem. Shouldn't it be Bloomfield?BTW Anand, you are doing a good job demystifying desktop products but the mobile space is even worse
arandale http://ark.intel.com/ProductCollection.aspx?codeNa...">http://ark.intel.com/ProductCollection.aspx?codeNa... vs clarkdale http://ark.intel.com/ProductCollection.aspx?codeNa...">http://ark.intel.com/ProductCollection.aspx?codeNa...
vPro is even more confusing. E.g. AMT KVM is supposed to work on AMT 6.0 + on chip GPU yet the i3 don't apply... or the i5-661 http://communities.intel.com/community/openportit/...">http://communities.intel.com/community/...ote-cont...
it would be useful if we could get some articles on mobile chips and/or vPro
iwodo - Thursday, March 11, 2010 - link
Waiting for Sandy Bridge- which will hopefully be the true successor of Core 2 Duo.PCI - Express 3.0, SATA 3.0, USB 3.0 ( Light Peak will be even better ), Bluetooth 4.0.
AnnonymousCoward - Saturday, March 13, 2010 - link
Light Peak is kinda dumb...I think that's just multi-lane USB3/PCIe, and using light instead of wires is pointless since no one needs really long point-to-point cables. Apple just wants it since they're all about marketing new flashy things. USB3 could just as easily use as many lanes as you want, but it'd be unnecessarily expensive since 1 lane at 5Gbps is much faster than anything.Pessimism - Thursday, March 11, 2010 - link
This is not intel's first 6 core CPU. The 6 core Xeon 7400 was announced in 2008.