Power Consumption

Power consumption is very low thanks to core power gating and Intel's 32nm process. Also, when the integrated GPU is not in use it is completely power gated as to not waste any power either. The end result is lower power consumption than virtually any other platform out there under load.

Idle Power Consumption

Load Power Consumption

I also measured power at the ATX12V connector to give you an idea of what actual CPU power consumption is like (excluding the motherboard, PSU loss, etc...):

Processor Idle Load (Cinebench R11.5)
Intel Core i7 2600K @ 4.4GHz 5W 111W
Intel Core i7 2600K (3.4GHz) 5W 86W
AMD Phenom II X4 975 BE (3.6GHz) 14W 96W
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T (3.3GHz) 20W 109W
Intel Core i5 661 (3.33GHz) 4W 33W
Intel Core i7 880 (3.06GHz) 3W 106W

Idle power is a strength of Intel's as the cores are fully power gated when idle resulting in these great single digit power levels. Under load, there's actually not too much difference between an i7 2600K and a 3.6GHz Phenom II (only 10W). There's obviously a big difference in performance however (7.45 vs. 4.23 for the Phenom II in Cinebench R11.5), thus giving Intel better performance per watt. The fact that AMD is able to add two more cores at only a 13W load and 300MHz frequency penalty is pretty impressive as well.

Gaming Performance Final Words
Comments Locked

283 Comments

View All Comments

  • 7Enigma - Monday, January 3, 2011 - link

    Do you happen to remember the space heater.....ahem, I mean P4?
  • DanNeely - Monday, January 3, 2011 - link

    I do. Intel used bigger heatsinks than they do for mainstream parts today.
  • panx3dx - Monday, January 3, 2011 - link

    The article states that in order for quick sync to function, a display must be connected to the integrated graphics. Since p67 does not support the IGP, then quick sync will be disabled???
  • panx3dx - Monday, January 3, 2011 - link

    Opps, just saw Doormat already asked the question on page three, and I can't find a way to edit or delete my post. However no one has yet to give a clear answer.
  • Next9 - Monday, January 3, 2011 - link

    There is not any problem with BIOS and 3TB drives. Using GPT you can boot such a drive either on BIOS or UEFI based system. You should only blame Windows and their obsolete MS-DOS partitioning scheme and MS-DOS bootloader.
  • mino - Monday, January 3, 2011 - link

    Microsoft not supporting GPT on BIOS systems (hence 3TB drivers on BIOS systems) was a pure BUSINESS decision.

    It had nothing to do with technology which is readily available.
  • mino - Monday, January 3, 2011 - link

    In the table there is "N" for the i3 CPUs.

    But in the text there is: "While _all_ SNB parts support VT-x, only three support VT-d"

    Could you check it out and clarify? (there is no data on ark.intel.com yet)
  • mczak - Monday, January 3, 2011 - link

    It's not exactly true that HD3000 has less compute performance than HD5450, at least it's not that clear cut.
    It has 12 EUs, and since they are 128bit wide, this would amount to "48SP" if you count like AMD. Factor in the clock difference and that's actually more cores (when running at 1300Mhz at least). Though if you only look at MAD throughput, then it is indeed less (as intel igp still can't quite do MAD, though it can do MAC).
    It's a bit disappointing though to see mostly HD2000 on the desktop, with the exception of a few select parts, which is not really that much faster compared to Ironlake IGP (which isn't surprising - after all Ironlake had twice the EUs albeit at a lower clock, so the architectural improvements are still quite obvious).
  • DanNeely - Monday, January 3, 2011 - link

    That's not true. Each AMD SP is a pipeline, the 4th one on a 69xx (or 5th on a 58xx) series card is 64 bits wide, not 32. They can't all be combined into a single 128 (160, 196) bit wide FPU.
  • kallogan - Monday, January 3, 2011 - link

    I'll wait for 22 nm. No point in upgrading for now

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now