The Intel Broadwell Desktop Review: Core i7-5775C and Core i5-5675C Tested (Part 1)
by Ian Cutress on June 2, 2015 7:45 AM ESTProfessional Performance: Linux
Built around several freely available benchmarks for Linux, Linux-Bench is a project spearheaded by Patrick at ServeTheHome to streamline about a dozen of these tests in a single neat package run via a set of three commands using an Ubuntu 11.04 LiveCD. These tests include fluid dynamics used by NASA, ray-tracing, OpenSSL, molecular modeling, and a scalable data structure server for web deployments. We run Linux-Bench and have chosen to report a select few of the tests that rely on CPU and DRAM speed.
Due to our limited testing time and other issues, only the i7-5775C was processed in our Linux tests. These should be updated for Part 2.
C-Ray: link
C-Ray is a simple ray-tracing program that focuses almost exclusively on processor performance rather than DRAM access. The test in Linux-Bench renders a heavy complex scene offering a large scalable scenario.
NAMD, Scalable Molecular Dynamics: link
Developed by the Theoretical and Computational Biophysics Group at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, NAMD is a set of parallel molecular dynamics codes for extreme parallelization up to and beyond 200,000 cores. The reference paper detailing NAMD has over 4000 citations, and our testing runs a small simulation where the calculation steps per unit time is the output vector.
NPB, Fluid Dynamics: link
Aside from LINPACK, there are many other ways to benchmark supercomputers in terms of how effective they are for various types of mathematical processes. The NAS Parallel Benchmarks (NPB) are a set of small programs originally designed for NASA to test their supercomputers in terms of fluid dynamics simulations, useful for airflow reactions and design.
Redis: link
Many of the online applications rely on key-value caches and data structure servers to operate. Redis is an open-source, scalable web technology with a b developer base, but also relies heavily on memory bandwidth as well as CPU performance.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
196 Comments
View All Comments
Shadowmaster625 - Tuesday, June 2, 2015 - link
Wow so anyone who buys one of these chips is spending half their money on a useless GPU that cant even beat a lowly R7 250. That is $120 to $180 totally wasted on GPU, which occupies half the die. Talk about a massive intel tax. What happens if intel only offer a K version that contains half the die wasted by this useless GPU? How many people are going to just suck it up and buy it even though half the chip will never be used because they will be running a real graphics card?TEAMSWITCHER - Tuesday, June 2, 2015 - link
These chips really only make sense for high end laptops like the 2015 MacBook Pro - which ironically doesn't use them. It boggles my mind that Intel is shipping so many transistors that go completely unused. It's the antithesis of Moore's Law - Intel silicon is HALF-USELESS.PubFiction - Wednesday, July 1, 2015 - link
That's because intel only cares about mobile now, this stuff isn't made for us its hacked to work for desktop users this stuff is all about mobile. Personally I deal with largely because I am just happy that people who buy stuff like macbooks can now actually have a chance of running boot camp and playing games. In the mobile work igpus have always been a big part of the scene. Also the better intel does with integrated graphics the more they are able to kill AMD/NVidia which is what they really want to do, slowly and steadily eat the bottom end of the GPU market out from under them. It used to be that ANY discreet graphics on a laptop was WAYYYYY better than integrated. But after intels 2nd gen core series the bottom X1XX and X2XX gpus seemed to not make any sense, and intel has been getting better to the point now that X4XXX gpus are starting to not make sense. This screws graphics makers into only being able to sell higher end X5XX + GPUs and they destroys their bread and butter money.bill.rookard - Tuesday, June 2, 2015 - link
As much as I hate to say it, I agree. While their new iGPU is beating AMDs iGPU, the place where such iGPUs make sense is in small HTPC scenarios most of all (apart from budget gaming laptops which have a completely different thermal restriction). The kicker is though that the pricing is far too high for even being considered for what amounts to a media playback machine. It's thermally too hot for a laptop scenario.If they had paired up the iGPU with a G3258 CPU core set and the Crystalwell DRAM, and priced it near AMD's offerings, THAT would be a very compelling product.
Refuge - Tuesday, June 2, 2015 - link
I'd buy that.extide - Tuesday, June 2, 2015 - link
Uhhh, maybe you need your eyes checked, but it is beating the R7 240 in all except one of the benchmarks...MikhailT - Tuesday, June 2, 2015 - link
Dude, go re-read the graphs, Intel is beating R7 in almost all benchmarks.Namisecond - Wednesday, June 3, 2015 - link
Actually, the GPU takes up over 60% of the die space on the first chips, there is a 2nd piece of silicon comprising the EDRAM that take up a not-so-insignificant piece of real estate on the chip.The situation with AMD APUs are similar, about 40-45% of their die space is GPU. When they go HBM, they will in a similar situation to Intel, and they'll need to charge much higher price to make up for the tech.
If you want lowest cost/value for CPU, get a Pentium, particularly the anniversary edition. They're cheap (I can get them for about $50) You can overclock the shit out of them and their IGPU only takes up about 40% of their die space. If you need more CPU power in the Socket 1150 format, get a Xeon E3 which has no IGPU...they are cheaper than Core I7, but they cost more than core I5.
der - Tuesday, June 2, 2015 - link
Awesome stuff! Killer chipset!der - Tuesday, June 2, 2015 - link
50th comment!