Giant roundup: 168 Intel and AMD processors! - BeHardware
>> Processors

Written by Marc Prieur

Published on June 2, 2011

URL: http://www.behardware.com/art/lire/778/


Page 1

Introduction



Dealing with current news means that we rarely have the opportunity to review old products and of course a comparison between the most recent products and those that came out several years ago can get a little problematic. But we’ve decided to push the boat out and take as exhaustive a look as possible at the Intel and AMD processor offer spanning the last five years.

To be included in the report, processors had to fulfil several criteria, the first being (we had to limit things somewhere) that they’re at least dual core. Secondly, as our most recent test protocol is 64-bit, the processors had to be capable of functioning in this mode, which excluded the old Core Duo using Mobile architecture.


After weeks of benchmarking, we can now give you 2016 results across the 12 applications in our test protocol with no less than 168 processors!
The test
For this test, we used the protocol we brought in for the Core i5 test. As you’ll remember if you’ve had a look at that test, we took advantage of the availability of the final version of Windows 7 to revamp the protocol. The OS first then, we’re now using a 64-bit version of Windows 7, which means that all software available in 64-bit mode is tested in this mode.

We have taken the opportunity to update the software, which means 3ds max is now tested in version 2010, Min GW and WinRAR (3.8 up to 3.9) have been updated, as have After Effects (CS3 up to CS4) and Nuendo (4.2 up to 4.3). The VirtualDub/DiVX combos and AutoMKV/x264 have been replaced by Avidemux/x264 and MainConcept Reference/H.264, while the test files of virtually all the tests have changed or been modified (higher rendering resolution for example).

In terms of games, we've decided to retain Crysis 1.2 and its ultra-heavy CPU test but to retire World In Conflict and replace it with more recent and demanding games: Arma 2, Grand Theft Auto IV and Anno 1404 join the protocol. So as to show up processor differences to a maximum, we set all graphics options to a max to load right up, at the same time as limiting resolution to 800*600 to eliminate any smoothing due to the power of the mono-GPU solution used on the test configuration.

The hardware used with the processors is as follows:

- ASUSTeK P5QC (LGA775)
- Intel DP55KG (LGA1156)
- Intel DX58SO (LGA1366)
- ASUSTeK M4A79-T (AM3)
- ASUSTeK M4A79-T (AM2)
- 2x2 Go DDR3-1333 7-7-7
- 2x2 Go DDR3-1066 7-7-7
- 2x2 Go DDR2-1066 5-5-5
- 2x2 Go DDR2-800 4-4-4
- GeForce GTX 280 + GeForce 190.62
- Raptor 74 Go + Raptor 150 Go
- Creative Audigy
- Windows 7 64 bits

And here's the list of CPUs:

A64 X2 3800 90n 512
A64 X2 4200 90n 512
A64 X2 4600 90n 512
A64 X2 5000 90n 512
A64 X2 5400 90n 512
A64 X2 4000 90n 1024
A64 X2 4400 90n 1024
A64 X2 4800 90n 1024
A64 X2 5200 90n 1024
A64 X2 5600 90n 1024
A64 X2 6000 90n 1024
A64 X2 6400 90n 1024
A64 X2 3600 65n 512
A64 X2 4000 65n 512
A64 X2 4200 65n 512
A64 X2 4400 65n 512
A64 X2 4600 65n 512
A64 X2 4800 65n 512
A64 X2 5000 65n 512
A64 X2 5200 65n 512
A64 X2 5400 65n 512
A64 X2 5600 65n 512
A64 X2 6000 65n 512
Athlon X2 7450
Athlon X2 7550
Athlon X2 7750
Athlon X2 7850
Athlon II X2 215
Athlon II X2 240
Athlon II X2 245
Athlon II X2 250
Athlon II X2 255
Athlon II X2 260
Athlon II X2 265
Athlon II X3 425
Athlon II X3 435
Athlon II X3 440
Athlon II X3 445
Athlon II X3 450
Athlon II X4 620
Athlon II X4 630
Athlon II X4 635
Athlon II X4 640
Athlon II X4 645
Phenom X3 8450
Phenom X3 8650
Phenom X3 8750
Phenom X3 8850
Phenom X4 9550
Phenom X4 9650
Phenom X4 9750
Phenom X4 9850
Phenom X4 9950
Phenom II X2 545
Phenom II X2 550
Phenom II X2 555
Phenom II X2 560
Phenom II X3 710
Phenom II X3 720
Phenom II X4 805
Phenom II X4 810
Phenom II X4 910
Phenom II X4 920
Phenom II X4 940
Phenom II X4 945
Phenom II X4 955
Phenom II X4 965
Phenom II X4 970
Phenom II X6 1055T
Phenom II X6 1075T
Phenom II X6 1090T
Pentium D 805
Pentium D 820
Pentium D 830
Pentium D 840
Pentium EE 840
Pentium D 920
Pentium D 930
Pentium D 940
Pentium D 950
Pentium D 960
Pentium EE 965
Celeron E1200
Celeron E1300
Celeron E1400
Celeron E1500
Celeron E1600
Celeron E3200
Celeron E3300
Celeron E3400
Celeron E3500
Pentium E2140
Pentium E2160
Pentium E2180
Pentium E2200
Pentium E2220
Pentium E5200
Pentium E5300
Pentium E5400
Pentium E5500
Pentium E5700
Pentium E6300
Pentium E6500
Pentium E6600
Pentium E6700
Pentium E6800
Core 2 E4300
Core 2 E4400
Core 2 E4500
Core 2 E4600
Core 2 E4700
Core 2 E6300
Core 2 E6400
Core 2 E6320
Core 2 E6420
Core 2 E6600
Core 2 E6700
Core 2 X6800
Core 2 E6550
Core 2 E6750
Core 2 E6850
Core 2 E7200
Core 2 E7300
Core 2 E7400
Core 2 E7500
Core 2 E7600
Core 2 E8200
Core 2 E8300
Core 2 E8400
Core 2 E8500
Core 2 E8600
Core 2 Q6600
Core 2 Q6700
Core 2 QX6800
Core 2 QX6850
Core 2 Q8200
Core 2 Q8300
Core 2 Q8400
Core 2 Q9300
Core 2 Q9400
Core 2 Q9500
Core 2 Q9450
Core 2 Q9550
Core 2 Q9650
Core 2 QX9770
Pentium G6950
Core i3-530
Core i3-540
Core i3-550
Core i3-560
Core i5-650
Core i5-66x
Core i5-670
Core i5-680
Core i5-750
Core i5-760
Xeon X3450
Core i7-860
Core i7-870
Core i7-880
Core i7-920
Core i7-930
Core i7-940
Core i7-950
Core i7-960
Core i7-975
Core i7-970
Core i7-980X


Page 2
3D Studio Max 2010

3D Studio Max 20010

We begin with the famous image rendering software, now in its x64 and 2010 version. The test scene used is from SPECapc for 3ds max 9 (space_flyby_mentalray) which employs the MentalRay rendering machine.

Hold the mouse over the graph to see a classification of the CPU’s by result.

Hold the mouse over the graph to see a classification of the CPU’s by result.


Page 3
Cinema 4D R11

Cinema 4D R11

The rendering software Maxon is well known in the overclocker community through Cinebench, which allows you to compare processor performance easily. Cinebench however uses version R10 of the Cinema 4D rendering machine, while version R11 doubles performance. We use this latest version in 64 bit mode with the scene from Cinebench R10 rendered at a higher resolution so as to prolong rendering time.

Hold the mouse over the graph to see a classification of the CPU’s by result.

Hold the mouse over the graph to see a classification of the CPU’s by result.


Page 4
MinGW / GCC

MinGW / GCC

This is an applied test with the compilation of MAME source code using GCC under the MinGW development environment. We are now using version 5.1.4 of MinGW and compile the source code of Mame 0.133.

Hold the mouse over the graph to see a classification of the CPU’s by result.

Hold the mouse over the graph to see a classification of the CPU’s by result.


Page 5
WinRAR 3.9

WinRAR 3.9

We use this latest 64-bit version of WinRAR, which introduces new multithreading optimisations for the compression of a group of files.

Hold the mouse over the graph to see a classification of the CPU’s by result.

Hold the mouse over the graph to see a classification of the CPU’s by result.


Page 6
Avidemux + x264

Avidemux + x264

Our test videos use H.264 encoding exclusively. To start with, we use Avidemux version 2.5.2 to compress a 1920x1080 HD video file via the x264 codec at intermediary quality.

Hold the mouse over the graph to see a classification of the CPU’s by result.

<Hold the mouse over the graph to see a classification of the CPU’s by result.


Page 7
MainConcept + H.264/AVC Pro

MainConcept Reference + H.264/AVC Pro

For this second H.264 encoding we use MainConcept Reference and its H.264/AVC Pro codec on “High”, still with the same video.

Hold the mouse over the graph to see a classification of the CPU’s by result.

Hold the mouse over the graph to see a classification of the CPU’s by result.


Page 8
After Effects CS4

After Effects CS4

We are using a new composition using various effects so as to render 3D animation. Multiprocecessing is activated so as to make the most of the available number of cores.

Hold the mouse over the graph to see a classification of the CPU’s by result.

Hold the mouse over the graph to see a classification of the CPU’s by result.


Page 9
Nuendo 4.3

Nuendo 4.3

Version 4 of Nuendo, with the most recent patch 4.3, in the 64-bit version of course. A new music project using various native plugins as well as 2 HalionOne virtual instruments was exported as a wav file (thanks to Draculax).

Hold the mouse over the graph to see a classification of the CPU’s by result.

Hold the mouse over the graph to see a classification of the CPU’s by result.


Page 10
Crysis

Crysis 1.2

With patch 1.2, Crysis has a very heavy CPU bench (to be found in the Bin32/Bin64 directory). The test was carried out at very high settings but at 800x600 so as to limit dependence on the graphics card. Affinity was forced on the physical processors, as Crysis is down by around 3% otherwise.

Hold the mouse over the graph to see a classification of the CPU’s by result.

Hold the mouse over the graph to see a classification of the CPU’s by result.


Page 11
Arma 2

Arma 2

New to our test protocol, Arma 2 is configured with all settings at a max including max visibility (10 km), which brings the configurations to their knees. Resolution stays at 800x600 to avoid the graphics card impacting on performance. To gauge performance we measure the framerate during a well-defined movement after having loaded a saved game. Note that you must disactivate HT or force the affinity for this game, as you’ll lose 15 to 20% of fps otherwise and it will suffer from rather disagreeable lags.

Hold the mouse over the graph to see a classification of the CPU’s by result.

Hold the mouse over the graph to see a classification of the CPU’s by result.


Page 12
Grand Theft Auto IV

Grand Theft Auto IV

GTA IV is included in the protocol for its weight and multi-threading optimisations. Once again all the settings were pushed to a maximum, with the exception of the textures so as not to exceed available video memory, all at a res of 800x600. We use the built-in benchmark but on a scene chosen by us for more weight than the default.

Hold the mouse over the graph to see a classification of the CPU’s by result.

Hold the mouse over the graph to see a classification of the CPU’s by result.


Page 13
Anno 1404

Anno 1404

Anno 1404 is a strategy game tested at max settings but with resolution still at 800x600. We use a saved game with a city of 46,600 inhabitants that we partly visualize from a distance.

Hold the mouse over the graph to see a classification of the CPU’s by result.

Hold the mouse over the graph to see a classification of the CPU’s by result.


Page 14
Average

Average
Although individual app results are worth looking at, we have calculated a performance index based on all tests with the same weight for each test. An index of 100 is attributed to the Intel Core 2 Q6600.

If you look a little closer at this graph, you’ll see that since the launch of its first dual core, the Pentium Extreme Edition 840 in April 2005, Intel has managed to multiply performance by a factor of 5.1 with the Core i7-980X, released five years later. On the AMD side, things are less rosy with the difference in performance between the Athlon 64 X2 4800+ and the Phenom II X6 1090T only amounting to a factor of 3: what was a leading position has become a deficit.

Processors that were previously very high end, namely the Pentium EE 840 and 965, are now completely eclipsed with even the Celeron E1500 and E3200 doing better. The Core 2 X6800, best of the best in 2006, has been caught up by the Pentium E6500. On the AMD side you can also see that the Athlon 64 X2 6400+ doesn’t look so good compared to a “simple” Athlon II X2 240, while the Phenom X4 9950 has been overtaken by the Athlon II X4 620 now on sale at under €100!


Hold the mouse over the graph to see a classification of the CPU’s by result.

Hold the mouse over the graph to see a classification of the CPU’s by result.


Page 15
Power consumption

Energy consumption
As performance doesn’t tell the whole story, we have decided to include energy consumption readings taken on our test configuraton for some of the processors. These readings were taken at the wall socket, the power used at a yield of around 80%. We used Prime95. This means that other components such as the graphics card or the hard drive are in idle when these readings are taken.

Hold the mouse over the graph to see a classification of the CPU’s by result.

It is interesting to see that the configuration with the Pentium EE 840 uses around the same power in load as the Core i7-975, for a performance level multiplied by a ratio of 4.4! Note also the advances made by both AMD and Intel in terms of energy consumption in idle, with 172 watts for the Pentium EE 965 (as much as the configuration with the Q8200… in load!) a distant memory… in contrast to the most economical configuration of all based on socket LGA1156.

Also, here are the energy consumption graphs for readings taken at the ATX12V socket on the motherboard, taken with a clip-on ammeter. We only give the results for Socket 775 and Socket AM2/AM3 here as readings from one platform to another are not comparable given the different architectures (on AM2 and AM3 the memory controller is built in to the processor and powered via it whereas this isn’t the case for Intel).

Hold the mouse over the graph to see a classification of the CPU’s by result.








Page 16
Conclusion

Conclusion

This survey that represents the largest compilation of results ever presented on BeHardware.com, gives a good idea of developments since 2005, the date when the first dual core models were launched by AMD and Intel. Moving from the 90nm engraving that was used then to 65nm and then 45nm has allowed the two chip makers to move on to quad core models with availability at under 100 euros. Performances have increased by a factor of more than 4, while over the same period energy consumption has been well controlled, with, in particular, major efforts being made in idle.


The most impressive improvement has of course come from Intel who in 2005 were still relying on the outdated Netburst architecture while AMD were already quite advanced with the K8 generation. Intel have done much more than catch up, introducing the Core generation and now Nehalem, so much so that the performance average index clearly shows Intel to be a generation in advance of AMD in terms of rapidity. While the Bulldozer architecture is promising on paper, it won’t be available until 2011. In the meantime, while AMD can't compete when it comes to pure performance, it is positioning itself aggressively in terms of price/performance ratios, both for its Athlon IIs and Phenom IIs!


Page 17



Copyright © 1997-2014 BeHardware. All rights reserved.