First we measured the memory performance of our respective platforms.
Monothreaded bandwidth
We started with the memory bandwidth accessible via a single thread. The readings were taken with the Aida64 memory test.
The lack of Turbo in monothreaded mode has an impact on memory performance in dual channel mode. It can be seen on the Core i3 2370M and is marked on the Core i3 3110M! While moving from one to two channels on the Core i5 3210M gives an increase in bandwidth of 43% in reads, the gain is just 26% on the Core i3 3110M!
Multithreaded bandwidth
Let's now move on to the multithreaded test included in Rightmark.
When all threads (4) are used on a Core i3, the difference in clock only has a minimal impact and both memory channels can be correctly used. It will be interesting to see if this difference has an impact in our applications tests.
Energy consumption
We measured the energy consumption of our platforms in different scenarios at the socket:
- Machine at idle
- Playback of an H.264 720p video file in DXVA mode via MPC-HC
- Processor load (Cinebench)
- GPU load (Furmark)
- Processor + GPU load (Cinebench + Furmark)
- Load in games (F1 2011)
Let’s look at the results!
As we said in our previous article, Intel allows its Turbo equipped processors to go over the TDP for 28 seconds. It’s this maximum energy consumption that we have noted in this graph and this is why the energy consumption of the dual core processors is particularly high in ‘Cinebench+Furmark’. This is the only instance where these processors exceed their TDP.
Variability between one mobile processor and another is relatively significant. On the Sandy Bridge side, while our Core i3 does a bit better at idle than the Core i5, in load they’re almost on a par in spite of the fact that the Core i3 doesn’t have Turbo. For the Ivy Bridges it’s the other way round. While the Core i3 is pretty much on a par with the Core i5 3210M at idle, its energy consumption in load is significantly down. In F1 2011 it even looks very low, but it should be remembered that the energy consumption in games is directly linked to the number of frames per second calculated. We’ll see what this means in practice.
When we compare the Core i3 2370M Sandy Bridge to the Core i3 3110M Ivy Bridge, we can see that as with models further up the range, the Sandy Bridge models have a small energy consumption advantage at idle or in video playback. Here it’s in the order of 4 or 5 Watts. In load, the trend is reversed and the 3110M consumes 4 to 5 Watts less in Cinebench and Furmark. When both are considered together, the 3110M is particularly economical, consuming 11 Watts less than its predecessor.
