| Intel Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition CPU |
 |
|
Reviews -
Featured Reviews: Processors
|
| Written by David Ramsey |
| Monday, 14 November 2011 |
|
Page 4 of 17
Processor Testing Methodology
For this review, I compared the Intel Core i7-3960X at stock and overclocked speeds on an ASUS Sabertooth X79 motherboard to an Intel Core i7-2600K on an ASUS P8P67 motherboard, an Intel Core i7-980X on an ASUS Rampage III Extreme motherboard, and an AMD FX-8150 on an ASUS Crosshair V Formula motherboard. The Intel platforms all used DDR3-1600 memory at 9-9-9-24 timings, whereas the AMD platform used DDR3-1866 memory at the same 9-9-9-24 timings.
The primary drive for all platforms was a Western Digital VelociRaptor 300G, and the same Radeon HD6850 video card was use for all platforms as well.
Intel X58 Express Test Platform
- Motherboard: ASUS Rampage III Extreme with BIOS 0901
- Processor: 3.33GHz Intel Core i7-980X
- System Memory: 12GB (6 2GB DIMMs) Corsair Dominator CMD12GX3M6A1600C8 DDR3-1600 (9-9-9-24)
- Primary Drive: Western Digital VelociRaptor 300G
- Graphics Adapter: AMD Radeon 6850
- CPU cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 612 PWM
Intel P67 Express Test Platform
- Motherboard: ASUS P8P67 with BIOS 1305
- Processor: 3.4GHz Intel Core i7-2600K
- System Memory: 8GB (2 4GB DIMMs) Corsair Vengeance CMZ16GX3M4A1600C9 DDR3-1600 (9-9-9-24)
- Primary Drive: Western Digital VelociRaptor 300G
- Graphics Adapter: AMD Radeon 6850
- CPU cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 612 PWM
AMD 990FX Test Platform
- Motherboard: ASUS Crosshair V Formula with BIOS 0083
- Processor: 3.6GHz AMD FX-8150 "Bulldozer"
- System Memory: G. Skill F3-17066CL7D-4GBPIS DDR3-1866 (9-9-9-24)
- Primary Drive: Western Digital VelociRaptor 300G
- Graphics Adapter: AMD Radeon 6850
- CPU cooler: Thermalright Silver Arrow
Intel X79 Express Test Platform
- Motherboard: ASUS Sabertooth X79 BIOS 0707
- Processor: 3.3GHz Intel Core i7-3960X
- System Memory: 16GB (4 4GB DIMMs) Corsair Vengeance CMZ16GX3M4A1600C9 DDR3-1600 (9-9-9-24)
- Primary Drive: Western Digital VelociRaptor 300G
- Graphics Adapter: AMD Radeon 6850
- CPU cooler: Intel High Performance Liquid Cooling System RTS2011LC
Benchmark Applications
- Operating System: Windows 7 Home Premium 64-Bit
- SiSoft Sandra Lite 2011.SPS (1780)
- AIDA64 Extreme Edition v1.85.1600
- Futuremark PCMark Vantage v1.0.2.0 64-Bit
- TV and Movies
- Gaming
- Music
- Maxon CINEBENCH R11.5 64-Bit
- Street Fighter IV benchmark
- PassMark PerformanceTest 7.0b1021
- x264Bench HD 3.0, including AMD-supplied variants using new FX instructions
- SPECviewperf-11:
- Lightwave 9.6
- Autodesk Maya 2009
- Siemens Teamcenter Visualization Mockup
- SPECapc LightWave 3D v9.6
- Handbrake 0.95 video transcoding
- Blender 3D rendering
- POV-Ray 3D rendering
|
Comments
"For most of us, though, the Core i7-3960X makes as much sense as a 1,000 horsepower street car. It's fun at the dragstrip (running benchmarks), but a Core i7-2700K on a nice Z68 motherboard will be a fraction of the price and just as fast in "real world" terms."
This is a new era in power that will remain almost completely unused and unnecessary for most people, like you say, even us enthusiasts will need to think twice, except those who have money to needlessly burn.
You would think in these economic times, R&D of high dollar items like this would slow down. Interesting. At the same time, my i7 920 cost 1000.00 back in 2008, so the price to power ratio has dramatically fallen too.
But rich fanbois have big egos to satisfy so there will always be market for for stuff priced way out of line with what it is really worth. Useless - if I'm paying $1000 for a CPU it better be a multi CPU server chip in a render farm - something where you can get a return on your money at least. just my 2 cents for an alternate perspective.
I think petty envy speaks always more to one's ego state. Anyone's needs that are "really satisfied" by todays computing power will probably have a "cute device" for their "cute needs" soon enuff. and good riddance.
My needs are far from even close to being satisfied... though cinebench over 12 is at least progressing ( not enough knowing the Ivy Extreme will be released in 2012. And hopefully that benchmark gives more distance )
Catch 22 is really depressing! There is an army of artists whose talent could bring yer boss machine to it's knees given the chance. Instead they compromise to console greed economics. And instead of buying hardware that can push the boundries a market without that entertainment actually believes that we are at "good enuff".
Thanks for the consolitic ball and chain!
Buy it and they will make it/ Make it and they will buy it.
What do "most" users do with their computers that does not desperately need more computing power? Don't they have an app for that yet?
Also, if by FPS you're referring to frames per second, I suggest you do a bit MORE reading here at Benchmark Reviews... so you'll learn that the CPU has very little to do with frame rates.
Look on the bright side: now that Intel's Core i7-3960X has significantly raised expectations, you might soon find AMD processors selling in the blue-light section over at K-Mart. I understand they fired their entire marketing staff of 1400 workers after Bulldozer launched, so the only people saying anything good about them these days are the fan boys, and even they're unhappy.
You're right about frame rates with some games, and I over-simplified my statement. Battlefield 3 is one such game, and DirectX-11 effects drive all processor cores to nearly 50% usage even when played with a GTX 590. Obviously, there are times when the CPU will make a difference in game performance, but that requires advanced technology at a time when most developers are keeping to console (a la Modern Warefare 3).
Amatures ... This David R guy sounds like he has it together though ...
This was a very comprehensive review. It left me with no questions about the comparison of power.
FSX: enough said.
For example, my 2600K at 4.9Ghz + water can run the SPECapc rendering suite in 443 seconds. From your chart in the review it shows an overclocked 3930X does it in 408 seconds.
Simply put, that would be a 10% improvement from what I have now for a 300% price tag. :-)
I just wanted to say the fact you include this test in your reviews is very helpful to me, so thanks again. :-)
So yes, you pay 300% more, but that is a one time cost compared to getting that 10% every single time you run a model.
I believe the 3d ivybridge will be a better bargain than these.
Idont know if ivybridge extreme will be compatible with x79 mobo but P67 mobos will all for ivybridge upgrades making the 2600k chips a better deal from the getgo.
If you're asking about six core non-extreme Sandy Bridges, well, there aren't going to be any.
The NVIDIA Maximus announced release sounds pretty sexy ( quadro and tesla sandwich please!). Kind of makes me wonder if the mercury engine might deserve a second look.
Would appreciate a review if could score a copy.
geforce.com/Active/en_US/shared/images/articles/x79/3way.jpg
Still will probably wait for ivy bridge - E as the cinebench numbers do not justify dropping $1500 for x79 porn. But if the 3 way scaling is even close to the truth then I am very happy that the IVY Bridge solution will most likely do as much.
Makes waiting a few more seasons for my new dragster pretty hard though.
I must say I am very satisfied!