I7 920 vs Phenom II 965 with an ATI 5870.(Finally!)

[jennyh]

Other games did change, the release notes show how much.


Look you have to see the broader picture here. I know men can't think in multi-threading but there is a much larger picture that so many of you are missing here.

All these games are coded on i7's, that's almost 100% certain. They may be tested on phenoms later, but chances are they are coded on an i7 platform. That means that they are all optimised for an i7 platform, right from the get-go.

ATI have limited resources and a lot of driver optimisations to work on. Tbh, it is my belief that they do poorly on crossfire optimisations. It took far too long for 9.8 to appear and fix issues that were months old.

So yes, the i7 has held the crossfire advantage for a while, and it would seem to do so again. It will probably last a while longer but it is mostly down to drivers not superior gaming hardware.

The proof is pretty simple, if the i7 was really so much better it would show on single gpu's not only on crossfire.

There is a *lot* more going on here than meets the eye. It isn't a simple QPI issue like Elmo believes. I dunno enough about that and there might even be some mileage in that argument...but even if so there is still a *lot* more going on than meets the eye.

If you just step back a bit and think about it sensibly you would see that 60fps+ wins for the i7 simply are not possible based on hardware. That is a clear driver issue, and ATI will either fix it or they wont. In my opinion they have more important things to do like get crossfire working with eyefinity instead of optimising the phenom II so it catches back up to the i7's 150 fps in some medium-settings gaming benchmark.

 

[jennyh]

Read my old posts on this, where I credited Intel for i7 already handling this much better, but the overall improvements were on P2 % wise, compared to other cpus.
At the time, some wondered whether AMD had set some kind of proprietary scenario

Yep i remember that too.

Thing is, the C2Q made excellent improvements also. People will always look for a conspiracy but much more likely is...? More people own C2Q's and ATI graphics than own Phenom II's/Nehalems and ATI graphics. ATI need to make the drivers work for them otherwise they look bad vs Nvidia. It was a customer based decision. Could they improve the i7 results? Possibly. Can they afford to put resources into doing it? Doubtful.

Again you need a bit of multi-threaded thinking to get your head around it all.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Overall, there was a 20% improvement on 4000 series cards from launch, I cant remember the link, but its somewheres, and no, not just the MT drivers, but they made a huge dent in those numbers

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Not sure how much this plays into it as well, but M$ has also worked with Intel extensively on their MT usage, how that translates to arch/approach, and whether its carried over to games/drivers, not sure.
Lets assume that Intel did get a boost, but how much, and how ide of one, who knows?
It isnt enough to overcome the natural superiority of i7s IPC, but catching up isnt within doubt of P2s abilities.
Id point to AMDs power reduction abilities, where Intel again already had the jump there

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

I never did get the info I was after with these drivers, some info slipped in here and there, but it was still left cloudy as to how much, how many games etc it was, and was totally left open as to why, exactly.
The info just isnt there to determine 1 way or the other, tho I tried to find it

 

[SuperFly03]

Other games did change, the release notes show how much.


Look you have to see the broader picture here. I know men can't think in multi-threading but there is a much larger picture that so many of you are missing here.

Good way to get people on your side.

All these games are coded on i7's, that's almost 100% certain. They may be tested on phenoms later, but chances are they are coded on an i7 platform. That means that they are all optimised for an i7 platform, right from the get-go.

Based on what? Your delusional fangirl view in the hopes that it will explain why Phenom II is fundamentally slower?

ATI have limited resources and a lot of driver optimisations to work on. Tbh, it is my belief that they do poorly on crossfire optimisations. It took far too long for 9.8 to appear and fix issues that were months old.

That's the way drivers work... they get revised as they find better ways to interface with the OS and hardware.

So yes, the i7 has held the crossfire advantage for a while, and it would seem to do so again. It will probably last a while longer but it is mostly down to drivers not superior gaming hardware.

At the end of the day... i7 has higher FPS right?

The proof is pretty simple, if the i7 was really so much better it would show on single gpu's not only on crossfire.

LOL... Single GPUs? You mean where GPU bottlenecks are more prevalent at lower settings?

There is a *lot* more going on here than meets the eye. It isn't a simple QPI issue like Elmo believes. I dunno enough about that and there might even be some mileage in that argument...but even if so there is still a *lot* more going on than meets the eye.

Why do women always over think things?

If you just step back a bit and think about it sensibly you would see that 60fps+ wins for the i7 simply are not possible based on hardware. That is a clear driver issue, and ATI will either fix it or they wont. In my opinion they have more important things to do like get crossfire working with eyefinity instead of optimising the phenom II so it catches back up to the i7's 150 fps in some medium-settings gaming benchmark.

Or it could be that Phenom II really is slower...

Edit: Don't give me any of that TLDR crap of yours either.

 

[greenlines]

I've heard that for gaming xFire on an LGA1366 platform is better then a single card solution.

That's kind of sad, that the most powerful commercial AMD CPU solution can't be a low end LGA1366 solution. Least they're making progress though.

I read P2 as Pentium 2.

 

[SuperFly03]

I read P2 as Pentium 2.

Word.

 

[jennyh]

At the end of the day... i7 has higher FPS right?

I guess you aren't currently playing dirt 2...or well anything at high quality. another i7 owner getting 150 fps at 640x480 resolution, low settings. What's that like btw?

Just fo back to your crap little website, you've got nothing to add.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

For once, people are actually talking/disputing benches/facts/findings, and not getting overtly personal, lets keep it that way.

 

[smithereen]

I know this is cliche, but are we really arguing over which CPU gets more perfect FPS?

 

[jennyh]

I'm trying to expand the tiny minds of these people. Some of it is getting through but because my pov threatens their belief that they made the right choice, they refuse to even look at the alternatives.

To them it's simple DURRR i7 OWNS. They actually believe that 60+ fps wins for the i7 is down to a much superior architecture. It's hard to believe that anyone could be so completely whacked to believe that is true. Hell an i7 couldn't even render Doom at 1fps but these sad fanboys believe it's superior architecture can give it 60 fps more in some games but only when it gets to use 2 graphics cards.

Honestly I dont know if they actually believe it or if they are just trolling.

 

[jennyh]

Did anyone ever answer the point about that btw?

If 30 fps more at 150ish fps is 'proof' of the i7's gaming superiority, what exactly is 4 fps less < 60fps proof of?

The consistent lesser performance below 60 fps is all because of a QPI issue causing latency apparently, but for some reason it doesn't apply with 2 graphics cards.

We just forget all about the latency issue with 2 cards because it doesn't fit in with the theory, right?

I think anyone who is capable of logical thought can figure that we're looking at driver issues here.

 

[notty22]

Good way to get people on your side.



Based on what? Your delusional fangirl view in the hopes that it will explain why Phenom II is fundamentally slower?



That's the way drivers work... they get revised as they find better ways to interface with the OS and hardware.



At the end of the day... i7 has higher FPS right?



LOL... Single GPUs? You mean where GPU bottlenecks are more prevalent at lower settings?



Why do women always over think things?



Or it could be that Phenom II really is slower...

Edit: Don't give me any of that TLDR crap of yours either.

+1
Good post.

 

[verndewd]

Intel



Intel Core i7 920 Processor @ 2.66GHz

Gigabyte EX58 UD3R LGA1366 Motherboard

6GB PC3-12800 DDR3-1600 Memory

HIS Radeon HD 5870 1GB GDDR5 Graphics Card
500GB Seagate 7200.12 SATA II Hard Disk Drive

Corsair TX 650W Power Supply Unit
Akasa Nero Heatpipe Cooler

Windows Vista Home Premium
LG 22x DVD+/-RW SATA


AMD



AMD Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition @ 3.40GHz
Gigabyte MA770T UD3P Socket AM3 Motherboard
4GB PC3-12800 DDR3-1600 Memory
HIS Radeon HD 5870 1GB GDDR5 Graphics Card

320GB Samsung Spinpoint F1 SATA II Hard Disk Drive
Corsair TX 650W Power Supply Unit
Arctic Cooling Freezer 64 Pro Cooler
Windows Vista Home Premium
LG 22x DVD+/-RW SATA

Who in their right mind does such an unbalanced comparison?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128392
Chipsets
North Bridge AMD 770
South Bridge AMD SB710


http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128375&Tpk=Gigabyte%20EX58%20UD3R%20LGA1366%20Motherboard

you Have to be delusional to call that a fair comparison. The only comparative value is the GFX card and ram speed. Fail

 

[jennyh]

Kinda lost me with that last one vern. What are you referring to?

 

[yannifb]

Kinda lost me with that last one vern. What are you referring to?

Im pretty sure the main focus is the motherboard, because as far as I am concerned the 770 is the lowest end AM3 motherboard.

 

[SuperFly03]

I guess you aren't currently playing dirt 2...or well anything at high quality. another i7 owner getting 150 fps at 640x480 resolution, low settings. What's that like btw?

Just fo back to your crap little website, you've got nothing to add.

Why resort to such childish insults?

High Quality? Crysis is high quality but runs like crap on every system. You can't look at things in a vacuum.

150 FPS @ 640x480? I run a 24" Gateway 2401HD Display. 24". 1920x1200 resolution.

Care to try again with your lame insults?

Quit insulting... "the other forum". You've never been there. You've never read anything there. You are merely attacking it out of frustration that you are wrong.

 

[SuperFly03]

I'm trying to expand the tiny minds of these people. Some of it is getting through but because my pov threatens their belief that they made the right choice, they refuse to even look at the alternatives.

Nah, I didn't look at the alternatives. I didn't read 5 different Core i7 reviews from 5 different websites. I didn't look at the benchies that apply to the work I do. I didn't run the cost/benefit. I didn't look at the Green team. I just blindly chose the i7 because I'm a die hard intel fanboi. /sarcasm

Here is my system order: P3 -> P4 Northwood -> AMD K8 -> AMD K8 Opteron -> Intel Conroe -> Intel Wolfdale -> Intel Nehalem

I've owned AMD systems. Chill out Jenny.

To them it's simple DURRR i7 OWNS.

Predominately, yes. Exclusively, no.

They actually believe that 60+ fps wins for the i7 is down to a much superior architecture.

It is superior. End of story. Now you can argue the value of Core i7 but you can't argue the superiority.

It's hard to believe that anyone could be so completely whacked to believe that is true.

Scientia and Abinstein believe what they are saying is true... but it doesn't make it true.

Hell an i7 couldn't even render Doom at 1fps but these sad fanboys believe it's superior architecture can give it 60 fps more in some games but only when it gets to use 2 graphics cards.

What kind of left field insult is that? Doom? 1FPS? ... drugs are bad mmmmmm kay?

Honestly I dont know if they actually believe it or if they are just trolling.

"Hi pot, this is kettle. You are black.

 

[jennyh]

Why resort to such childish insults?

High Quality? Crysis is high quality but runs like crap on every system. You can't look at things in a vacuum.

150 FPS @ 640x480? I run a 24" Gateway 2401HD Display. 24". 1920x1200 resolution.

Care to try again with your lame insults?

Quit insulting... "the other forum". You've never been there. You've never read anything there. You are merely attacking it out of frustration that you are wrong.

My insults? Your attitude stinks. I've done my best to remain civil and put my point across as calmly as possible but you downright refuse to even answer any of my points, instead coming back with 'but the i7 has higher fps' which is a total LIE.

I have no intention to go to your website, why the hell would I try to change the minds of people who clearly are devoid of hope? What I don't get is why *you* are *here*. Tired of all the agreements going on amongst the i7-owner crowd on your forum? We don't really care.

Either answer the valid points I put across properly or just don't bother responding. I'm not doing this for your benefit, even though you could benefit a lot by opening your mind, this isn't for you.

 

[SuperFly03]

Did anyone ever answer the point about that btw?

If 30 fps more at 150ish fps is 'proof' of the i7's gaming superiority, what exactly is 4 fps less < 60fps proof of?

The consistent lesser performance below 60 fps is all because of a QPI issue causing latency apparently, but for some reason it doesn't apply with 2 graphics cards.

We just forget all about the latency issue with 2 cards because it doesn't fit in with the theory, right?

I think anyone who is capable of logical thought can figure that we're looking at driver issues here.

...

What? QPI issues are present in single and dual GPU configurations as far as I can tell.

 

[jennyh]

What kind of left field insult is that? Doom? 1FPS? ... drugs are bad mmmmmm kay?

Is it any wonder you are so defensive when you consider everything to be an insult?

My point that you missed due to being overly defensive is that an i7 couldn't render doom at 1 fps. The actual cpu, not the i7 with a gpu.

It's 'left field' in that it is supposed to show how ludicrous the notion of a cpu making a huge 60 fps difference is. 60 fps over a same generation cpu? Use your brain, that is *clearly* driver issues yet yourself and others have talked yourselves into believing it's all about the i7's 'superior architecture' (note that this doesn't apply with one gpu, only two).

And to think you say AMDZoners are whacked? I mean seriously look at what you are saying.

 

[SuperFly03]

My insults?

You started it. We were debating civilly then you went off the deep end again.

Your attitude stinks.

... This is actually me being nice.

I've done my best to remain civil and put my point across as calmly as possible but you downright refuse to even answer any of my points, instead coming back with 'but the i7 has higher fps' which is a total LIE.

Total lie? This is funny. How have I not answered your points? I go sentence by sentence. I believe you are getting angry because someone is actually taking the time to rip apart your arguments. If we are talking GPU bound instances, the results are even to slightly favoring AMD due to the QPI tunneling. In CPU bound instances the results favor Intel heavily.

I have no intention to go to your website, why the hell would I try to change the minds of people who clearly are devoid of hope?

The only person devoid of hope is you. We counter with knowledge and sources not perceptions and whims.

What I don't get is why *you* are *here*.

To further the knowledge of those less informed.

Tired of all the agreements going on amongst the i7-owner crowd on your forum? We don't really care.

Agreements? There is very little agreement going on on most days. Difference is... we resolve our differences in an effort to get to the correct answer.

Either answer the valid points I put across properly or just don't bother responding. I'm not doing this for your benefit, even though you could benefit a lot by opening your mind, this isn't for you.

You clearly aren't doing this for the benefit of those less informed otherwise you'd be using facts not perceptions/whims.

I've answered you point by point. Can you say the same?

 

[yannifb]

You started it. We were debating civilly then you went off the deep end again.



... This is actually me being nice.



Total lie? This is funny. How have I not answered your points? I go sentence by sentence. I believe you are getting angry because someone is actually taking the time to rip apart your arguments. If we are talking GPU bound instances, the results are even to slightly favoring AMD due to the QPI tunneling. In CPU bound instances the results favor Intel heavily.



The only person devoid of hope is you. We counter with knowledge and sources not perceptions and whims.



To further the knowledge of those less informed.



Agreements? There is very little agreement going on on most days. Difference is... we resolve our differences in an effort to get to the correct answer.



You clearly aren't doing this for the benefit of those less informed otherwise you'd be using facts not perceptions/whims.

I've answered you point by point. Can you say the same?

Ok you guys can argue about who has the bigger gun based on their CPU's, but for Gods sake please don't make yourself sound like some sort of righteous educator of the misinformed. The only reason you are arguing so much is because of the need to justify your purchase, don't throw any other bull into this. And why am I posting this? No, its not because i need to justify my PhII (my system was exceptionally well priced, excluding the GTX 295 of course), its so I can show that people like you, who think they are so superior, are full of it.

 

[SuperFly03]

Is it any wonder you are so defensive when you consider everything to be an insult?

Defensive? I just called you out on not making sense.

My point that you missed due to being overly defensive is that an i7 couldn't render doom at 1 fps. The actual cpu, not the i7 with a gpu.

What on earth does this have to do with anything related to the topic at hand?

It's 'left field' in that it is supposed to show how ludicrous the notion of a cpu making a huge 60 fps difference is. 60 fps over a same generation cpu?

It isn't about the CPU rendering any of the images but about the speed with which it transfers the necessary raw data to the GPU so that it can render the image.

Use your brain, that is *clearly* driver issues yet yourself and others have talked yourselves into believing it's all about the i7's 'superior architecture' (note that this doesn't apply with one gpu, only two).

Ugh, denial. Why are you relegating it to dual GPU?

And to think you say AMDZoners are whacked? I mean seriously look at what you are saying.

Oiy, I'm going to get a drink. That fifth of Jack is the only way I am going to continue on without stooping to your level.