Crysis CPU performance: E6850 vs QX6850 vs QX9650 vs Phenom X4

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: harpoon84
OK, good news first - Phenom overclocks to 3GHz on the B2 stepping - yay!

Now to the bad news - Performance is poor, 5 - 10% slower than C2D/C2Q.

http://news.expreview.com/2007...9/1193590532d6599.html
http://www.expreview.com/img/news/071028/score.png

Specs:
C2D/C2Q using P35 mobo/ 8800GTX / WinXP / Forceware 169.01
Phenom X4 using RD790 mobo/ 8800GTX / WinXP / Forceware 169.01

I have to say this is pretty disappointing, having a heavily overclocked Phenom fail to match a stock C2D/C2Q. Consdering Penryns are routinely overclocking to 4GHz+ on air... things ain't looking too pretty for AMD.

Also interesting (and somewhat disappointing) is that Penryn shows almost NO performance gain over Conroe/Kentsfield. Quad core is also showing negligible gains over dual core, but apparently the Crysis SP demo is not multithreaded?

ok, @ anybody who can read the chinese, what res / quality are they running it at? my e6750 at 3.488 just got 26.30 fps at 1440x900 all medium no AA/AF.

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
ok, @ anybody who can read the chinese, what res / quality are they running it at? my e6750 at 3.488 just got 26.30 fps at 1440x900 all medium no AA/AF.

That's because of your video card. They used an 8800GTX.

 

[lyssword]

Originally posted by: Arkaign
The AMD procs with the integrated memory controller are much less sensitive to memory performance in comparison to Intel. Run a C2D 3Ghz with 5-5-5-15 2T DDR-2 667, then run the same proc/clock with 4-4-4-12 DDR2-800 1T, and you'll see 5-15% performance delta, depending on app.

I was under the impression it was the other way around. As in memory speed more important to a64 than c2d.

 

[TC91]

yah, a64 loves low latency fast memory especially the 1t command rate. c2d can go with slower memory with little performance loss (usually).