SYSMark 2007 Performance

Our journey starts with SYSMark 2007, the only all-encompassing performance suite in our review today. The idea here is simple: one benchmark to indicate the overall performance of your machine.

SYSMark is an example of what a mostly dual-core workload looks like. The 6-core advantage is nil, although the very large L3 cache makes up for it. In this case the Core i7 970 is just slightly slower than the quad-core 975.

Adobe Photoshop CS4 Performance

To measure performance under Photoshop CS4 we turn to the Retouch Artists’ Speed Test. The test does basic photo editing; there are a couple of color space conversions, many layer creations, color curve adjustment, image and canvas size adjustment, unsharp mask, and finally a gaussian blur performed on the entire image.

The whole process is timed and thanks to the use of Intel's X25-M SSD as our test bed hard drive, performance is far more predictable than back when we used to test on mechanical disks.

Time is reported in seconds and the lower numbers mean better performance. The test is multithreaded and can hit all four cores in a quad-core machine.

We loved the 980X for Photoshop use when it launched, and the 970 is no different. Photoshop can use the extra cores, although the performance difference isn't huge it's there.

DivX 6.8.5 with Xmpeg 5.0.3

Our DivX test is the same DivX / XMpeg 5.03 test we've run for the past few years now, the 1080p source file is encoded using the unconstrained DivX profile, quality/performance is set balanced at 5 and enhanced multithreading is enabled.

Video encoding is where it's at with the 6-core Gulftown processors. The 970 is hot on the heels of the 980X.

x264 HD Video Encoding Performance

Graysky's x264 HD test uses x264 to encode a 4Mbps 720p MPEG-2 source. The focus here is on quality rather than speed, thus the benchmark uses a 2-pass encode and reports the average frame rate in each pass.

There's no replacement for core count in these heavily threaded workloads. The 970 is over 40% faster than the Core i7 975 and gives you 96% of the performance of a Core i7 980X.

Introduction & The Test 3D Rendering Performance
POST A COMMENT

49 Comments

View All Comments

  • spunlex - Thursday, July 29, 2010 - link

    don't forget crunchers Reply
  • kuwan - Friday, July 30, 2010 - link

    If you're a photographer doing image editing then Bibble 5 Pro will fully utilize 6 cores +HT. Bibble actually scales all the way up to 32 cores.

    Cheers
    Reply
  • Golgatha - Thursday, July 29, 2010 - link

    I was all ready to read up until I realized I can't afford it. Reply
  • AstroGuardian - Thursday, July 29, 2010 - link

    How come the 920 scores lower than the 750? Considering they are the same chip but the 920 has HT. Reply
  • ViRGE - Thursday, July 29, 2010 - link

    They're not the same chip. 750 is Lynnfield (1156) while 920 is Bloomfield (1366). They do happen to have the same core and uncore clock speeds, but the 750 can turbo boost to higher clockspeeds than the 920 can. So that's most likely the reason the 750 is winning some tests. Reply
  • jfelano - Thursday, July 29, 2010 - link

    Intel and affordable don't belong in the same sentence. Reply
  • afkrotch - Thursday, July 29, 2010 - link

    Don't see how they can't be in the same sentence. Who had the cheapest dual cores, when they first hit the market? I'll give you 1 hint. It wasn't AMD. Hell, I went with an Intel dual core, simply cause it was $200 dollars cheaper than anything AMD had to offer during the time.

    But hey, if all you're looking for is crappy $100 or less processor, then yes. Intel is not meant for you.
    Reply
  • medi01 - Friday, July 30, 2010 - link

    Yep. Intel had "cheapest" (and crapiest) dual cores, which was an EXCEPTION from Intel's practices. How come it supports your argument? Reply
  • tech6 - Thursday, July 29, 2010 - link

    I was really hoping this CPU would fall in the $500-$600 range but the price sort of makes sense as there really is no competition at this performance level from AMD so Intel can pretty much charge whatever it wants. Reply
  • Etern205 - Thursday, July 29, 2010 - link

    Even AMD's 12 core Operteron is cheaper than Intel's "slightly affordable" hex.

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...

    8-core
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now