Interesting benchmarks, looks like I'll be sticking with my Q9550 for a little bit longer, and sure wont be moving to GTX295 any time soon.
[xbit]Two Quad-Core CPUs vs. Two Fast Nvidia Graphics Cards
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Quote:
The benchmarks I have seen usually show the i7 a few frame rates behind. It is only when you start adding two or three GPU that the lead starts to get pretty wide. I guess the shared buss of a dual PCB card doesn't tax the system as much, which may be why this test show hardly any difference even at identical clocks.
Originally Posted by grunion I thought the early reviews showed the i7 totally dominating the Core arch in games... propaganda? |
Quote:
Same here.
Might be bad connection at work though.
Originally Posted by Sullivan I cannot even connect to that site linked... |
Might be bad connection at work though.
Quote:
nope, i cant look at home either :s
Originally Posted by Dylan Same here. Might be bad connection at work though. |
2
No, the site is realllaaalalalllyyy slow
![]()
.................now I've timed out
![]()
.................now I've timed out
Can someone post at least an article summary? I'm interested in reading it
![]()
Quote:
i believe that was at 800x600, a very low resolution on lowest quality.
Originally Posted by grunion I thought the early reviews showed the i7 totally dominating the Core arch in games... propaganda? |
4
Website is a bit faster now, here's some of the more important stuff for you boys.
Quote:
Quote:
First of all, I suggest that you take a look at the advantage of the dual-processor GeForce GTX 295 over the fastest single-processor graphics card GeForce GTX 285. The results are shown for the overclocked Core i7 platform.
Since these two diagrams compare fast graphics cards, I guess it would be correct to evaluate them by the least CPU-dependent modes, i.e. at high resolutions and with high graphics quality settings. For example, the GeForce GTX 295 has an average advantage of 47.5% over the GeForce GTX 285 at 1920x1200 and in the FSAA mode, but the gap is smaller (33.5%) at 1280x960. Anyway, you can see that the dual-processor card is far faster despite its lower frequencies and smaller amount of graphics memory. The next two diagrams compare the platform with a Core i7 920 processor overclocked to 4GHz (and with 3GB of DDR3 memory clocked at 1.6GHz) and the platform with a Core 2 Quad QX9650 overclocked to 4GHz (with 4GB of DDR2 at 1GHz). The results are shown for the GeForce GTX 295 card. 
|
4
Game benchies
Quote:
Quote:
|
facepalm at their spelling of "Mercy"...
Quote:
Totally dominating at low resolutions and low-medium graphic settings where games can become more CPU than GPU-bound. Not exactly propaganda, but not exactly a real-world situation either. It shows that Core i7 has more potential, but our games are still largely limited by our graphics cards.
Originally Posted by grunion I thought the early reviews showed the i7 totally dominating the Core arch in games... propaganda? |
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
