|
|
Performance
General PerformanceSYSMark 2007 is an integral benchmark showing the systems performance in real applications of different types. That is why it is not surprising at all that the obtained results turned out very diverse: far not all the algorithms are optimized for quad-core processors. As you can see from the charts, Core 2 Quad Q9300 performs best of all during video processing. Here defeats all the competitors in nominal mode as well as during overclocking.
In other cases Core 2 Quad Q9300 yields to the new top dual-core Wolfdale processor, Core 2 Duo E8500, which boasts 26% higher nominal clock speed. Even overclocking doesn’t help, because it doesn’t really make up for the frequency difference between the quad- and the dual-core Penryn CPUs.
Note that overclocked to 3.5GHz Core 2 Quad Q9300 doesn’t lose to Core 2 Extreme QX9770 with twice as large L2 cache or to Core 2 Quad Q6600 overclocked to higher frequency of 3.6GHz. In other words, the youngest Yorkfield processor will not lose its attractiveness for computer enthusiasts even despite some overclocking mishaps.
3D GamesWe have already complained that quad-core processors support is not being adopted by gaming applications fast enough. The result is clearly seen on the diagrams: Core 2 Quad Q9300 is very often falling behind its dual-core competitor at default frequencies as well as during overclocking.
This situation is completely different from what we saw with previous generation processors on 65nm cores. Since Conroe and Kentsfield both overclocked to pretty similar frequencies, overclocked Core 2 Quad Q6600 ran neck and neck with overclocked Core 2 Duo E6850 even in games not optimized for quad-core. Now Core 2 Quad Q9300 cannot catch up with the overclocked Core 2 Duo E8500, so that overclocked have to face a really hard choice between a dual- and a quad-core processor.
Moreover, gaming benchmarks results reveal one more problem. During overclocking Core 2 Quad Q9300 sometimes falls not only behind its dual-core counterpart, but also behind its predecessor running at 3.6GHz frequency. This makes things even more confusing.
Media Content EncodingVideo codec copes pretty well with multi-threaded workload that is why quad-core processors show their real best in corresponding benchmarks. Core 2 Quad Q9300 outperforms dual-core processors in all tests except audio encoding into MP3 format (that uses maximum two cores). However, the balance between Core 2 Quad Q9300 working at 3.5GHz and Core 2 Quad Q6600 overclocked to 3.6GHz is not always steady. For example, XviD 1.2 codec works faster in a system with an older CPU despite all the improvements and enhancements of the new Yorkfield processor. But when the new versions of these codecs start supporting SSE4.1 instructions, Core 2 Quad Q9300 should become a more confident winner.
Final RenderingWhen we compare the performance of dual-core and quad-core processors, the results of final rendering applications are the most illustrative ones. Today is also no exception.
Other ApplicationsWe have to state once again that there is no unanimity in our today’s results. It is especially true for results of overclocked processors: Core 2 Quad Q9300 loses to the dual-core Core 2 Duo E8500 in Photoshop and Mathematica. In WinRAR and Mathematica it also falls behind Core 2 Quad Q6600.
Power ConsumptionWe decided to conclude our review with the power consumption measurements for our systems (without the monitor) working in nominal as well as overclocked modes. The system configurations were the same as during our performance tests. Enhanced Intel SpeedStep and Cool’n’Quiet 2.0 power-saving technologies were activated. The processors were loaded with Prime95 25.5 utility.
[ 本帖最后由 skyfx 于 2008-5-13 18:01 编辑 ] |
|
IP卡
狗仔卡
发表于 2008-5-13 17:43
QQ好友和群
收藏
分享
好贴
烂贴
提升卡
置顶卡
沉默卡
喧嚣卡
变色卡
显身卡
楼主