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.
The Core i7 860, as expected, falls right in between the i5 750 and the i7 870. The overall performance impact of slightly faster clock speeds and Hyper Threading is small, it's only in the individual cases that you see large gains from the feature. Most applications have difficulty stressing four cores, pushing eight threads isn't any easier.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
121 Comments
View All Comments
DigitalFreak - Saturday, September 19, 2009 - link
He's the troll formerly known as snakeoil. Just ignore him and he'll go away.the zorro - Saturday, September 19, 2009 - link
why, did you ran out of arguments?strikeback03 - Monday, September 21, 2009 - link
No, just following this proverb"Do not argue with a fool, those watching may not know the difference between you and he"
DigitalFreak - Saturday, September 19, 2009 - link
Arguing with someone who is clearly delusional is pointless. On the other hand, if you're mentally retarded then you have my sympathy.Troll Trolling - Saturday, September 19, 2009 - link
Ok, let's do your way.In the magic lands of Ecualia, there was a magic blacksmith cyclope, he forged the Core i7 860 such way it would be better than BloomField.
Beat my argument troll.
the zorro - Saturday, September 19, 2009 - link
the story is even worst than that:somewhere at satan clara's intel's HQ the evil orcs at intel decided that free overclocking was not profitable so they decided to create the turbo crap story, and call it a 'feature' so this way they would use all available overclocking headroom in the cpu and begin charging for it.
so they are killing free overclocking for intel users.
now you have to pay for overclocking because lynnfield turbo overclocking is consuming all the overclocking ability of the cpu
now intel can make this turbo overclocking more aggressive in some cpus and charge more for it.
but there is another problem because intel's orcs betrayed the evil nvidia warlock who sweared revenge and now intel cpus are underperforming when paired with an nvida graphics card.
SpaceRanger - Saturday, September 19, 2009 - link
We gotta get a "Do Not Feed The Trolls" sign for the end of every page posted here at Anandtech.jordanclock - Saturday, September 19, 2009 - link
Not really... Just look at the numbers. The i5 750 is outperforming the PII 965 in almost every case. And when the 965 pulls ahead, it's not enough to justify the increase in price and huge increase in power draw.Eeqmcsq - Saturday, September 19, 2009 - link
> Not really... Just look at the numbers. The i5 750 is outperforming the PII 965 in almost every case... when given room to Turbo. When not given room to Turbo, then the winner is...? Based on the limited number of Turbo off benchmarks available, my theory is that the i5 750 will fall below the 965 with no room to Turbo. I'm not completely convinced yet that the i5 750 is the definitive winner over the 965. CPU comparison's aren't that clearcut anymore with the variableness of Turbo mode.
On a side note, I do agree the price tag of the 965 is certainly too high, even if the 965 is hypothetically better than the 750 under heavy load. Maybe AMD is fighting the 750 with the slightly lower priced PII 955, which anyone can multiplier bump into a 965.
yacoub - Saturday, September 19, 2009 - link
How many of you trolls are there? Turbo is on by default, so the end user is going to have the advantage of it all the time. The only reason benchmarks were run without Turbo is for the three of you out there who are going to turn it off... no wait, you're not even going to buy it in the first place because you're just here to troll.