|
|
Advertisement:
|
|
Intel QX6700 Quad-Core CPU |
|
Join the community - in the OCAU Forums!
|
Benchmark Settings and Results
TEST SETTINGS AND BENCHMARK SOFTWARE:
In this test we are benchmarking a quad-core Intel QX6700 engineering sample clocked at 2.66 GHz. Our QX6700 sample reports stepping “B3”. This is indicating an advanced production stage, probably identical with the first lot of retail QX6700. With a few exceptions we are running the same benchmarks we have used in our “Core 2 Duo” review. This allows us to compare the QX6700 with an X6800, E6700, and AMD’s FX-62. With the exception of the motherboards and the PSU, the QX6700 was benchmarked exactly with the same peripherals, hardware settings, and in the same environment as we had used for the “Core 2 Duo” test. The results are therefore comparable. Once again the motherboard was not installed in a case when the benchmarks were running, but on an open tray for ease of access. At least 2C should be added to the temperatures we are reporting if the motherboard is installed in a case.
BENCHMARK RESULTS:
The quad-core QX6700 and the dual-core E6700 are both clocked by default at 2.66 GHz. We can therefore isolate the impact of 4 cores versus 2 cores when comparing the performance of these 2 CPUs – and this will be the main focus for the following tests. The first test when benchmarking a new CPU is naturally a dedicated CPU test. The “PCMark” CPU tests and in particular the “3DMark” CPU test are multithreaded and therefore favoring the QX6700. In “3DMark” the QX6700 is outperforming an E6700 by almost 75%. We can also see that all Intel CPUs in this test are performing substantially better than AMD’s FX-62 - even the E6700 is still 9% ahead. The AMD system on the other hand retains a healthy lead in the “Sandra” memory tests thanks to the on-die memory controller. The QX6700 system shows basically the same memory bandwidth as the “Core 2 Duo” systems, which is not surprising as all 3 Intel systems are based on the same chipset.
We intentionally included the rather dated “Winstone” Multimedia and Business benchmarks in our test. They are based on scripted runs of mainstream applications like MS Office. Most of these applications are single threaded, and as to be expected the quad-core QX6700 performs no better than the dual-core E6700 in both tests. The overall “PCMark” score is based on several application based subtests. All of them are either running single-threaded or in the best case parallel. There is nothing to gain with a quad-core CPU in such a situation: The QX6700 performs therefore on par with the E6700. The X6800 performs slightly better thanks to its higher frequency.
|
|
Advertisement:
All original content copyright James Rolfe.
All rights reserved. No reproduction allowed without written permission.
Interested in advertising on OCAU? Contact us for info.
|
|
