Date:
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
Author:
Kyle Bennett
Google +1

Intel Core i7 and Gaming

We take our Intel Core i7 processors ranging from 2.66GHz all the way up to 4GHz and turn them loose on Ubisoft’s FarCry 2. It is a great game but does it need a new CPU to give you a better gaming experience? The results even surprised us.

continued...

Core i7 and SLI

While this is a “Nehalem” article and not an article covering the new Intel X58 chipset that supports the Core i7 processor, we would be remiss without talking about almost all of the new X58 motherboards supporting NVIDIA’s 2-way and some supporting 3-way SLI as well as continuing to support AMD's CrossFire X. Configuring 2-way SLI on our ASUS P6T Deluxe motherboard was easy to do and as long as you can plug tab A into slot B you likely have the mechanics of it covered.

Below is a look at the setup we were using for our SLI testing covered here. We used two BFG Tech GeForce GTX 280 OC video cards supported by power from Thermaltake Toughpower 1200w PSU. BFG’s cards performed flawlessly as well as Thermaltake’s PSU. While a 1200w PSU might seem to be a bit of overkill for this setup, we are working on 3-way SLI as well on another X58 motherboard.

Article Image Article Image

This particular setup with the Core i7 965EE overclocked to 4GHz pulled idle power wattage of 285 at the wall. Under a FarCry 2 gaming load at 2560x1600 2xAA it pulled a solid 590 watts at the wall.

Below we are showing you some BFGTech GTX 280 OC SLI results at stock Core i7 965EE speeds as well as with the CPU clocked to 4GHz. Also for comparison we have results of the same stock clock rig with a single BFGTech GTX 280 OC.

Article Image

What is tremendously satisfying is seeing near perfect scaling between the SLI and non-SLI configurations. In some cases it is almost 100%! We were hoping that our GTX 280 SLI configuration would “cut loose” for our overclocked CPU, but again that was not the case. In fact, our 4GHz CPU seemed to do a bit worse, although easily within the margin of error which I estimate be about + or – 3 frames per second after toiling through all the data.

The Bottom Line

Before you guys start with all the “You AMD fanboy!” email, please make sure you check out our i7 Synthetic Benchmarks and i7 Applications articles. Those two articles show the Core i7 is a much better light.

When it comes to FarCry 2 you have to think that no optimization has been done for the Core i7 at all. Given that FarCry 2 is an “NVIDIA title,” I don’t think it is totally out of line to hypothesize that not much work has been done to optimize this game for Core i7, but that is all just wild speculation on my part. Undoubtedly though, we still see that “modern day” gaming is still highly limited by the video card selection.

For those of you out there still gaming on a dual core CPU, I would suggest making sure you check out page two of this article if you are thinking of investing in a Core i7 for gaming. Our E8500 solidly held its own in FarCry 2 gaming at 1600x1200 resolution and above.

One thing I do know is that the data presented here today should give you enough Core i7 performance feedback to help you make a decision on your next upgrade. If you are in for a full blown system build, I think you would not be making a good decision by sticking with a Core 2 platform unless you are making the decision based solely on budget. My next system is very likely going to contain a Core i7 920 on an ASUS P6T Deluxe motherboard, but gaming will not be my primary goal, but a close second.

And if you guys have any suggestions for better showing off Core i7 gaming at 1600x1200 or better without turning off all the eye candy, I am all ears.

Discussion

Please join our HardForum discussion about this article.