Hi

Awesome article, though I was surprised to see the Q6600 hold up so well!

I have a request. I own a Core i5 2400 CPU on stock settings with a H67 motherboard. A friend of mine recently purchased a 3570K and OCed it to 4 Ghz and claims that this makes a big difference in games, though I am not convinced myself.

Would it be possible to do a comparison between the 2400 and the 3570K, on same clocks and on OCed settings?

Thanks a lot.

i do really enjoy this type of benchmark new hardware paired with old hardware!!
what about if you do it with the FX8120/8150 OC to see how it goes?

TL;DR:

AMD's best current CPUs are the same speed (or slower than) their old Phenom II CPUs and run at the same speed as Intel's 3 year old CPUs.

Intel's newest CPUs are as much as 64% faster in Skyrim and, according to The Tech Report's article from August 23 2012 ("Inside the second: Gaming performance with today's CPUs" provide much faster and more consistent framerates.

The single modern Intel CPU measured in this article costs $310 but you can get most of its speed benefit by going with the $200 i5-3470.

The Tech Report has an article which compares the i5-2400 to the i5-3570 (among many other CPUs). To summarize, in Skyrim the 2400 gets 97 FPS while the 3570 gets 104, in Arkham City the 2400 gets 77 FPS while the 3570 gets 84, in Crysis 2 with DX11 the 2400 gets 85 FPS while the 3570 gets 88, in Battlefield 3 the 2400 gets 85 FPS while the 3570 gets 88.

The scores of the two CPUs you mentioned in Skyrim, Arkham City, and Crysis 2 are both well above average. For example, the FX-8150 gets just 68 FPS in Skyrim (to your 2400's 97) and 59 FPS on average in Arkham City (to your 2400's 77).

Since these are only averages you must remember that there are times when they go far above and far below, so both of your i5 CPUs will both provide a noticeably better and more consistent experience than many older (or AMD) CPUs.

Keep in mind that he's overclocking his CPU so his results will likely be a bit better than I'm indicating here, though probably not by a wide margin.

The spam filter on this site prevents me from posting a link to the article I'm referring to but it was posted at The Tech Report on August 23, 2012. Its title is "Inside the second: Gaming performance with today's CPUs".

Thank you for your interesting post,
here is theone you are talking about:
http://techreport.com/review/23246/in ... ormance-with-today-cpus/1

Great test
Please use:
Athlon II X4 631 stock and 3000Mhz
chipest Core i5
Pentium G630
Pentium Wolfdale @ 3500Mhz

Core i3 and Trinity
Please

Hallo zusammen,

erstmal Super Test! Könnt ihr bitte den Q9550@3.4 auch noch in die Testreihe einbauen? Es gibt auch noch wirklich viele die diese CPU Ihr eigen nennen.

Frage ans Forum: Wie hoch müßte der Q6600 getaktet sein um an den Q9550@3.4 ranzukommen?

Grütz all

1

Hi

Awesome article, though I was surprised to see the Q6600 hold up so well!

I have a request. I own a Q6600 CPU at 2.4 Ghz. I was wondering if it is worth it to overclock it.

Would it be possible to do a comparison between the stock Q6600 CPU at 2.4 Ghz and the Q6600 CPU at 3.0 Ghz?

Thanks a lot.