Intel Core i7-3960X SLI Gaming Performance Scaling
Category : 2014
Published by Marc Büchel on 28.02.14
In our SLI gaming performance scaling articles we're going to investigate SLI scaling factors with different CPUs and different clock speeds (since a lot of guys asked for this). In eight recent games and two theoretical benchmarks we want to find out what difference SLI makes, when we run benchmarks with the CPU at stock clocks as well as overclocked to 4.5 GHz. Let's kick off with an Intel 3960X CPU and two ASUS GTX 780 DirectCU II graphics cards and find out what the differences are going to be like.
[pagebreak]
Test Setup
Hardware
|
Mainboard |
|
| CPUs |
- Intel Core i7-3960X @ Stock (Turbo On)
- Intel Core i7-3960X @ 4.5GHz (Turbo On)
|
|
Memory |
- 4x4GB Corsair Dominator Platinum @ CL9-9-9-24 1T DDR3-1600 MHz
|
|
Graphic Cards (Driver) |
-
2 x
ASUS GeForce GTX
780 DC2 OC @ 889 MHz /
1'500 MHz
|
| Drivers |
|
| Games and OS |
- Windows 7 x64 (Up to date
on the 25/07/2013
- All
games were up to date on the 25/07/2013)
|
|
HDD |
- OCZ Technology Octane 512 GB SSD
|
PSU
|
- Seasonic Patinum SS-1000XP / 1000 Watts
|
[pagebreak]
3DMark - Fire Strike
| Overall Score |
Single Card |
SLI |
Scaling |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
8'850 |
14'095 |
56.92 % |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
9'177 |
14'604 |
59.13 % |
| |
More is better |
| GPU Score |
Single Card |
SLI |
Scaling |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
9'810 |
17'850 |
81.95 % |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
9'996 |
18'059 |
80.66 % |
| |
More is better |
[pagebreak]
Unigine Heaven 4.0 Extreme Preset
| Basic Preset |
Single Card |
SLI |
Scaling |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
4'176 |
4'195 |
1.34 % |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
5'184 |
5'855 |
12.94 % |
| |
More is better |
| Extreme Preset |
Single Card |
SLI |
Scaling |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
1'616 |
2'468 |
52.72 % |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
1'773 |
2'909 |
64.07 % |
| |
More is better |
[pagebreak]
BattleField 4
| 1280 x 1024, Low
details |
Single Card |
SLI |
Scaling |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
130.00 fps |
130.20 fps |
0.15 % |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
149.85 fps |
165.39 fps |
10.37 % |
| |
More is better |
| 1920 x 1080, max
details, max AA, max AF |
Single Card |
SLI |
Scaling |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
80.00 fps |
92.27 fps |
15.33 % |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
85.6 fps |
112.54 fps |
31.47 % |
| |
More is better |
[pagebreak]
BattleField 3
| 1280 x 1024, Low
details |
Single Card |
SLI |
Scaling |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
146.96 fps |
160.21 fps |
9.02 % |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
170.17 fps |
188.21 fps |
10.60 % |
| |
More is better |
| 1920 x 1080, max
details, max AA, max AF |
Single Card |
SLI |
Scaling |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
101.10 fps |
105.62 fps |
4.47 % |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
103.42 fps |
128.14 fps |
23.90 % |
| |
More is better |
[pagebreak]
Bioshock Infinite - Benchmark
| 1280 x 1024, Low
details |
Single Card |
SLI |
Scaling |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
223.29 fps |
245.23 fps |
9.82 % |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
280.00 fps |
296.32 fps |
5.82 % |
| |
More is better |
| 1920 x 1080, max
details, max AA, max AF |
Single Card |
SLI |
Scaling |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
176.53 fps |
213.17 fps |
20.75 % |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
194.90 fps |
263.13 fps |
35.00 % |
| |
More is better |
[pagebreak]
Crysis 3
| 1280 x 1024, Low
details |
Single Card |
SLI |
Scaling |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
123.27 fps |
128.92 fps |
4.58 % |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
146.62 fps |
152.38 fps |
3.92 % |
| |
More is better |
| 1920 x 1080, max
details, max AA, max AF |
Single Card |
SLI |
Scaling |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
31.2 fps |
80.2 fps |
257.05 % |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
32.1 fps |
91.3 fps |
284.86 % |
| |
More is better |
[pagebreak]
Call of Duty Black Ops 2
| 1280 x 1024, Low
details |
Single Card |
SLI |
Scaling |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
309.83 fps |
365.42 fps |
17.94 % |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
423.40 fps |
583.26 fps |
37.76 % |
| |
More is better |
| 1920 x 1080, max
details, max AA, max AF |
Single Card |
SLI |
Scaling |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
136.75 fps |
208.36 fps |
52.51 % |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
154.78 fps |
246.99 fps |
59.57 % |
| |
More is better |
[pagebreak]
Sleeping Dogs - Benchmark
| 1280 x 1024, Low
details |
Single Card |
SLI |
Scaling |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
163.20 fps |
163.80 fps |
0.36 % |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
199.90 fps |
209.40 fps |
4.75 % |
| |
More is better |
| 1920 x 1080, max
details, max AA, max AF |
Single Card |
SLI |
Scaling |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
63.00 fps |
63.60 fps |
0.95 % |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
108.50 fps |
109.00 fps |
0.46 % |
| |
More is better |
[pagebreak]
The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
| 1280 x 720, Low details |
Single Card |
SLI |
Scaling |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
189.56 fps |
205.55 fps |
8.44 % |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
285.76 fps |
295.95 fps |
2.52 % |
| |
More is better |
| 1920 x 1080, All set to
Max |
Single Card |
SLI |
Scaling |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
104.34 fps |
111.58 fps |
6.93 % |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
140.27 fps |
142.86 fps |
1.84 % |
| |
More is better |
[pagebreak]
Metro: Last Light - Benchmark
| 1280 x 1024,
Preset low |
Single Card |
SLI |
Scaling |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
132.46 fps |
132.95 fps |
0.36 % |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
160.32 fps |
160.52 fps |
0.12 % |
| |
More is better |
| 1920 x 1080, Preset
high |
Single Card |
SLI |
Scaling |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
42.20 fps |
63.48 fps |
50.43 % |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
43.10 fps |
67.18 fps |
55.87 % |
| |
More is better |
[pagebreak]
Power
Consumption
| idle |
Single Card |
SLI |
Index |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
85 Watt |
115 Watt |
35.29 % |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
190 Watt |
209 Watt |
10.00 % |
| |
less is better |
| Furmark |
Single Card |
SLI |
Index |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
350 Watt |
675 Watt |
92.85 % |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
442 Watt |
724 Watt |
63.81 % |
| |
less is
better |
[pagebreak]
Scaling Factors
Games |
| 3DMark
Overall |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
1.59 |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
1.59 |
| |
| 3DMark GPU
Score |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
1.83 |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
1.81 |
| |
| Unigine
Heaven 4.0 Basic |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
1.24 |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
1.13 |
| |
| Unigine
Heaven 4.0 Extreme |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
1.65 |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
1.64 |
| |
|
BattleField 4 Low |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
1.07 |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
1.10 |
| |
|
BattleField 4 High |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
1.27 |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
1.31 |
| |
|
Battlefield 3 Low |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
1.12 |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
1.11 |
| |
|
Battlefield 3 High |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
1.07 |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
1.24 |
| |
| Bioshock
Infinite Low |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
1.01 |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
1.06 |
| |
| Bioshock
Infinite High |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
1.21 |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
1.35 |
| |
| Crysis 3
Low |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
1.05 |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
1.04 |
| |
| Crysis 3
High |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
2.80 |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
2.94 |
| |
| Call of
Duty Black Ops 2 Low |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
1.52 |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
1.38 |
| |
| Call of
Duty Black Ops 2 High |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
1.71 |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
1.73 |
| |
| Sleeping
Dogs Low |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
1.01 |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
1.05 |
| |
| Sleeping
Dogs High |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
1.04 |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
1.03 |
| |
| Skyrim Low |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
1.18 |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
1.09 |
| |
| Skyrim
High |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
1.07 |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
1.02 |
| |
| Metro:
Last Light Low |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
1.04 |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
1.01 |
| |
| Metro:
Last Light High |
| Intel Core i7-3960X Stock |
1.50 |
| Intel Core i7-3960X 4.5G |
1.56 |
| |
More is better |
[pagebreak]
Conclusion
As we already mentioned this is the first article of a series of
SLI scaling analysis with different CPUs and different numbers of graphics cards
as well as different graphics cards. At this point we want to quickly explain
what a scaling factor is. Basically it describes by how many times a certain
configuration is faster than another one. In fact we could also write that the
SLI setup is 80 percent faster than the non-SLI setup, but it's shorter to write
that with game XY we see a scaling factor of 1.80.
So far there are already some rather
interesting findings. One rather obvious thing is the fact, that consistent
scaling regarding GPU performance can only be found with theoretical benchmarks.
Referring to 3DMark we see that the overall socre is between factor 1.59 higher than with one card. Translated into
the raw GPU score we see an scaling factor of 1.81, respektively 1.83 (depending
on our CPU preset) which is usually about the
maximum scaling you get with SLI. A closer look at Unigine Heaven reveals that
in case of the basic preset scaling factor is as low as 1.24 at stoc CPU frequencies
and 1.13 with the CPU at 4.5 GHz. When it comes to the Extreme Preset then we
see that the GPU has much more influence again, which is acutally rather
obvious, since there is much higher load on the VGA(s).
Games on the other hand are a completely different story. Some of you might be
asking, why in the name of ... we ran an SLI with low resolution. Well, browsing
all the results shows, there is actually some scaling going on and we find it
interesting to see that even at low resolutions certain games benefit from a
second card. Another point is that adding a second card makes dead sure, the
VGAs aren't limiting in any case, meaning CPU limitation becomes even better
visible. But lets go back to talking about the results now. Scaling factors at
low resolutions vary from 1 to 1.52. 1 basically means, the fps didn't change at
all and 1.52 is quite a mssive jump, which bears the question why. The game in
question is Call of Duty Black Ops 2 of which we know, graphics load is very
low. If we have a closer look at the scores we see that with the CPU ran at
stock clocks.
Now lets focus on high resolution and high details, where the games cause quite
some load on the two graphics cards. In this case the lowest scaling factor we
find with Sleeping Dogs and the CPU at 4.5 GHz, where fps are by factor 1.04
higher than with one card. On the other hand there is Crysis 3, which produces
some values that look rather ridiculous at a first glance. If we look at the
scaling factor with the Intel Core i7-3960X at stock clocks then there is a
scaling factor of 2.80 and at 4.5 GHz this factor goes up to 2.94. We've cross
checked this value about 20 times in the meantime and we always get the same
result. Our explanation on this goes as follows. Since there must be a
multiplying factor we assume, there is a CPU as well as GPU bottleneck being
opened. We think that when we add two cards in the system the benchmark is not
VGA limited anymore, which is causing the CPU to kick in. We think this is
acutally possible since the scaling factor is even higher when we overclock the
CPU 4.5 GHz, which means the CPU must have a rather drastic effect on the
endresult.
To end this conclusion we try to leave you guys with at least some sort of
buying advice. Basically if you do have the funds to buy two high-end graphics
cards and then use them in SLI (apparently) it makes sense to combine these two
cards with a powerful CPU, since you're quite likely to run into CPU limitation
on certain games. On the other hand the question remains how much sense it makes
to buy two high-end cards in the first place, since not too many games are
actually well optimized for multi-card setups. Overall you'll definitely end up
with a highly futureproof setup but the benefit comes at quite a cost.
Article in English
Artikel in Deutsch
Article en français
Articolo in italiano
