PDA

View Full Version : i7 Extreme 965 processor



kilo delta
December 14th, 2008, 06:03
Ted, have you had the opportunity to test the new i7 965 vs the QX9770 yet? I'm going to be building a new rig in the New Year and will most likely go for this chip coupled with an Evga X58 mobo and 12gb of memory. I'll probably go with the HD4870X2 for gfx.
I'm selling my QX9650 and QX9770 chips to help fund the new build........... and probably both my Alienware M9700 and M9750 notebooks too ( in order to fund a FSX capable quadcore M17 notebook with dual HD4870 cards).

txnetcop
December 14th, 2008, 12:42
No I didn't test the 965 core. I was astounded at how well the 920 OC'd and how big the margin was between it and the QX9650 since the 920 is not an Extreme Core. Looking forward to your results
Ted

kilo delta
December 14th, 2008, 13:07
Thanks for the reply, Ted. Let's hope that i7 is the silver bullet that us FSX simmers have been waiting for:isadizzy: :)

FAC257
December 15th, 2008, 15:16
SimHq did a pretty nice little write up on the I7 and simming performance a few days ago. FSX was one of the sims looked at.

http://www.simhq.com/_technology2/technology_111a.html

MCDesigns
December 15th, 2008, 15:32
SimHq did a pretty nice little write up on the I7 and simming performance a few days ago. FSX was one of the sims looked at.

http://www.simhq.com/_technology2/technology_111a.html

Thanks for the link to that depressing read :banghead::censored::censored::banghead: :bs:

Here I was 'hoping" to finally get enough headroom to fly the sim like it should be flown, oh well there's always next year :isadizzy:

Butcherbird17
December 15th, 2008, 19:23
I'd like to see these same test with the systems overclocked and at higher resolutions. I bet the core i7 will start to shine. And out of all the games/sims they used only fsX is the most demanding on the cpu. They should have used Crysis as that game will bring any system to its knee's at Highest settings. Heck I have SH4 on my laptop (in sig) with everything at high settings and it runs smooth as silk.:kilroy:
Hey MC, next year is only a couple weeks away.:) Getting a Core i7 system will be a big upgrade over what your running now, and fsX will be a whole new sim to you.

Joe

kilo delta
December 16th, 2008, 00:58
I was hoping that they'd have tested at higher resolutions too. Still...i'm rather disappointed at those results as I was hoping for a much bigger margin in performance. I'm thinking now of holding off on the i7 build for the time being ...at least until I get a "hands on" test of the i7 965 at work.My current system is an excellent gaming rig as is (should be considering I spent around €7k on it!!) although I'd like to get more performance out of FSX.

txnetcop
December 16th, 2008, 02:32
Guys the testing we did at TechCorp showed substantially better numbers than these. Now when OC'd the frame rates even in FSX came up, but there seem to be some limiters in FSX that keep it from really taking advantage of the new quad cores capability. It has to be in the programming and I doubt that Micorsoft is going to put anything else in the way of effort into FSX itself. That being said our test results were much better. I think the i7 Cores show outstanding progress in a gaming chip...I know, I can hear it now, tell me that Ted didn't just call FSX a game:costumes:
Ted

BTW these are only the introductory Nehalem processors-it gets even better in the second quarter of 2009.

FLighT01
December 16th, 2008, 03:51
...I know, I can hear it now, tell me that Ted didn't just call FSX a game:costumes:

But it is just a game, a deadly serious, all or nothing, life or death, gray hair inducing, mental meltdown, neurosis producing, halucinogenic paranoia, artery clogging..............piece of gaming software :banghead: :isadizzy: :icon_lol:.

MCDesigns
December 16th, 2008, 13:23
I'd like to see these same test with the systems overclocked and at higher resolutions. I bet the core i7 will start to shine. And out of all the games/sims they used only fsX is the most demanding on the cpu. They should have used Crysis as that game will bring any system to its knee's at Highest settings. Heck I have SH4 on my laptop (in sig) with everything at high settings and it runs smooth as silk.:kilroy:
Hey MC, next year is only a couple weeks away.:) Getting a Core i7 system will be a big upgrade over what your running now, and fsX will be a whole new sim to you.

Joe

Joe, I meant 2010, as in even newer hardware :banghead: Any of the current Core2 will be a big upgrade over what I have, but I am basing my purchasing on what all the others are getting out of the sim based on their hardware. I have to agree with Ted, there is some funky programming in FSX. I have paid attention to a plethora of posts on what simmers are running and their settings and there is no common denominator, results are all over the board. I have seen simmers with much better systems than mine get worse performance.

I was hoping for a nice gain on performance with the core i7s, guess I will stick with a Core2 duo for now as I can't justify the little performance gain over the price and then pray for the best :banghead::isadizzy:.

I guess I could just drive over to Ted's give him the money and say "what can you do for me", LOL :costumes:

txnetcop
December 16th, 2008, 13:35
Hey Michael I know what you are looking for. Wait until February. I have someone a lot smarter than me looking at what it would take to put FSX in supercharge mode. By then two more i7s should be coming out.
Ted

MCDesigns
December 16th, 2008, 17:05
I have someone a lot smarter than me
Ted

Is that even possible??!! :redf:

Thanks Ted, feb is actually the deadline I gave myself for a new rig. I have a new longterm design project starting with the release of a new game then.

Wiens
December 16th, 2008, 17:40
I have someone a lot smarter than me looking....................
Ted


It's Donna!!

Kevin :d

txnetcop
December 16th, 2008, 18:37
It's Donna!!

Kevin :d
Dang how did you figure it out??? By the way Kevin thanks for giving away my secret as to who the real brains of this outfit really is...hehehe
Ted

SolarEagle
December 30th, 2008, 19:01
Did you guys see these benchmarks? Sure seems SimHQ doesn't know how to do proper benchmarks as I certainly can't imagine i7 having a 0% clock per clock gain in FSX as they indicate. I was estimating 30% and these results seem to confirm that, ranging from a 21% to 50% gain at equal clocks.....

http://www.ocforums.com/showpost.php?p=5878944&postcount=4

Here's one benchmark of sorts:
i7 920 @ 2.8 vs. q9550 @ 2.83
* All sliders full max except traffic, which is zeroed out
* 4GB ram & ATI 4850 video in both
* In B-737 cockpit, full wide view, sittling on default Runway at krno with fair wx in mid-day

q9550= average of 27 fps
i7 920= average of 40 fps

Most games don't see much improvement with Nehalem, but it looks like those who predicted that MSFS X would benefit were absolutely right.

http://www.ocforums.com/showpost.php?p=5879770&postcount=12

Just did a FRAPs test on a local flight over Seattle in F-18 at 1500 ft & 300 knots over the same route. Nehalem still rules but the margin was a bit lower this time:

Q9550 @2.83Ghz= 17fps average in fraps
i7 920 @ 2.8 Ghz= 21 fps average in fraps

That's a 23% increase in frame rate for i7, which isn't as good as the 50% I saw sitting on the runway, but lots of tests will be necessary to bracket the performance difference.

The i7 ran much smoother, though, and produced a considerably-better flight experience. I suspect the Nehalem will gain ground at higher Ghz, due to better memory handling. I hope to have mine up to 3.8Ghz later in week to do more tests

http://www.ocforums.com/showpost.php?p=5882993&postcount=36
http://nextlevelhardware.com/FSX.jpg