Intel core 2 extreme qx6850 vs i7: Intel Core i7-2600 vs Core2 Extreme Q6850

Today we have in our hands the latest Intel Core 2 Extreme quad-core processor, and I know what you are thinking but no, this is not yet another extremely expensive processor featuring the same four cores with only a speed bump over the last QX6850 we looked at last time. Hmm, ok so I told a bit of a white lie there, as this is still an extremely expensive processor, but it’s not just another in a chain of speed bumps. The new Core 2 Extreme QX9650 represents Intel’s new flagship processor technology which until now was mainly known by its code-name “Penryn”, manufactured on a 45nm design process, adding fifty new SSE4 instructions, among other things.

Now, the actual QX9650 processor and other Penryn quad-cores have received its own codename which is “Yorkfield” and because this particular processor belongs to the Extreme line up, its complete name is Yorkfield XE. Similarly, future dual-core CPUs based on Penryn will go by the code-name “Wolfdale” once they are released. To complete the equation you should know that Yorkfields are really two Wolfdale chips stuck together. This is the same as with previous Kentsfield quad-core processors which in reality were just two Conroe chips stuck together in one package. This may be a bit confusing but when time to buy comes, it’s important being able to identify each different core version and know what advantages one generation of chips has over another, ultimately making the better buying decision.

The Core 2 Extreme QX9650 is the first of many products to be released using the Penryn architecture. Like the previous Core 2 Extreme QX6850, the QX9650 also works at 3.0GHz but adds a number of enhancements. Perhaps the most prominent, Intel’s 45nm High-k metal gate silicon technology, which is claimed to be an industry’s first, featuring transistors with reduced current leakage designed to decrease power consumption while also accommodating for increased clock speeds. This is a big deal considering Intel has used the conventional silicon-oxide technique since 1960.

Besides the apparent die shrink, the Penryn architecture features a faster Radix-16 divider, faster OS primitive support, improved store forwarding, split load cache enhancements, enhanced virtualization technology and enhanced dynamic acceleration technology. While all of these may sound nice in paper, in real-life terms what we do know is that this newer Core 2 architecture is faster and more efficient. We were able to observe power consumption levels that are significantly lower as well as operating temperatures. These are all aspects that we will uncover in this review, but for now let me just say that when heavily overclocked the QX9650, it produced stress temperatures that were comparable to a dual-core Conroe processor operating at its default frequency.

When we move on to benchmarking the QX9650, it will extremely easy to spot the differences and advantages Penryn offers today because the QX9650 and the QX6850 (65nm Kentsfield) both operate at 3.0GHz and use the same front side bus speeds, so we will be putting them head to head for comparison. Also to note, the QX9650 does receive a L2 cache boost at 12MB versus only 8MB found in the QX6850.

Memory Peformance

Test System Specs: Hardware
— Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650 (3. 00GHz) LGA775
— Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6850 (3.00GHz) LGA775
— Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 (2.66GHz) LGA775
— Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 (2.40GHz) LGA775
— Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800 (2.93GHz) LGA775
— Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 (2.66GHz) LGA775

— x2 1024MB Corsair XMS PC3-10600 CAS7 Module(s)
— x2 1024MB Corsair XMS PC2-6400 CAS4 Module(s)

— ASUS P5E3 Deluxe (Intel X38)
— ASUS P5K Deluxe (Intel P35)

— OCZ GameXStream (700 watt)

— Seagate 500GB 7200RPM (Serial ATA II)

— ASUS GeForce 8800 GTX (768MB)

Software
— Microsoft Windows XP Pro 32bit (SP2)
— Nvidia Forceware (169.04)
— Intel System Drivers (8.4.0)

In terms of memory performance the QX9650 should be no better than the QX6850, however because we were unable to re-test the QX6850 using the Intel X38 chipset, what you see here is the QX9650 taking the lead thanks to the use of faster DDR3-1333 memory. As you can see, in SiSoft the memory bandwidth reached an impressive 7.5GB/s whereas the QX6850 was limited to 6.2GB/s by the DDR2-800 memory. Similar performance margins were also witnessed in PCmark2005 and MemTach.

CPU Performance

Interestingly despite being clocked at the same frequency, the QX9650 appears to be much faster in the SiSoft Whetstone iSSE3 test when compared to the QX6850. Of course the QX9650 has been tested on an updated platform, though we never expected that this would have any impact on these results. The Dhrystone ALU performance was much closer between these two processors, though the QX9650 was again faster. Moving on to the SiSoft Multimedia testing we found that the new QX9650 was no faster than the older QX6850.

The Super PI results saw both the QX9650 and the QX6850 complete the 512KB calculation in 7 seconds, while the QX9650 did complete the 1MB calculation 1 second faster than the QX6850. The PCmark2005 processor performance results were again much the same.

Application Performance

The new QX9650 provided a reasonably impressive performance gain over the QX6850 in Adobe Photoshop as it was 13% faster. It is worth mentioning that the QX6850 holds a similar performance lead over the Q6600, but there is a 600MHz discrepancy between those two.

The QX9650 provided a marginal 3% gain in Pinnacle Studio, though this is still a positive result.

The QX9650 was back in winning form defeating the QX6850 by a 13% margin in QuickTime Pro as it completed the test 44 seconds faster than the QX6850.

3D Studio Max allowed the QX9650 to provide an 8% performance gain when compared to the QX6850 (3 second saving).

The above results are measured in KB/s and as you can see the QX9650 was impressive as it sustained a throughput speed of 2162KB/s, making it 16% faster than the QX6850. Those that often work with large compressed files will no doubt find a 16% performance gain very worthwhile.

The Cinebench test was the only one included here that didn’t award the QX9650 with a clear performance advantage over the QX6850. While the QX9650 was faster, the margin was insignificant.

Gaming Performance

We did not expect to see any real performance gains here as most games are not yet quad-core optimized (or multi-core for that matter). Although we have not included any really new games, even the latest and greatest titles show no real advantages. At this point every quad-core gamer out there is banking on the fact that Crysis should fully support quad-core processors despite a total lack of evidence so far. Interestingly the QX9650 did show a slight performance advantage when compared to the QX6850, so perhaps that extra 4MB of cache is coming into play here.

Overclocking, Power Consumption

The Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650 proved to be an exceptional overclocker as we were able to push the processor to 4. 0GHz using a basic air-cooled setup. In order to reach this frequency the FSB speed was increased from 333MHz to 400MHz, leaving the clock multiplier intact at 10x, and then using a slight CPU voltage adjustment (up to 1.4375v). While this may sound a bit extreme, the processor stress temperature went from around 55 degrees at 3.0GHz to just 65 degrees at 4.0GHz with the extra voltage.

We found the QX9650 to consume 23% less power when compared to the QX6850. In fact the QX9650 used 7% less power than the Q6600 which carries 4MB less of cache and operates 600MHz slower. We also saw the QX9650 using only 12% more power than the X6800 despite featuring a similar operating frequency and two more cores! So we can safely say that the efficiency of the QX9650 (and the Penryn architecture) is by far the best we have seen out of any Core 2 processor thus far.

Final Thoughts

The new Penryn architecture has proven to be a worthy successor to the original Conroe as it offers better performance while significantly reducing operating temperatures and power consumption levels. This update is certainly going to help bolster the Core 2 line up and with many more Penryn-based processors on the way, there seems to be no stopping at Intel.

Although the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650 is a seriously impressive bit of technology, it is also incredibly expensive at $1000. During the first quarter of 2008, Intel plans to release new quad-core processors that will replace the current Q6600 and Q6700. There will also be a number of new Wolfdale dual-core desktop processors that are expected to range from 2.66GHz to 3.16GHz using the current 1333MHz FSB and a 6MB L2 cache. Finally the QX9650 itself will also be replaced early next year by the QX9770 which will operate at a bumped 3.20GHz, keeping the 12MB L2 cache, but running a staggering 1600MHz FSB. This upgrade will require the upcoming Intel X48 chipset that we have been hearing about.

So while the original Conroe architecture has been the foundation for countless Core 2 processors over the past year, it will soon begin to be phased out by a sea of next generation Penryn processors. Already we have discovered that this new architecture is capable of at least 4GHz without having to implement any kind of extreme cooling measures.

This being the case, it is a little disappointing to find that Intel is playing the conservative card only pushing the QX9650 to 3GHz when it is capable of so much more.

The (dual-core) E6700 was released over a year ago and this processor came clocked at 2.66GHz while we were easily able to reach 3.66GHz with it. Since then Intel has pushed Core 2 Duos to just 3GHz. With no real competition from AMD just yet it would seem that Intel has no need of pushing things any further which would also explain the delay of the 3.2GHz QX9770.

The QX9650 is a fantastic processor and in fact it is now the fastest desktop processor money can buy. It is hard to speak about value when reviewing any Intel Extreme product as this series has never been about that. Much like the AMD AthlonFX range, the Intel Extreme is simply meant to offer enthusiasts a processor with an unlocked multiplier and (at the time of its respective release) the fastest thing money can buy.

Well, the QX9650 has an unlocked multiplier and it is the fastest processor out there, so it has achieved all objectives then. In a nutshell the QX9650 offers more speed, more overclocking headroom, more efficiency, while creating less heat and less noise! How about that?