Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6850: first impressions
Now that we found out that the differences between the new
Core 2 Extreme QX6850 and the former leader Core 2 Extreme QX6800 are
about support for the FSB 1333 MHz (instead of 1066 MHz) and secondly
about the multiplier which is now equal to 9? (versus 11? in QX6800 and
10? in QX6700), which in in the end affects the increase of the clock
speed up to 3.0 GHz (versus 2.93 in its predecessor, and 2.66 GHz in
QX6700).
Test configuration
|
Bus
|
PCI-Express
|
|
CPU
|
|
|
MB
|
|
|
Memory
|
Corsair XMS Xpert DDRII-800 2 x 1Gb
|
|
Video
|
AMD Radeon X1950XT
|
|
OS
|
WinXP + SP2 + DirectX 9.0c
|
|
PSU
|
|
Needless to say, it would be a good idea to present an
investigation of the overclocking capability of QX6850 as well as
QX6800 which is close at the clock speeds, but unfortunately because of
the shortage of time we have to be confined with the scope of the
tests. The specifics of the test configuration does not let us run a
detailed research and adjust the CPU clock speeds. So we have to merely
promise a presentation of detailed results in the forthcoming
publications.
Therefore, our today's task made more complex due to the
scarce volume of test results is actually not about the re-evaluation
of leadership on the market of desktop PCs which has belonged to Core 2
Extreme QX6800 even without today's CPU in question. Today, we won't be
able to estimate the advantages which are seen on using a CPU of the
higher system bus speed 1333 MHz.
Of course, we won't be able to compare processors of different
clock speeds in a "brute-force" way - we only have to estimate the
"percentage" of performance scattering of results for the chips QX6700
and QX6850 at the most characteristic test applications. Again, we
won't be able to take the 20% difference in FSB speeds as the
reference, or ~12% difference in clock speeds (and even to account for
the different multipliers at the same time!) - the times of a linear
"megahertz races" are well in the past. So today we are publishing the
data which is absolute and weakly connected to the possibility to
compare data on QX6850, or, if you like, a data template for detailed
comparison.
First, synthetic benchmarks. The CPU test integrated into the
3DMark 2006.
The key CPU tests of SiSoft Sandra 2007 Lite.
Tests of matrix multiplication following the AES algorithm of
ScienceMark.
The key tests in CrystalMark.
Encoding video data with Windows Media Encoder.
Finally, estimation of data compression rate with benchmarks
integrated into WinRAR and 7ZIP.
Repeating it again: today, there can't be any quantitative
comparative data on comparing the results of CPU tests which are so
different at clock speeds and FSB speeds. However, some interesting
results can be seen even from today's material. For instance, the
maximum difference is seen in video encoding and archiving - perhaps
because these tests are originally optimized for multi-core CPUs. Also
impressive is the gap in results in a number of synthetic tests, but we
would need an additional investigation to find out which parameter made
the most contribution to the performance boost - the clock speed or the
FSB speed.
Of course, there were no surprises: in any case, Intel Core 2
Extreme QX6850 will now occupy the top-ranking position in the
hierarchy of the company's chips for desktop PCs. It is highly probable
that for some time it will be able competing on par with new
"non-extreme" novelties with FSB 1333 MHz or, quite possibly, clock
speeds over 3 GHz due to the unlocked multiplier, the adjustability of
the bus speed, and other overclocking options. By the way, according to
some information that has appeared in the Internet, QX6850 has proved
successful at overclocking to clock speeds over 5 GHz.
A more detailed investigation into Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6850
at our lab will certainly reveal its overclocking capability,
experiments with DDR3 memory, and most importantly will refine the
numerical gap of the new flagship from its brethren and the most
immediate competitors by AMD. Hopefully, we won't have to wait long to
the continuation.
 |
Top Stories: |
 |
 |
|
MoBo:
| |
|
|
VGA Card:
|
|
|
|
CPU & Memory:
|
|
