Phenom II X3 720BE & CrossFire X Performance - Does it Compete?
by Gary Key on March 28, 2009 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
Left 4 Dead
This game is a blast and addictive to boot - provided you like killing hundreds of zombies while trying to take care of your teammates and sustaining high blood pressure rates. What we really like about Source engine games is their ability to run well on variety of systems. We enable all options, set AA to 2x and AF to 8x, and play back a custom timedemo of a complete game session from the Runway chapter within the Dead Air campaign.
This title also favors the Intel processors. When comparing the 720BE to the X4 940 at 1680x1050, the 940 holds a 7% average frame rate advantage in single card mode, 4% in Crossfire, and a surprising 3% in the overclocked settings. We matched our stock 720BE clock and NB speeds with the X4 940 to see if the extra core really makes a difference in this game with the multi-core rendering option enabled. It actually did with the performance improvement averaging about 2% on this particular level.
Adding a second card for CrossFire operation improves average frame rates by 17% and minimum frame rates by 8% for the 720BE. Overclocking our 720BE by 35% resulted in a 19% improvement in average frame rates and 26% in minimum frame rates.
No real surprises here; the 1920x1200 results follow the pattern set at 1680x1050 for each platform. The X4 940 holds a 6% average frame rate advantage in single card mode, 7% in Crossfire, and 5% in the overclocked settings. Adding a second card for CrossFire operation improves average frame rates by 14% and minimum frame rates by 27% for the 720BE. Overclocking the 720BE resulted in a 25% improvement in average frame rates and 21% in minimum frame rates.
Our game play experiences revealed no differences between the three platforms. Although the frame rates were lower with the Phenom II platforms, it just did not matter in this game as minimum frame rates were at 60fps or higher in our tests. The 720BE certainly offers more than enough processing power for this title.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
59 Comments
View All Comments
yyrkoon - Saturday, March 28, 2009 - link
You know I have been thinking it would be really cool if you guys did a story on *why* a specific game title performs better on various hardware. Does ID soft optimize for Intel ? AMD ? nVidia? AMD/ATI ? What about other game developers ? Could it be Microsofts "fault" ?You know, all that sort of "jazz" :)
MadMan007 - Saturday, March 28, 2009 - link
I would have liked to see idle and load power consumption numbers. I know that my PC does not run at loast at least half the time if not more so idle power consumption is important to me and matters for TCO.That's the only thing missing from this article, otherwise nice succinct writeup.
gnesterenko - Saturday, March 28, 2009 - link
Well, if I was buying a system today, I'd have to go for i7 920 by these numbers, BUT. THeres a few very interesting options coming soon. First is the new C2D from intel - the E8700 clocked at 3.5GHz. Although only a dual core, thats really really fast clocks per core and I'm sure it would OC to 4.5GHz on air like a champ considering how well the other C2Ds OC. THe other is the Phenom II 955 clocked at 3.2GHz. THis is the first quad AM3 CPU from AMD to break 3GHz barrier and should be an interesting option as well. In any case, I'd like to see another one of these articles including these two above once they come.Although either way, won't be picking a platform until I see performance numbers of the RD890 and SB800 platform from AMD. THis is going to be a merry X-mas!
TMike7 - Saturday, March 28, 2009 - link
The quality of your articles is really outstanding, i love reading them.Some time ago I read an article about memory and the conclusion was that more memory is better for improving the overall performance of a given computer system than more expensive memory.
Could You please include in your testing on DDR2 versus DDR3 one or several tests with 8Gb of DDR2-memory (2 kits of 2x2Gb). It would really be nice to see how the PhenomX3 720BE can cope with all four memory slots populated and how far it still can overclock.
Thanks
martenlarsson - Saturday, March 28, 2009 - link
He paid $400 for the entire setup excluding GPU, that's just a tad more than you pay for the cheapest i7, CPU only...Really nice article and shows you don't need a monster CPU to game. The X3 720 is looking more and more like the chip to buy.
erik006 - Saturday, March 28, 2009 - link
In the article index "opposing forces" in displayed. That should be "opposing fronts."JarredWalton - Saturday, March 28, 2009 - link
Gary's been playing the new cross-genre game that combined HL2 with RTS gameplay, I suppose. We could tell you more about it, but then we'd have to kill you.... ;-)jaggerwild - Saturday, March 28, 2009 - link
You spent four hundred on a MATX when for a few hundred more you could have bleeding edge I7 that will clock out higher? You must be a FAN BOY with yer very miture remarks!Oh yeah my momma says hello :)
abzillah - Sunday, March 29, 2009 - link
This is why I bought my phenom 720. On January 18th I got laid off work from a biotech company. I haven't had any luck finding a job. Two weeks ago I sold my 2 year old PC for $350 to a friend who's kid needed a new PC but didn't want to spend much. So now I had $350, and I got $100 for painting some stuff around his house. So, please tell me how I could get myself a core i7 for $450, unless you will give me the rest of the money for free.Yesterday I got hired part time at a hardware store and after I pay some of my credit cards, I will buy myself a 4890. You can call me a fan boy all you want, but I see it as smart economics.
I use mATX boards because I don't add anything on the board besides a video card, so the extra pci lots are not needed by me. I use my pc to surf the net, watch movies, play video games and use Microsoft Office.
iamezza - Tuesday, March 31, 2009 - link
he was being sarcastic ;)