The Intel Core i7 860 Review

by Anand Lal Shimpi on September 18, 2009 12:00 AM EST

DivX 8.5.3 with Xmpeg 5.0.3

Our DivX test is the same DivX / XMpeg 5.03 test we've run for the past few years now, the 1080p source file is encoded using the unconstrained DivX profile, quality/performance is set balanced at 5 and enhanced multithreading is enabled:

DivX 6.8.5 w/ Xmpeg 5.0.3 - MPEG-2 to DivX Transcode

Lynnfield inches towards the crown with the 860; it's closer to the 870 than the Core i5 750, and that's to be expected. The biggest gains here are due to Hyper Threading, the clock speed is just icing on the cake.

x264 HD Video Encoding Performance

Graysky's x264 HD test uses the publicly available x264 codec (open source implementation of H.264) to encode a 4Mbps 720p MPEG-2 source. The focus here is on quality rather than speed, thus the benchmark uses a 2-pass encode and reports the average frame rate in each pass.

x264 HD Encode Benchmark - 720p MPEG-2 to x264 Transcode

The Core i7 860 continues to do better than the i7 920, even if by only a small margin. As expected, it's closer to the 870 than it is to the i5 750 thanks to Hyper Threading.

x264 HD Encode Benchmark - 720p MPEG-2 to x264 Transcode

 

Windows Media Encoder 9 x64 Advanced Profile

In order to be codec agnostic we've got a Windows Media Encoder benchmark looking at the same sort of thing we've been doing in the DivX and x264 tests, but using WME instead.

Windows Media Encoder 9 x64 - Advanced Profile Transcode

The race is close here, there's only a 2 second difference between the Core i7 870 and the Core i5 750. The 860 lands closer to the 750 this time.

Adobe Photoshop CS4 Performance 3D Rendering Performance
Comments Locked

121 Comments

View All Comments

  • DigitalFreak - Saturday, September 19, 2009 - link

    He's the troll formerly known as snakeoil. Just ignore him and he'll go away.
  • the zorro - Saturday, September 19, 2009 - link

    why, did you ran out of arguments?
  • strikeback03 - Monday, September 21, 2009 - link

    No, just following this proverb

    "Do not argue with a fool, those watching may not know the difference between you and he"
  • DigitalFreak - Saturday, September 19, 2009 - link

    Arguing with someone who is clearly delusional is pointless. On the other hand, if you're mentally retarded then you have my sympathy.
  • Troll Trolling - Saturday, September 19, 2009 - link

    Ok, let's do your way.
    In the magic lands of Ecualia, there was a magic blacksmith cyclope, he forged the Core i7 860 such way it would be better than BloomField.

    Beat my argument troll.
  • the zorro - Saturday, September 19, 2009 - link

    the story is even worst than that:
    somewhere at satan clara's intel's HQ the evil orcs at intel decided that free overclocking was not profitable so they decided to create the turbo crap story, and call it a 'feature' so this way they would use all available overclocking headroom in the cpu and begin charging for it.
    so they are killing free overclocking for intel users.
    now you have to pay for overclocking because lynnfield turbo overclocking is consuming all the overclocking ability of the cpu
    now intel can make this turbo overclocking more aggressive in some cpus and charge more for it.

    but there is another problem because intel's orcs betrayed the evil nvidia warlock who sweared revenge and now intel cpus are underperforming when paired with an nvida graphics card.
  • SpaceRanger - Saturday, September 19, 2009 - link

    We gotta get a "Do Not Feed The Trolls" sign for the end of every page posted here at Anandtech.
  • jordanclock - Saturday, September 19, 2009 - link

    Not really... Just look at the numbers. The i5 750 is outperforming the PII 965 in almost every case. And when the 965 pulls ahead, it's not enough to justify the increase in price and huge increase in power draw.
  • Eeqmcsq - Saturday, September 19, 2009 - link

    > Not really... Just look at the numbers. The i5 750 is outperforming the PII 965 in almost every case
    ... when given room to Turbo. When not given room to Turbo, then the winner is...? Based on the limited number of Turbo off benchmarks available, my theory is that the i5 750 will fall below the 965 with no room to Turbo. I'm not completely convinced yet that the i5 750 is the definitive winner over the 965. CPU comparison's aren't that clearcut anymore with the variableness of Turbo mode.

    On a side note, I do agree the price tag of the 965 is certainly too high, even if the 965 is hypothetically better than the 750 under heavy load. Maybe AMD is fighting the 750 with the slightly lower priced PII 955, which anyone can multiplier bump into a 965.
  • yacoub - Saturday, September 19, 2009 - link

    How many of you trolls are there? Turbo is on by default, so the end user is going to have the advantage of it all the time. The only reason benchmarks were run without Turbo is for the three of you out there who are going to turn it off... no wait, you're not even going to buy it in the first place because you're just here to troll.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now