Intel Core i7-965: 50% more performance than QX9770
According to some reviewers who had their hands on the upcoming Bloomfield, the new CPU runs great. But how huge improvement it is compared to today’s top dog?
In a recent document sent to partners, Intel pointed out that when comparing Core i7-965 with QX9770, we can get 52% more 3D gaming performance, 38% more rendering performance and 41% more movie editing and conversion performance. (Core i7-965 platform: X58, DDR3 3G, Discrete VGA card, QX9770 platform unknown.)
Yes, the numbers are quite vague, but it is directly coming from Intel. Compared to a more expensive product, we can’t expect more. (QX9770>1450USD, Core i7-965=999USD)
October 6th, 2008 at 9:26 pm
52% more gaming performance? I hope that’s true!
October 6th, 2008 at 10:49 pm
52%!!well!
October 6th, 2008 at 11:50 pm
Nice! good to hear, but hell, both are EXPENSIVE…btw please do a spell check or something
October 7th, 2008 at 4:11 am
I hope they are not just saying a 50% boost because they can run 8 threads instead of 4… I’ll have to see some benchmarks before I am impressed.
October 7th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
not gonna happen
its simply a marketing technique that all companies use, wait until the real numbers are out you gullible people
October 7th, 2008 at 6:04 pm
What complete rubbish!
Remember that 3D games are GPU limited, not CPU limited. If the CPU can deliver an extra 40% in movie editting using 8 threads instead of 4 then AT BEST it will deliver 10-20% extra performance on a single threaded task. And apply that to a 3D game that is GPU contrained, and typically single threaded, then the performance gains will be 10% at best.
To get “52%”, then they must be using multi-threaded game and a GPU setup, ie. resolution and effects, which is not GPU contrained, e.g. 640×480 or some other such silly resolution.
I would have liked to think that the prestigous Expreview reporters would have kicked the tires on those stats.
October 7th, 2008 at 6:17 pm
also wonder if it’s true, anyway, thanks for the info
October 7th, 2008 at 8:40 pm
What you all are saying here is this is only CPU bound figures. I for one actually believe Intel’s claims in some extent as I’ve seen such claims many times before when they rolled out new platforms. Remember, we’re talking about a whole new platform here not just new CPUs. Memory controller on CPU, higher performing interconnects, a whole new memory architecture,… all this should account for far more than just what you all here are considering it to be only GPU limiting processes. What worries me though is that while figures can speak for themselves why upgrade would be much appreciated in HPC environments and within enthusiasts community, upgrading will be utterly expensive. Most 1st tier mobo manufacturers gave us previews of their upcoming i7 mobos and one thing is for sure. It won’t be cheap and not for a long while. Mobos will probably sell for $200+, DDR3 memory is about 2.5x more expensive than DDR2… so while CPUs alone might give better bang for buck i wonder how long it will take for the while systems to come even near what Intel rolled out in last 3 years.
October 7th, 2008 at 11:33 pm
I am definitely will not think about this one, too expensive and with that amount of money, would rather buy a cheap but great performing rig, then use the left overs for a VIA Nano computer rig for low power usage. Really, any cpu that goes over 300 U.S dollars for me is just another one of those “my penis is bigger than yours” way of thinking, even if I had the money, I would rather spend it on other things than a sitting computer that no one gets to see but me.
October 8th, 2008 at 7:23 pm
Re: “52% more 3D gaming performance”
Ugh, this is a big LIE. It’s only 3DMark Vantage! In real games it is FAR from 50%, it’s even SLOWER than QX9770 in some cases…
Look at here: http://en.hardspell.com/doc/showcont.asp?news_id=4135&pageid=3367
October 8th, 2008 at 9:27 pm
Yeah sure, 50% gaming performance increase in benchmarks. In actual games? Not much of a difference.
October 11th, 2008 at 11:06 pm
52% more 3D gaming performance
Not gonna happen even intel agrees, Core i7 is more for servers than anything else!!!
October 13th, 2008 at 5:01 am
dont for get it says “can”, rather than “you will”. in regular gaming, i dont think you’d see a difference.
April 15th, 2011 at 1:35 pm
Between me and my husband we’ve owned more MP3 players over the years than I can count, including Sansas, iRivers, iPods (classic & touch), the Ibiza Rhapsody, etc. But, the last few years I’ve settled down to one line of players. Why? Because I was happy to discover how well-designed and fun to use the underappreciated (and widely mocked) Zunes are.
February 3rd, 2012 at 6:57 pm
Intel Core i7-965: 50% more performance than QX9770 – Expreview.com I was recommended this blog by my cousin. I’m not sure whether this post is written by him as nobody else know such detailed about my difficulty. You’re incredible! Thanks! your article about Intel Core i7-965: 50% more performance than QX9770 – Expreview.com Best Regards Andy Cindy