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

And we're done. DivX, historically a stronghold for AMD's Phenom II processors (at least compared to their price-competitive Penryn counterparts) is faster on the Core i5 750 than on the Phenom II X4 965 BE. What's wrong with that?

The i5 750 costs $199, the 965 BE costs $245. Intel is selling you more transistors for less than AMD is for once.

x264 HD Video Encoding Performance

Graysky's x264 HD test uses the publicly available x264 codec (open source alternative to 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

In the first pass AMD is quite competitive, outpacing the i5 750, but when we get to the actual encode:

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

It's close, but the cheaper i5 750 is faster than the Phenom II X4 965 BE once again; Hyper Threading keeps the i7 920 ahead.

 

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

AMD is about 6% faster than the i5 750 here, it looks like the Phenom II does have some hope left for it. Let's see how the rest unfolds...

Adobe Photoshop CS4 Performance 3D Rendering Performance
Comments Locked

343 Comments

View All Comments

  • HexiumVII - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link

    I must say that Lynnfield is the best stock processor ever. It will o/c itself without you having to touch it at all. Nearly perfect for the masses. I absolutely can't wait for the notebook incarnation.
  • ClagMaster - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link

    The performance of these processors is what I thought they would be based on your May Preview Article. Its great the NDA is lifted and we can now see what this processor can really do.

    This is hardly a Celeron. I know a troll in earlier Lynnfield/P55 that should be eating crow.
  • Apahutec - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link

    Not sure what "core parking" priorities are (reduce power consumption by grouping tasks on active CPUs, or tune performance by taking into account cache trashing in scheduler decisions), but it sounds like it could even be beneficial on my Core 2 Quad: single socket, no HT, but two Core2 Duo (each with its own L2 cache) glued together.
  • erple2 - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link

    Sounds like it, but the logic that controls that on the CPU is on the CPU, and uses up a couple million transistors. That would require a re-spin of the Core 2 parts (which, given the P55 platform release, I think is a safe bet won't happen), however.
  • Obsy - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link

    I don't get how Turbo Boost ends "dual-core or quad-core?" I know that an on-die IGP is a selling point for the upcoming 32nm dual cores, but wouldn't they be clocked higher than these quads and have Turbo Boost too? There will be dual cores clocked higher than quads again. Or is Intel not clocking their dual cores past the speeds of quads?
  • macs - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link

    Would be interesting an article about P55 mobo with nf200 chip and 2 gpu...
  • Ryan Smith - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link

    We talked to NVIDIA about that scenario a couple of weeks ago. A NF200 chip would not make a significant difference in performance, which is why they're letting manufacturers go ahead and just split lanes with a straight-up bridge chip.
  • Darkanyons - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link

    Thanks for this great article!!
  • Tomzi - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link

    Do the PCIe controller's voltage demands impose stricter limits on undervolting in the case of Lynnfield processors compared to Bloomfield? I can run my i7 920 at stock frequncies undervolted to 0.9xx V VCore. How much voltage (power consumption) reduction can we expect from the an i5 750?

    This might not be a hot topic so close to the release of the new chips when everyone is focused on top performance comparisons but I've always been interested in undervolting/clocking and would like to see a more complete picture.
  • Tomzi - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link

    750 and 870 undervolted by ~0.1V reported on silentpcreview.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now