Wednesday, April 18th 2007

Intel Penryn 3.33GHz Quad-Core Benchmarks Released

Intel unveiled the first benchmark numbers of its recently announced Penryn quad-core processor, which runs at 3.33GHz, at the IDF event in Beijing, China. Intel presented the benchmark numbers of a Penryn 45nm quad-core processor running at 3.3GHz with a 1333MHz FSB and 12MB cache versus an Intel Core 2 Extreme processor QX6800 introduced last week at 2.93GHz with 1066FSB and 8MB cache. Another dual-core version of the Penryn family named Wolfdale with 6MB L2 cache was also included in the comparison. Intel said that the three test systems were configured with identical hardware, including Intel D975XBX2 BadAxe 2 motherboard, single GeForce 8800 GTX graphics card, 2GB of DDR2-800 memory with 5-5-5-15 timings, and a 32-bit version of Windows Vista Ultimate. The results are available below:

Source: CdrInfo
Add your own comment

13 Comments on Intel Penryn 3.33GHz Quad-Core Benchmarks Released

#1
ghost101
DivX 6.6 Alpha, SSE4 enhancements kicking in there? Looks promising.
Posted on Reply
#2
HaZe303
Wow... this cpu will be great for gaming... Look at the HL2 difference between Penryn and conroe... amazing..
Posted on Reply
#3
malware
Don't forget that the Kentsfield QX6800 CPU is clocked at 2.93GHz, while the Penryn CPUs work at 3.33GHz...
Posted on Reply
#4
WarEagleAU
Bird of Prey
Awesome numbers. Hell, the Penryn Dual Core is right up there and all of these. Great for gaming, that is, if these numbers arent fudged. We all know AMD and Intel tend to fudge them though.

With that said, still looks awesome and I cant wait for them to come out.
Posted on Reply
#5
pt
not a suicide-bomber
by: malware
Don't forget that the Kentsfield QX6800 CPU is clocked at 2.93GHz, while the Penryn CPUs work at 3.33GHz...
i bet if you clock the qx6800 to 3.3 you will have very close results :)
Posted on Reply
#6
RickyG512
numbers dont tell much as cpu speed is different

other than 45nm, wat is different with the penryn that makes it better ?
Posted on Reply
#7
ghost101
Anandtech's final words
Obviously we'll reserve final judgments on Penryn for our official review of the CPU, but these initial results look very promising. We would expect to see clock for clock Penryn vs. Conroe improvements to be in the 5 - 10% range at minimum depending on the application. Factor in higher clock speeds and you can expect our CPU performance charts to shift up by about 20% by the end of this year.

Intel has shown its cards, now it's time for AMD to respond with those long overdue Barcelona tests...
Even if you do factor in clock differences, there is a clock for clock increase in performance. Something which is most evident in the divx test.

Even the need for a clock for clock comparison is unnecessary sometimes. If a CPU can be clocked higher, why shouldnt it recieve the credit of doing so? Say in the future, barcelona turns out to be better clock for clock however penryn is able to beat it due to higher clock speed, which is the better CPU?
Posted on Reply
#8
malware
by: RickyG512


other than 45nm, wat is different with the penryn that makes it better ?
Penryn features new SSE4 instructions.
Posted on Reply
#9
Casheti
One day, quad core will be mainstream.

Oh how I wait for that day...
Posted on Reply
#10
ghost101
by: Casheti
One day, quad core will be mainstream.

Oh how I wait for that day...
Intel are hoping that 49% of sales in the 2nd half of 2009 will be quad cores.
Posted on Reply
#11
Casheti
by: ghost101
Intel are hoping that 49% of sales in the 2nd half of 2009 will be quad cores.
If those price cuts for Q3 2007 are real, I will definitely try to go Quad Core.

Either that or a HD 2900 :p
Posted on Reply
#12
RickyG512
Q3, is that septemeber or later and no earlier ?
Posted on Reply
#13
overcast
by: RickyG512
Q3, is that septemeber or later and no earlier ?
3rd Fiscal Quarter is April 1st 2007 - June 30 2007
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment