1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

CPU Core i5 750 disappointed with performance

Discussion in 'Tech Support' started by Thermal5, 15 Sep 2009.

  1. Thermal5

    Thermal5 R.I.P

    Joined:
    3 May 2009
    Posts:
    182
    Likes Received:
    3
    Is it just because the i5's are so new and not optimized yet the fact that it seems less responsive than my older Core 2 Duo E8400 and 4 GB DDR 800 ram because I seem to be suffering from a performance drop.

    Now all games are just as playable and work fine, but the performance of the i5 has disappointed me a little, and I wondered if I should really suffer a performance hit instead of an increase in performance.

    Basically Core 2 Duo E8400 3000 mhz, 4GB DDR2 800 mhz ram, GTX 275 = 16813 points in 3DMark 06

    Core i5 2666 mhz, 4 GB DDR3 1333 mhz ram, GTX 275 = 16154 points in 3DMark 06

    That's not normal is it? Granted the i5 is 334 mhz slower than the E8400 but even when I enable Turbo on the i5 which takes it to 3200 mhz nothing changes.

    Anyone else got comparable benchmarks results after upgrading?
     
  2. thehippoz

    thehippoz What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    19 Dec 2008
    Posts:
    5,780
    Likes Received:
    174
    yeah thermal.. the e8400 was a gaming beast =] least for single card systems

    haven't messed with the newer socket, but I wouldn't doubt it's not much of an upgrade, bit already showed the i7 still the best if your buying new
     
  3. Thermal5

    Thermal5 R.I.P

    Joined:
    3 May 2009
    Posts:
    182
    Likes Received:
    3
    I totally agree with ya there, it was fantastic at gaming, I just got the upgrade bug and would assume that the i5 and 4 GB DDR3 ram should still be faster though?
     
  4. thehippoz

    thehippoz What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    19 Dec 2008
    Posts:
    5,780
    Likes Received:
    174
    well probably not anything noticeable.. saw the numbers in that article and they were running 1680x.. at 1080p especially in games like crysis the gpu plays a bigger role
     
  5. Thermal5

    Thermal5 R.I.P

    Joined:
    3 May 2009
    Posts:
    182
    Likes Received:
    3
    So have I shot myself in the foot by upgrading, because right now I feel a tad stupid! lol
     
  6. oasked

    oasked Stuck in (better) mud

    Joined:
    24 Aug 2005
    Posts:
    4,092
    Likes Received:
    75
    No, because more games are taking advantage of multi-core systems. Just try playing GTA IV on your old and new systems and you'll see what I mean. ;)
     
  7. Thermal5

    Thermal5 R.I.P

    Joined:
    3 May 2009
    Posts:
    182
    Likes Received:
    3
    I'll see how GTA IV runs on it at some point then, I did play GTA IV on my old system and it ran really well, no slowdown at all but if it's optimized for Quad Core then I'll probably see a difference :)

    Not sure if I'll be able to tell a noticeable difference though (or will I?) because it's been ages since I played it on the E8400 and won't be able to test it on that now anyway as it's been sold
     
  8. Thermal5

    Thermal5 R.I.P

    Joined:
    3 May 2009
    Posts:
    182
    Likes Received:
    3
    One thing I will say though as I've just mentioned to another forum member in PM, that current games such as Fallout 3 and Burnout Paradise all seem to be more responsive and run better on the E8400 which is kind of wrong isn't it!, shouldn't they run better on my new i5?

    Wonder if the lack of hyper-threading on the i5's is actually more of a performance hit than first thought!
     
  9. smc8788

    smc8788 Multimodder

    Joined:
    23 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    5,974
    Likes Received:
    272
    Eh? You've still got 4 cores, which is 2 more than the E8400 had. Having 8 threads in a game won't help you any more.

    From the sounds of it you were expecting a massive jump in gaming performance just from a CPU upgrade, which ain't gonna happen, and if that's the only reason you upgraded then perhaps you should have taken a closer look at the reviews. From a layman's point of view, then yes, the i5 should be noticeably better, but I wouldn't be surprised if you were GPU limited anyway (depending on your resolution, obviously).

    For starters there's absolutely no point whatsoever in going by synthetic benchmarks (especially 3DMark). For all intents and purposes they mean nothing, except to the benchmarketeers (to shamelessly quote a phrase coined by Bindi). The benefits of a quad lie in its performance in multi-threaded apps, which, generally speaking, games aren't. However, the i5 is still faster than the C2Ds and C2Qs clock-for-clock, and the only logical reason for lower framerates than an E8400 system is that the game uses no more than 2 cores (likely) and is more reliant on clock speed than anything else (also likely). In which case, get yourself a decent cooler and overclock like there's no tomorrow :thumb:
     
  10. Thermal5

    Thermal5 R.I.P

    Joined:
    3 May 2009
    Posts:
    182
    Likes Received:
    3

    No that's not the only reason I upgraded, I just wanted to upgrade :D, I just figured going from an E8400 to an i5 then there would be a noticeable difference in games not a drop in performance, and let's face it there shouldn't have been a drop in performance it should have been a slight increase shouldn't it?

    Can't see me being GPU limited at all? Because the GTX 275 is a really good card, more than capable of playing any game I throw at it right now, and like I said there has been a decrease in gaming performance not an increase and I know that's not down to the graphics card because it's the same one lol.

    Interesting what you said though about the games not using any more than 2 cores, the thing is and I'm not sure if you noticed but I ran 3DMark and all the games I play on a regular basis when turbo mode was enabled so the i5 CPU was running at 3200 mhz (200 mhz faster than the E8400) and there was still a performance drop in gameplay.

    I guess my point is this E8400 3000 mhz with 4Gb DDR2 800 MHZ ram with a GTX 275 vs a Core i5 750 clocked at stock or in turbo mode @ 3200 mhz with 4Gb DDR3 1333 mhz ram with GTX 275 graphics card does NOT beat the E8400 with lower clock speed (than when i5 is in turbo mode) and slower ram than the i5 system, in my experience the E8400 wins hands down.

    I don't go on 3DMark scores alone but common sense says that a newer/supposedly better processor with the same graphics card should either equal the score set by the E8400 or be a little bit better not be about 650 points lower.

    E8400 @3000 mhz = 16813 3DMarks

    Core i5 @ 3200 mhz = 16154 3DMarks

    All of the above is just in my experience, other people may disagree when they upgrade.

    P.S) I ran 3DMark 06 and all games in 1440x900 resolution (the max on my monitor) with 2x Anti-aliasing enabled
     
  11. smc8788

    smc8788 Multimodder

    Joined:
    23 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    5,974
    Likes Received:
    272
    Hmm, if it's 1440x900 then you're definitely not going to be GPU limited, that won't happen with a GTX 275 until 1920x1200 in most games.

    So basically I have no idea why you might be getting lower framerates - the article on the site from a couple of days ago shows that the Lynnfield CPUs and P55 chipset are definitely a fair bit faster than the Core 2s and P45 chipset.

    I would definitely try overclocking that 750 if you get the chance, though - I'm sure you'll see a noticeable improvement from it.
     
  12. erratum1

    erratum1 What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    30 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    1,924
    Likes Received:
    68
    Present games probably only need 2 cores, so a fast dual core is the best.

    But thats not saying that in future 2 cores won't be enough, then the dual corers will be in trouble.

    Games benefit from a cpu being fast, if it's only using the capacity of 2 cores, then what's the point of spreading it out over 4.
     
  13. [PUNK] crompers

    [PUNK] crompers Dremedial

    Joined:
    20 May 2008
    Posts:
    2,909
    Likes Received:
    50
    try running a virus scan in the background whillst gaming, then you'll notice a difference mate!

    coming up from high end C2D performance perhaps you should have spent a little more and got i7?
     
  14. Guest-16

    Guest-16 Guest

    You didn't even overclock it? :confused:

    What board did you buy with it?

    What DDR3 did you buy exactly? Did you tweak the memory timings?
     
  15. Sh0cKeR

    Sh0cKeR a=2(s-ut)/t²

    Joined:
    21 Aug 2009
    Posts:
    477
    Likes Received:
    11
    Clock for clock the nehalems are faster by as much as 45% so If you've also got the i5 running at 3ghz, theres no reason for it to be slower. As its most likely at stock, your getting a lower score because of the lower frequency cpu and the loose timings of DDR 3 ( the board defaults at the rubbish 9-9-9-24 ).
     
  16. Thermal5

    Thermal5 R.I.P

    Joined:
    3 May 2009
    Posts:
    182
    Likes Received:
    3
    Possibly,

    Oh well, having to sell the i5 system now either as a bare bones system or separately to fund repairs to my car.

    i7 may be the future but not for a few months unless I win the lottery :D.

    The board bought was the Gigabyte GA-P55-UD3

    DDR3 ram is the Corsair XMS3 1333 ram 9-9-9-24 (not tweaked)

    But with the old E8400 and 4 GB DDR2 ram I didn't overclock that ever or alter any ram timings or anything and it ran better/faster than the Core i5/DDR3 ram :eyebrow:

    To be honest I've never dabbled in overclocking, always thinking if I wanted a 2.66ghz CPU to run at 3ghz then I'd just buy a 3ghz CPU :D I just figured with no overclocking the i5 would have been better.
     
  17. Guest-16

    Guest-16 Guest

    Yes but you've bought a 2.66GHz CPU. Not a 3GHz CPU. :p

    I don't have your board in, but check back Monday for an education ;)
     
  18. jbloggs

    jbloggs What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    12 Sep 2007
    Posts:
    855
    Likes Received:
    28
    The Gigabyte P55 boards are very good, I have the UD5 with an 860 @ 4.1GHz:

    [​IMG]

    With HT disabled I was able to get 4.45GHz:

    [​IMG]

    (Click to enlarge)
    ________
    ComeForMeNow
     
    Last edited: 20 Aug 2011
  19. Sh0cKeR

    Sh0cKeR a=2(s-ut)/t²

    Joined:
    21 Aug 2009
    Posts:
    477
    Likes Received:
    11
    Quite simply the whole point of buying the i5 is to overclock it to a performance level up and above an equivalent core 2. On another note synthetic benchmarks only mean something to people who use synthetic benchmarks ( they don't show how it will play out in the 'real world' ) Quad SLI for example might produce great results in vantage but trips over hopelessly like a four legged Spore creature during any number of 3D apps.
     
  20. jbloggs

    jbloggs What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    12 Sep 2007
    Posts:
    855
    Likes Received:
    28
    They can give some kind of indication of what you might expect in the "real world"!

    Quad SLI are not being discussed in this thread... :p
    ________
    Live sex webshows
     
    Last edited: 20 Aug 2011

Share This Page