Intel's Core i7 870 & i5 750, Lynnfield: Harder, Better, Faster Stronger
by Anand Lal Shimpi on September 8, 2009 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Power Consumption
If you'll remember back to last year's Nehalem coverage I made a point to mention that the Nehalem architecture, thanks to its PCU and power gate transistors, was the most power efficient of the high end options. The lower the TDP, the more important power efficiency is and thus it's no surprise to see Lynnfield truly impress when it comes to power consumption:
At idle the Core i5 and Core i7 870 use less power than any other processor we've ever tested. Note that these idle power figures include an idling GeForce GTX 280. With a lower power graphics card, you could easily get to idle power consumption around 60W. Once we start seeing on-package GPUs, total system power consumption should drop even further.
Under load the Core i5 and Core i7 870 continue to impress. They both draw less power than a Q6600 or a Q9650, all the while outperforming the two. Power consumption is also noticeably lower than Bloomfield.
These things are fast and smart with power. Just wait until Nehalem goes below 65W...
343 Comments
View All Comments
Griswold - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link
You definitely ARE stupid.dragunover - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link
Readers aren't, but you didn't read...snakeoil - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link
wow, this lynnfield is expensive, and the motherboards are expensive too.this is a crippled core i7 and you will have problems because the northbrige only have 2 x 8 pcie express electrical.
so if you are going to buy a new directx 11 video card don't commit the mistake of buying a lynnfield which is crippled.
without hyperthreading in some cases is a 40% slower than core i7
Eeqmcsq - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link
Anand, can't you just ban this guy? He's always trolls against Intel here, TechReport, and a couple other tech sites.JonnyDough - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link
I second the notion.Chlorus - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link
Thirded.maddoctor - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link
Your comment will not affect people whose committed to bought these. I think it is more valuable than any AMD platform. I don't think AMD will survive next year.TA152H - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link
From a purely processor perspective, I'd agree, but AMD platforms are pretty strong when you compare IGPs. The G45 compared to the 790GX is worse comparison than the Phenom II compared to the Nehalem.Don't forget IGPs are a HUGE market, so it's not an unimportant consideration.
PassingBy - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link
Yes, the IGP market is huge and Intel dominates that market as it is. If Intel can get its drivers right, then it looks like the IGP on Clarkdale/Arrandale will extend that domination. If you want to game seriously on graphics intensive games, then don't use an IGP.ash9 - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link
broaden your horizons; the real money is in corporate retooling- that said AMD's platform is without question offer more bang for the buck, considering corporate needs...most corporate folk have gone blind because of Intel's IPG's (laptops and desktops)Anand how bout running the tests that addresses that issue (IPG's and eye strain)