ramcoza
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2011
- Messages
- 17 (0.00/day)
Processor | Intel Core i7 2600 |
---|---|
Motherboard | ASUS Sabertooth Z77 |
Cooling | Noctua NH-D14 |
Memory | 2x4GB 1600MHz |
Video Card(s) | MSI 580 Lightning |
Storage | Intel 520 120GB + WD Caviar Black 1TB |
Display(s) | Samsung S24B350HL 1080p |
Case | Corsair White Graphite Series 600T |
Audio Device(s) | Asus Xonar Essence 7.1 PCI |
Power Supply | Rosewill Fortress 750w |
Software | Dual Boot (Windows 7 Ultimate x64 + Windows 8 RP x64) |
When benching CPU framerates, one should reduce the resolution as much as possible, to remove the GPU as the bottleneck, otherwise, you just get all the results for the CPUs under test topping out and hence showing the same performance, when they actually all have different performances. If anything 1680x1050 is too high and that's why they look the same in those slides. I would test at 800x600.
Regardless, I'll say it again, wait for the official benchies tomorrow before passing judgment.
But I couldn't get the point. People who buy this series of CPUs will never play at such lower resolutions(whoever afford to buy this, should be already owning at least a top tier GPU & Display). So there is no sense to test it at lower res, even though you have to test it's processing power while gaming. Is it fair to test Today's CPU with a decade old configuration and come to a conclusion according to those results? I didn't stand for SB-E or Intel. I thought it's unfair to come to a conclusion with these low Res benchies. I may be wrong. But anyway we can find out the real story tomorrow..
Thank you..And welcome to TPU.