CrossFireX and the Phenom II X4 940 – Competitive or Not?
by Gary Key on February 2, 2009 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
Final Words
We set out to answer the question, “Is the Phenom II competitive with a similar Intel Platform in CrossFireX?” Based on our results today, we would have to answer a resounding yes to that question.
It’s not as balanced as the Core i7 920 or even Core 2 Quad Q9550 in a few games, but it does not embarrass itself either. In fact, we think it put up a very good fight and stood its ground with the Q9550. Compared directly to the Q9550, the Phenom II X4 940 is a strong competitor. It had better average frame rates in CrossFire mode than the Q9550 in three titles, tied in one, and finished behind the Q9550 by about 2%~7% in the other three games.
When it came to actual game play experiences, we thought the Phenom II 940 was clearly the better choice in Company of Heroes: Opposing Fronts and Crysis Warhead due to minimum frame rate advantages and fluidity of game play. In the five other titles, we could not tell any real differences in the quality of game play between the Phenom II 940 and Core 2 Quad Q9550. Except for Far Cry 2 where we could raise the graphic quality settings without affecting game play, the i7 platform was no different than our two other solutions.
However, looking through the performance results and game play experiences, we have to mention just how fast Intel's Core i7 is right now. Its results were just remarkable in Far Cry 2 and it consistently scored at the top in CrossFire mode in the other games even though it has the lowest core clock speed. If platform pricing were better, then the Core i7 series would have a clear recommendation for an upgrade if you were considering a multi-GPU setup.
As it stands now, if you already have a CrossFire capable motherboard, there is no need to change architectures with the current crop of AMD video cards - or you can just forget about "CrossFire compatible" altogether and grab a 4870X2. If you are currently running a P45 or X48 chipset then stick with that platform. We would highly suggest an E8500 or up dual-core or a Q9550 or up quad-core processor in order to gain any benefits from CrossFire on the Intel side. The same theory holds true on the AMD side. If you have an AM2+ motherboard based on the 790GX or 790FX chipset then stick with it and get a Phenom II X4 940.
Despite Intel's advantages in processor technology and developer relations, AMD was able to perform well in a CrossFireX setup today. In fact, it did much better than expected when we started looking at multi-GPU gaming results after the Phenom II launch. The real question is if a multi-GPU setup has enough benefits to justify the cost, regardless of platform. This is something Derek is investigating currently. In the meantime, we just know that it is no longer embarrassing to run CrossFire on an AMD processor based system. What about NVIDIA and SLI? Well, that's a question for another day....
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
68 Comments
View All Comments
megabuster - Monday, February 2, 2009 - link
If it's not too troublesome next time please include a few pictures of your hardware set up. :)none12345 - Monday, February 2, 2009 - link
There are errors in the benchmark charts on page 9....and maybe other pages..In the first chart you have the overclocked 9550 CF at the top of the chart, yet if you look at the min and max frame rates it is NOT the top performer, the core i7 beats it with 5 more min frames and 12 more max frames. The overclocked phenom ii cf shoudl also beat it with 11 higher min frames tho 13 less max frames.
In the second chart, the clear winer by the min/max frames is the overclocked phenom ii CF, it had a 9 higher min fps and 6 higher max fps yet its rated lower then the core i7. It had 21 more min fps yet only 2 less max fps then the 9550 but was ranked way lower.
Your score or min/max numbers are fubar...something is really wrong with those charts.
Maybe some of the other charts are messed up too, but this page stood out like a sore thumb.
Gary Key - Monday, February 2, 2009 - link
The charts are sorted by Average Frame Rates, unfortunately our engine does not allow multiple sorts on values. Let me see if I can do something different in the SLI article with an Excel chart, or I might just separate all the values into individual charts..7Enigma - Tuesday, February 3, 2009 - link
Gary, Let me just throw my opinion in to keep it sorted by average frame rates.That is probably the most important data point (next to possibly minimum) and so is a good way of ranking. I will thank you again and ask that all future reviews use your format of showing all 3 data points as it is very important in determining the better card for a specific game at a specific resolution/detail setting.
balancedthinking - Monday, February 2, 2009 - link
The Phenom II massively gains gaming performance with an overclocked Nortbridge because it directly boosts the cache performance.Reviews like the one from the german site p3d showed an increase in gaming performance worth 300-500mhz core frequency for an overclock of only 400 mhz NB frequenzy!
The NB runs stock @ only 1800 mhz. Good overclocks are in the range of 2600 - 2800mhz. Imagine the performance that is missing in the OC results from anand!
That is why the Q9550 can pull ahead when overclocked, because due to architecture, the cache gets overclocked too wenn you raise the reference clock.
The Phenom II 940 offers great potential when tweaking the NB clock but you have to do it manually in contrast to Q9550!
So please Anand, redo the Phenom II 940 OC tests with the Northbridge frequency maxed out. Only that would be a fair comparison.
Gary Key - Monday, February 2, 2009 - link
The NB frequency is at 2486MHz in these tests. I have it listed on page two now. I could not go higher and maintain this clock speed in Vista 64. Raising the NB speed to 2712 meant lowering CPU speed to 3842MHz. I test both values and our 3955/2486 combo performed the best.Kiijibari - Monday, February 2, 2009 - link
Perfect :)Thx a lot.
Kiijibari - Monday, February 2, 2009 - link
I agree, an info concerning the NB clock of the Phenom2 is missing.@anandtech: Please add it.
cheers
Kiiji
Kiijibari - Monday, February 2, 2009 - link
From the article:"(17.5x226, DDR2-1205, 5-5-5-18)"
That means, that the NB was clocked with 2034 MHz, if nobody changed the default multiplier 9
CPUGuy - Monday, February 2, 2009 - link
balancedthinking,Thanks for providing this tidbit of information regarding how cache is overclocked on the Intel vs AMD CPUS. If this review is based on what you said then it should be amended for re-testing.