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
Myrandex - Monday, February 2, 2009 - link
I agree that you would probably not see a difference at all, but you can get 6GB of Ram in a PhenomII system and still keep your Dual Channel Goodness:2 x 2GB & 2 x 1GB = 6GB in all 4 slots, operating at dual channel mode.
Jason
Goty - Monday, February 2, 2009 - link
This is true, but then you run into the problems AMD's IMCs have when you populate all four DIMM slots.monovillage - Monday, February 2, 2009 - link
Good review and thanks for doing the work, i look forward to seeing the power numbers. With 2 very similarly priced platforms and the premium (but not out of reach i7 920) I was glad to see the P2 940 give a good account of itself.duploxxx - Monday, February 2, 2009 - link
not sure how you guys whant to run a review, but perhaps start a comparing review with competing price configurations.q9400 = p2 940 in price, so it's useless to throw in a q9550, it's 20% more expensive. http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Sub...">http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductLi...43%20401...
then trying to memic a same price range by choosing a very expensive motherboard while a same spec mobo kosts about 50$ less.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...">http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...
so there is already a 10% price difference.
not to mention that a q9400 also has the same hard time getting above that 4GHZ border and is already shown in many reviews including yours that this was the marketing target against p2 940 then why the hell testing a q9550.
I call this review total crap and waste of time for readers and reviewers.
Just remove the first page on your review, with this kind of review you just prooven that you are not open for the best whoever it provides.
CPUGuy - Monday, February 2, 2009 - link
Unless I misunderstand their intent, it appears to me that they clearly showed the PII 940 is better then a Q9550.Erif - Monday, February 2, 2009 - link
I think the purpose of this test is to see if AMD's latest processors are fast enough for higher-end crossfire setups or not.As for comparing the performance of specific CPUs and their prices- Anandtech did that in their Phenom II review back in January 8 review.
Goty - Monday, February 2, 2009 - link
If you're going to try and tear down someone else's article, you might want to check your spelling so you don't come off as a complete idiot.duploxxx - Monday, February 2, 2009 - link
wow nice post, your added value is very high. Lets try some writing here and start with several languages, french, dutch, german, english, let's see how good you are at foreign languages.The fact remains that the platform is not balanced on price and marketing.
Spoelie - Monday, February 2, 2009 - link
Total platform price was the same. The motherboard you linked1) was an open box, i.e. second-hand
2) had the 790GX chipset, while the motherboard in the review was the FX version. The feature set of this last one is more suited to running crossfire. Of course, you would have known that from actually reading the review instead of glancing at it.
In fact, it's a rather interesting comparison for the purpose: cpu with a little more grunt (Q9550) paired with a mainstream chipset (P45) compared to a cheaper cpu (940) paired with an enthusiast chipset (FX).
I presume the FX was able to provide a nice boost.
duploxxx - Monday, February 2, 2009 - link
FX does not boost at all, unless you require the pci-e 2.0 16x bandwith which is already shown in normal CF setups that it is not required.here is another one.... board cost 100$ and although it is with the sb600, there is nothing wrong with it, the P45 is also a midrange board.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...">http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...