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
FingerMeElmo87 - Monday, February 2, 2009 - link
"Seriously, who cares for Crossfire (or SLI)?Please. Stop making those useless enthusiast's enthusiast reviews and come back to the ground, AnandTech."
--Whats down to earth? Intel Celeries and IGPs'? They did both average use benches with single GPU and enthusiast class benches with dual GPUs and overclocking. how could you get your panties in a bunch like so easily. did you even bother to read the article?
"Please, go ahead, check the Steam survey hardware list.
Then tell me: How many people out of 100 do have SLI/Crossfire.
Then laugh.
Then stop testing this shit like it was important."
--Once again, same worthless comment. they didnt just test crossfire
"And here my suggestions for constructive improvement:
Test the new generation of HDDs with 500GB platters (e.g. Seagate 7200.12 series)
THAT would be interesting, because EVERYONE needs a good HDD, but no one needs Crossfire."
--ugh. saying eveyone needs the latest and greatest type of harddrive is like saying everyone needs crossfire and SLI.
going as far as breaking down your entire retarded post was a complete waste of time just to call you a douche bag but i guess it had to be done
CPUGuy - Monday, February 2, 2009 - link
The user "Finally" is right (although a tad abrasive). You don't need CF or SLI to run any of those games at an acceptable frame rate. Furthermore, the mainstream crowd does outnumber the enthusiast crowd using CF/SLI by many fold. So it would have made more beneficial to show both CPU stock and overclock results using just a 4870.Heck, they could have added a PII 920 at stock and overclock and a 4850 just to make it interesting. Maybe one day we will see such a setup tested.
scottb75 - Wednesday, February 4, 2009 - link
With SLI/CF the CPU becomes more of the bottleneck then it would be with just one GPU. So, testing with SLI/CF shows more of a difference between the CPUs then it would with just a single card.Gary Key - Monday, February 2, 2009 - link
This is not a GPU comparison per say, it is a platform comparison. We set the game options to a blended mixture of quality and performance in order to keep the GPU setup from becoming the limiting factor when possible. This is explained in further detail in page two.CPUGuy - Monday, February 2, 2009 - link
Although I understand your reasoning and to a degree it make sense. However, many are using or attempting to use 4xAA max settings at 1680 (at the very least). Therefore, it would be very informative to many of use what we could expect.This is with the expectation that we are no longer worried about just CPU scores but platform scores. IMO, reviewers should start looking at the platform as whole in reviews like this as many are looking at it that way. If it were true that one motherboard performed exceedingly better then another a CPU only benchmark would make sense.
CPUGuy - Monday, February 2, 2009 - link
us not use...sorryv1001 - Sunday, February 1, 2009 - link
Page 10 - Final Words is missingGary Key - Monday, February 2, 2009 - link
The article went live before it was completed. Page 10 is in and I will update it late tomorrow with power consumption numbers. Just finishing the power tests on the i7 with the same power supply we use on the other setups.