5. Test results in graphsFor an overview, I put the results of both CPUs in graphs.
Computing operations are in seconds, lower means better (Superpi on 32M, PiFast and more modern wprime 1024M)
Fritczhess is chess CPU computing with support of up to 16 threads. Higher score is better.
Working with DRAM includes the AIDA64 subtest. The values are in MB / s
Rendering was used ten years ago and is still in use today. I have included three generations of Cinebench, where the oldest one is used to compare the clear performance of one core (CinebenchR10), the other two are using all cores. And that Superpi got in the graph there by mistake
🙂Complex performance is represented by Geekbench3. Incredibly, slightly older Geekbench3 seems to be a better performance comparison method than the last Geekbench4. This is especially true for subtests (eg RAM subtests, etc.) AIDA64 as CPU Queen universal quick test. More points are better.
The FHD video encoding was the absolute maximum 10 years ago, today it is a common standard. The x264 codec is still very popular. And of course the higher value of FPS is better.
What about graphic subtests? Today, the GTX 1050 is still usable card on FHD resolution. It will be interesting in the less demanding 3DMark06 and more challenging 3D Mark11 on both platforms.
6. How much jumped the performance in those generations? And what about Maximus XI Apex?The results of the measurements are over and let's summarize them. With the same number of cores, the result in Superpi is one-third the time, which is a huge leap (of course, the lion's share of it is processor frequency - 2.33 GHz vs 4.7 GHz during this test). Multithreaded wprime more than double the performance for i7-8086K 4C/4T.
In single thread CinebenchR10 is performance almost quadruple. Working with RAM has progressed leaps and bounds.
Mostly the performance with the same number of cores has improved by more than twice as much as four times. It is necessary to state that the performance of the processors is growing, although it does not always look so unambiguously in the inter-generational context.
Also interesting is the result of 3D Marks. While 3DMark11 has a higher resolution than 3DMark06, the GTX 1050 is not so much in it. 3DMark06 is then more dependent on the processor and suddenly the edge of a modern processor is triple in this graphical test
🙂i7-8086K 4C / 4T CPU boosted to 4.3 GHz at full load
While the Core Quad Q8200 only at 2.33 GHz. And this is actually a 2 GHz difference. So we can say that the frequencie in those 10 years on similar Intel architectural basics has jumped a nice 2 GHz up. If the Q8200 went overclocking to say 3.3 GHz, which is a very high jump, then today's i7-8086K goes from 4.3 GHz turbo, say at 5 GHz. That is also not enough, but at that time the relative jump in performance due to overclocking was higher!
In basic, the big difference of base clocks was one of main keypoints of performance results in this fight. Also some of the computational instructions (in CinebenchR15, X264FHD), but also the communicate of the memory controller and the communication of individual cores among themselves (much visible in AIDA throughput), as well as the existence of L3 cache in modern Intel CPU. Such an upgrade from Core Quad to Core 8th or 9th Generation (but actually 7th) will be noticeable (or AMD of course). I subjected myself to great differences. On the other hand, for occasional gaming or web and movies, CoreQuad still does a good job.
What about the boards? The Maximus Formula was great, at the time with 6 USB ports on the rear output, dual LAN, optical output and input, SupremeFX dedicated audio card, curved SATA connectors, decent VRM with direct mosfet cooling and good ribbing. It had functional buttons for start, reset, CMOS reset and external post display, high qaulity caps where you look, one PWM connector (the remaining were DC controlled). Ability to save two OC profiles in BIOS. It just wasn't commonplace in 2008 ... The FSB limit was also high above 450 MHz. Today it is a beautiful piece of hardware in my collection. ...It is time to replace the old with a new one.
Maximus XI Apex is the highlight of today's enthusiastic offer along with the Extreme version. Everything works precisely, even there is a function for failed RAM post, which automatically throws us through bad memory training into the BIOS. I think there was an inspiration from AMD boards, where is this function on Ryzens (after 3 unsuccessful attempts it is suitable for default safe settings). Great for us - users. In BIOS you can find many OC profiles for CPU overlcocking and for memory special settings.
You can even use the BIOS settings like Tweakers paradise to set hours, even days, or manually set the memory itself. The board is absolutely accurate in voltage stability (LLC6 / 7/8), and no active VRM cooling is needed
This VRM is perhaps the strongest I have ever seen in this segment. Surprisingly, this OC board has common things like WiFi, enough USB3.0 and 3.1, and a quality integrated codec "SupremeFX" with suppression and tracing .
The motherboard supports up to 64 GB of RAM despite only two slots, that is not standard. And up to 4800 MHz OC!
There are also Intel Optane memory technology, 2x M2 storages placed over the DIMM 2 slot adapter. Setting up to RAID is then easy through the BIOS wizard.
Who knows me, knows me ;)....AMD 3000+, AMD x2 4600+ EE, AMD X4 955 BE C2,2x AMD X4 965 BE C3, AMD X4 970 BE C3, AMD x4 975 BE, AMD x4 980 BE, AMD X6 1090T BE, AMD x6 1100T BE, 2x AMD FX-8120, 2x AMD FX-8150, FX-6300, FX-8300, FX-8320E, FX-8320, FX-8350, FX-8370, FX-8370E, FX-9370, FX-9590, AMD A8-3850, AMD A8-3870K, A8-5600K, A10-5800K, A10-6800K, A10-7850K, A10-7870K, A 5150, Athlon x4 860K, Intel i7-5960X, i7-6700K, Intel i7-4770K, Intel i7-980x, Intel i7 2600k, Intel i7-3770K, i7-3930K.