Memory Bandwidth Performance

Surprisingly MaxxMem² reports very little difference in retentivity bandwidth betwixt the Cadre i7 920 and the new Cadre i7 860 processor. Despite utilizing a triple-aqueduct retention controller, the Cadre i7 920 produced the same write functioning, while the read throughput was v% college. The Cadre i7 920 has a 140MHz clock speed disadvantage all the same.

The Cadre i5 750 processor, which does operate at the same frequency as the Core i7 920, only uses a dual-channel retentiveness controller and does without Hyper-Threading. This reduced the write operation past eight.v% when compared to the 920, while read performance was 12% lower.

Although the AMD Phenom Ii X4 965 processor also features a dual-channel memory controller with a rather high operating frequency of three.40GHz, it delivered past far the lowest memory bandwidth result. The read performance of the Phenom II X4 965 was 26.5% lower than that of the Core i5 750, making information technology considerably slower in this test when compared to the Intel contest.

The latency results follow the same trend as the bandwidth results, though every bit y'all can see the deviation betwixt the Phenom II X4 965 and Core i5 750 processors is much smaller here. The Core i7 920 is likewise only slightly better than the Core i7 860 in this test.

EVEREST Ultimate Edition shows slightly different performance margins when compared to MaxxMem². For instance, the Core i7 920 has a considerably college read and write operation advantage over the Core i7 860 processor, but the margin separating the Core i7 860 and Core i5 750 is significantly smaller in this examination. One thing did remain constant, and that was the huge margin by which the Phenom Two X4 965 trails the Intel processors.