Gaming comparison between X9100 and P8600 in M4400

As the title say's,the fastest core duo against the second to slowest choice,as there seem's a fair number of people here who play game's on their M4400's,I thought this might be interesting to some.

Benchmarked with FRAPs.
Did each run twice [for each cpu] from the same start point,trying to be as consistent as possible,I'm most surprised by the RTS's especially world in conflict,see attached thumbnail's of the inbuilt benchmark,as that game is supposed to love cpu power.
Empire total war,I'm sure still carry's out control instruction's much better with the X9100 despite framerates being pretty much identical.....a bit hard to tell as the game AI is soo buggy.

Surprising? comment's......


X9100 3.06ghz processor

2009-04-09 11:05:24 - Empire
Frames: 2138 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 35.633 - Min: 30 - Max: 42

2009-04-09 11:11:42 - Empire
Frames: 2086 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 34.767 - Min: 30 - Max: 39

2009-04-09 11:18:10 - Crysis
Frames: 2151 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 35.850 - Min: 26 - Max: 47

2009-04-09 11:19:53 - Crysis
Frames: 1983 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 33.050 - Min: 23 - Max: 45


2009-04-09 11:42:28 - Bioshock
Frames: 2846 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 47.433 - Min: 30 - Max: 61

2009-04-09 11:50:00 - Bioshock
Frames: 2499 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 41.650 - Min: 29 - Max: 61

P8600 2.4ghz processor

2009-04-09 19:53:30 - Empire
Frames: 2038 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 33.967 - Min: 30 - Max: 43

2009-04-09 20:00:51 - Empire
Frames: 2014 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 33.567 - Min: 27 - Max: 41

2009-04-09 20:07:53 - Crysis
Frames: 1959 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 32.650 - Min: 24 - Max: 43

2009-04-09 20:09:26 - Crysis
Frames: 1995 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 33.250 - Min: 23 - Max: 43

2009-04-09 20:13:24 - Bioshock
Frames: 2588 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 43.133 - Min: 30 - Max: 61

2009-04-09 20:15:34 - Bioshock
Frames: 2498 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 41.633 - Min: 29 - Max: 60

 

It doesn't surprise me too much. These games seem to rely on the strength of the graphics chip rather than the CPU. If you were doing something more CPU intensive (like having a fun-filled evening compiling code) the choice in CPU would make a bigger difference.

 

I hear you,It seem's that only task's that use 100% cpu for long period's benefit greatly from it,my cad software barely uses 100% cpu ever for more than a few second's,the finite element analysis add on does,but I don't use it all that much,same with the video encoding software I have which only seem's to want to max one core anyway.

Intel do try and market this cpu to gamer's though,which seem's a bit of a have to me looking at those result's,unless maybe ATI benefit more,maybe being GPU limited has an effect,but can't see it personally,I remember when I had a XPS M1730 with 8800gtx's,my 2.4ghz equipped unit seemed to have just as good in game performance as the X9000 cpu'd one's.

I just had to try one of these extreme cpu's for myself,and make's me glad I only bought an ES version to qwell my curiosity.

Compiling code is fun?