AllInfo

Tested 15 years ago: Intel's Core 2 Extreme on 45 nm steroids

In the test 15 years ago, the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 (test) with Penryn architecture and 45 nm production stood. With a 3.2 GHz chip clock and a 1.6 GHz front side bus (FSB), the QX9770 should not only be extremely fast, but also show what Intel was capable of in general.

Table of contents

  1. Penryn at the limit
  2. Too fast to play
  3. Conclusion

< h2 class="text-width text-h2" id="section_penryn_at_stop">Penryn at stop

With four cores at 3.2 GHz, the Core 2 Extreme was the highest clocked quad-core processor that Intel had in its range 15 years ago. It was also the first Penryn processor to feature a 1.6 GHz front side bus. In combination with the support for fast DDR3-1600 RAM, the advantages were obvious.

Due to the high TDP of 136 watts, Intel only approved the new X48 chipset for use with the QX9770 – the older X38 and P35 chipsets or platforms based on them officially only supported 130 watt TDP CPUs. However, some manufacturers such as Asus or Gigabyte released their older boards for the QX9770.

The processors at a glance Features Core 2
Extreme
(Quad-Core) Core 2 Quad,
Core 2
Extreme
(Quad-Core) Core 2 Duo,
Core 2
Extreme
(Dual-Core) Core 2 Duo
(Dual- Core) Logo Codename Yorkfield
(2 × Wolfdale) Kentsfield
(2 × Conroe) Conroe Allendale clock speed or
model number
(clock in GHz) QX9770 (3.20)0
QX9650 (3.00)
Q9550 (2.83)
Q9450 (2.66) Q6600 (2.40)
QX6700 (2.66)
QX6800 (2.93)
QX6850 (3.00)1 E6300 (1.86)3
E6320 (1.86)
E6400 (2.13)3
E6420 (2.13)
E6540 (2.33)
E6550 (2.33)1, 4
E6600 ( 2.4)
E6700 (2.66)
E6750 (2.66)1, 4
X6800 (2.93)
E6850 (3.00)1, 4
E4300 (1.80)2, 5
E4400 (2.00)2, 5
E4500 (2.20)2, 5
E4600 (2.40)2, 5
E6300 (1.86)
E6400 (2.13) Manufacturing 45nm 65nm socket socket 775 cores 4 (MCP) 2 multithreading – front side bus 1333MHz QDR
1600MHz QDR6 1066MHz QDR
1333MHz QDR6 1066MHz QDR
1333MHz QDR6 800MHz QDR6
1,066 MHz QDR Frontside Bus Load 2 1 Peripheral Interface External Memory Controller External Transistors 2 × 410M 2 × 291M 291M 167M Chip Size 2 × 107 mm² 2 × 143 mm² 143 mm² 111 mm² L1 Execution Cache 2 × 2 × 32 kbytes 2 × 32 kbytes L1 data cache 2 × 2 × 32 kbytes 2 × 32 kbytes L2 cache 2 × 6,144 kbytes 2 × 4,096 kbytes 1 × 2,048 kbytes0
1 × 4096 kbytes 1 × 2048 kbytes L2 connection 256 bit L2 mode L1 including cache 2 × 6,144 kbytes 2 × 4,096 kbytes 2,048 kbytes6
4,096 kbytes 2,048 kbytes Energy-saving function C1E, Enhanced
SpeedStep (EIST) C1E, Enhanced
SpeedStep (EIST) C1E, Enhanced
SpeedStep (EIST) C1E, Enhanced
SpeedStep (EIST) Date Execution
Prevention (NX bit) ✓ 64-bit technology ✓ (EM64T) virtualization
technology ✓ (Vanderpool) CPU architecture 14-level
pipeline (core) instruction sets MMX
SSE
SSE2
SSE3
SSSE3
SSE4.1
VT MMX
SSE
SSE2
SSE3
SSSE3
VT MMX
SSE
SSE2
SSE3
SSSE3
VT
TXT MMX
SSE
SSE2
SSE3
SSSE3
VT 0 Has a 1,600 MHz fast frontside -Bus
1 Has a 1,333 MHz fast frontside bus
2 Has an 800 MHz front side bus
3 Has 2 MB L2 cache (4 MB are available in the silicon, 2 MB are deactivated)
4 Supports Trusted Execution Technology (TXT, formerly La Grande)
5 Does not support virtualization technology (VT, formerly Vanderpool)
6 Select models only

Too fast to play

Depending on the application scenario, the QX9770 in combination with a Radeon HD 2900 XT was on average between 4 and 8 percent faster than the second fastest quad-core processor, the QX9650. The lead over the previous generation, represented in the test by the Intel Core 2 Quad Q6700, was between 16 and 31 percent. Intel's fastest dual-core, the Core 2 Extreme X6800, was partially outperformed by almost 50 percent. In games in particular, the advantages were smaller, here the other CPUs were much closer to the QX9770 – regardless of whether dual or quad core.

Performance rating

Performance Rating – Overall

    • Core 2 Extreme QX9770105,6
    • Core 2 Extreme QX9650100,0
    • Core 2 Extreme QX685094,6
    • Core 2 Quad Q945091,9
    • Core 2 Quad Q670085,5
    • Core 2 Duo E685081,6
    • Core 2 Quad Q660079,5
    • Core 2 Extreme X680078,1
    • Core 2 Duo E675075,1
    • Core 2 Duo E660068,1
    • Core 2 Duo E642062.9

Unit: Percent Performance Rating – Applications

    • Core 2 Extreme QX9770105,1
    • Core 2 Extreme QX9650100.0
    • Core 2 Extreme QX685093,7
    • Core 2 Quad Q945090,1
    • Core 2 Quad Q670082,8
    • Core 2 Quad Q660075,6
    • Core 2 Duo E685075,1
    • Core 2 Extreme X680071,6
    • Core 2 Duo E675067,9
    • Core 2 Duo E660060,4
    • Core 2 Duo E642054,8

Unit: Percent Performance Rating – Multimedia

    • Core 2 Extreme QX9770107,7
    • Core 2 Extreme QX9650100,0
    • Core 2 Extreme QX685091,9
    • Core 2 Quad Q945090,7
    • Core 2 Quad Q670082,3
    • Core 2 Duo E685078,4
    • Core 2 Quad Q660075,8
    • Core 2 Extreme X680074,9
    • Core 2 Duo E675070,4
    • Core 2 Duo E660062,6
    • Core 2 Duo E642056,2

Unit: Percent Performance Rating – Games

    • Core 2 Extreme QX9770103,8
    • Core 2 Extreme QX9650100.0
    • Core 2 Duo E685097,1
    • Core 2 Extreme QX685096,6
    • Core 2 Quad Q945095,8
    • Core 2 Duo E675093,0
    • Core 2 Extreme X680092,3
    • Core 2 Quad Q670089,9
    • Core 2 Quad Q660086,1
    • Core 2 Duo E660085,7
    • Core 2 Duo E642082,3

Unit: Percent Performance Rating – Synthetic

    • Core 2 Extreme QX9770105.7
    • Core 2 Extreme QX9650100.0
    • Core 2 Extreme QX685096.0
    • Core 2 Quad Q945091,1
    • Core 2 Quad Q670086,9
    • Core 2 Quad Q660080,3
    • Core 2 Duo E685075,5
    • Core 2 Extreme X680073,3
    • Core 2 Duo E675068,8
    • Core 2 Duo E660063,0
    • Core 2 Duo E642058.0

Unit: percent

If this performance was not enough for you, you could overclock the processor – as an Extreme Edition, it had an open multiplier. In the test, the QX9770 easily reached a clock rate of 4.15 GHz with a voltage increased to 1.45 volts. The performance gain varied depending on the application – as expected, the overclocking did not bring much benefit for games when played in high details and resolutions. Here, we compared Company of Heroes at minimum settings and 800 × 600 pixels: in this case, the performance increased by almost 20 percent.

Charts

Overclock

  • SuperPi (in seconds):
    • Core 2 Extreme QX9770 Standard14,611
    • Core 2 Extreme QX9770 @ 4.15 GHz11,294
  • Cinebench R10 1 CPU:
    • Core 2 Extreme QX9770 @ 4.15GHz4.559
    • Core 2 Extreme QX9770 Standard3.528
  • Cinebench R10 x CPU:
    • Core 2 Extreme QX9770 @ 4.15GHz16.224
    • Core 2 Extreme QX9770 Standard12.570

Unit: Points Overclock Memory < ul class="chart__groups toggle-body-container" id="chart-groups-131688">

  • SiSoft Sandra memory throughput:
    • Core 2 Extreme QX9770 @ 4.15 GHz8.433
    • Core 2 Extreme QX9770 Standard8.052

    • Unit: Megabytes per second (MB/s) Overclocking Games

    • Crysis:
      • Core 2 Extreme QX9770 @ 4.15GHz33.82< /li>
      • Core 2 Extreme QX9770 Standard33.40
    • Company of Heroes:
        < li class="chart__row">Core 2 Extreme QX9770 @ 4.15 GHz697.90
      • Core 2 Extreme QX9770 Standard584.80

      • < /ul> Unit: frames per second (FPS)

      Conclusion

      The Core 2 Extreme QX9770 was a showcase: it offered extreme performance at an extreme price. Because at $1,399 wholesale, the price was even higher than the previous Extreme Editions, where Intel traditionally charged around $1,000. Buying a QX9770 is not worthwhile for gamers. You could only benefit from the extremely fast four cores if you used programs that could be run in parallel and that were almost exclusively calculated on the CPU.

      In the category “In the test 15 years ago”, the editors have been taking a look at the test archive every Saturday since July 2017. The last 20 articles that appeared in this series are listed below:

      • The GeForce 8800 GTS 512 with the secret G92 full expansion
      • Scythe Ninja Cu, the limited copper block
      • Hide, Radeon HD 3850, the 135-euro miracle weapon
      • With the Zalman VF-1000 against Arctic Coolings S1
      • ATi made a comeback with the Radeon HD 3870
      • Nvidia's GeForce 8800 GT was almost perfect
      • Intel's 45 nm process made Penryn fast and economical
      • Two towers weren't enough for the Thermalright IFX-14
      • The The best Radeon HD 2600 XT were blue
      • Thermalright's Ultra-120 Extreme was the reference
      • 249 euros were too much for the Radeon HD 2600 XT X2
      • Teufels elegant 2.1 system with great sound
      • Arctic Cooling's Accelero S1 was colder than the competition
      • Zalman tried to reinvent itself and failed
      • Cooler Masters Cosmos at an astronomical price
      • The best multimedia keyboard came from Microsoft
      • Sparkles Caliber GeForce 8600 GT performed far outside the norm
      • Xigmatek was on the road to success with the HDT-S1283< /li>
      • Movie playback on GPUs from ATi versus Nvidia
      • Teufel and Logitech in 5.1 exchange of blows

      More content of this Art and many other reports and anecdotes can be found in the retro corner ComputerBase.

    Posted

    in

    by

    admin

    Tags: