The value proposition and HEXUS.bang4buck
Value summary
We can normalise the performance of the chips by setting the fastest's result to '100' and then apportioning a figure for the other chips based on the relative performance. We've chosen to evaluate the value proposition over four benchmarks. A table should make this easier to understand:
| Chip name/benchmark | AMD Phenom II X4 965 BE | AMD Phenom II X4 955 BE | AMD Phenom II X4 940 BE | Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650 | Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 | Intel Core i7 920 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HEXUS.PiFast normalised | 94.6 |
89.8 |
83.9 |
100 |
93.9 |
94.8 |
| POV-Ray normalised | 78.3 |
74.0 |
68.5 |
72.2 |
68.2 |
100 |
| ET: QW (1680x1,050) normalised | 98.5 |
98.4 |
96.2 |
100 |
99.3 |
96.5 |
| DivX + QuickTime normalised | 91.7 |
86.0 |
80.1 |
90.0 |
84.1 |
100 |
| Average normalised performance | 90.8 |
87.05 |
82.18 |
90.6 |
86.38 |
97.83 |
| Price | £191 |
£146 |
£132 |
£239 |
£164 |
£205 |
| HEXUS.bang4buck rating (marks per £100) | 47.5 |
59.6 |
62.3 |
37.9 |
52.7 |
47.7 |
The benchmarks and normalisation
The first, HEXUS.PiFast, helps us to understand single-threaded performance, which still makes up the throughput of a large number of applications. Secondly, we've taken account of POV-Ray, as it provides near-perfect scaling with cores and threads, such that the performance in this benchmark is with the processor working at close to 100 per cent: an ideal scenario. Thirdly, we look at gaming at 1,680x1,050, to see how the chips fare when the IQ is set to a decent level. Lastly, we look at DivX performance with a QuickTime clip in the foreground - a kind of multi-tasking, if you will.
We then derive an averaged normalised figure based on the four results, with the leading chip set to 100 at all times. In effect, we're looking at the percentage performance of any chip when the fastest chip is locked to 100. So, for example, if the Intel Core i7 920 is the fastest in a particular benchmark and scores 150fps, a chip scoring 75fps would receive a normalised score of 50 marks.
Analysis
Our marks for average normalised performance show that the six above-mentioned processors each perform admirably. Based solely on overall performance, Intel's Core i7 920 is the best chip, followed by AMD's Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition.
Despite the performance of the 3.4GHz AMD part, however, it's the knock-on effect that will be of most importance to consumers. The arrival of the new part, combined with competitive pricing from both Intel and AMD, has resulted in mid-to-high-end parts that are priced such that they're hard to ignore. In terms of value for money, the AMD Phenom II X4 940 Black Edition scores highest with a rating of 62.3, that's made possible by massive price drops - the part launched in January priced at around £240, and it can now be had for as little as £132.
In second place, the Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition - launched in April priced at £217 - scores 59.6 as a result of being available for just £146. With competition as fierce as ever, Intel has lowered the price of its Core 2 Quad Q9550 to £164, putting it closely behind in third place.
What's also interesting is that, in terms of CPU-performance-per-£100, Intel's Core i7 scores slightly higher than AMD's Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition. That's a result of the Intel part being reduced in price to just £205. Readers should be aware, however, that the platform costs associated with Core i7 - including, for example, an X58 motherboard and tri-channel DDR3 memory - are more costly than an alternative AMD AM3 platform.
In summary, the Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition, albeit quick, makes little sense when marginally-slower multiplier-unlocked Phenom IIs can be had for nearly £50 less.
