What's new
  • Please do not post any links until you have 3 posts as they will automatically be rejected to prevent SPAM. Many words are also blocked due to being used in SPAM Messages. Thanks!

Intel Core i3-2120 & Core i5-2400 LGA1155 Processors Review

Status
Not open for further replies.

MAC

Associate Review Editor
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
1,086
Location
Montreal
Gaming Benchmarks: 3DMark06 / 3DMark Vantage

Gaming Benchmarks: 3DMark06 / 3DMark Vantage




Futuremark 3DMark06


3DMark06 v1.2.0
Graphic Settings: Default
Resolution: 1280X1024

Test: Specific CPU Score and Full Run 3Dmarks
Comparison: Generated Score

The Futuremark 3DMark series has been a part of the backbone in computer and hardware reviews since its conception. The trend continues today as 3DMark06 provides consumers with a solid synthetic benchmark geared for performance and comparison in the 3D gaming realm. This remains one of the most sought after statistics, as well as an excellent tool for accurate CPU comparison, and it will undoubtedly be used for years to come.


Corei32120_Corei52400_45.jpg


Futuremark 3DMark Vantage


3DMark Vantage v1.0.2
Graphic Settings: Performance Preset
Resolution: 1280X1024

Test: Specific CPU Score and Full Run 3Dmarks
Comparison: Generated Score

3DMark Vantage is the follow-up to the highly successful 3DMark06. It uses DirectX 10 exclusively so if you are running Windows XP, you can forget about this benchmark. Along with being a very capable graphics card testing application, it also has very heavily multi-threaded CPU tests, such Physics Simulation and Artificial Intelligence (AI), which makes it a good all-around gaming benchmark.


Corei32120_Corei52400_46.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:

MAC

Associate Review Editor
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
1,086
Location
Montreal
Gaming Benchmarks: Crysis / Far Cry 2 / X3

Gaming Benchmarks: Crysis / Far Cry 2 / X3



Crysis


Crysis v1.21
Resolution: 1680x1050
Anti Aliasing: 0
Quality Settings: High
Global Settings: DX10 / 64-Bit

Test 1: Ice benchmark_CPU2 demo
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)

Still one of the most hardware intensive game on the market today, Crysis has been chosen for its obvious ability to be able to showcase the differences between platforms and to showcase just how far one will need to go in the quest for maximum performance. The game also features the renowned CryEngine, the power behind the incredible graphics, which is expected to be foundation of future titles.


Corei32120_Corei52400_47.jpg



Far Cry 2


Far Cry 2 1.02
Resolution: 1680x1050
Anti Aliasing: 0
Quality Settings: Very High
Global Settings: DX10 Enabled

Test 1: Ranch Long Demo
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)

Far Cry 2 is the hot new new first-person shooter from Ubisoft's Montreal studio, and the first game to utilize the new visually stunning Dunia Engine, which will undoubtedly be used by numerous future games. Using the included Benchmarking Tool, we ran the Long Ranch demo in DX10 mode at 1680x1050 with all settings set to very high.


Corei32120_Corei52400_48.jpg


X3: Terran Conflict


X3: Terran Conflict 1.2.0.0
Resolution: 1680x1050
Texture Quality: High
Shader Quality: High
Antialiasing 4X
Anisotropic Mode: None
Glow Enabled

Game Benchmark
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)


Corei32120_Corei52400_49.jpg
 

MAC

Associate Review Editor
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
1,086
Location
Montreal
Gaming Benchmarks: Left 4 Dead / Particle Simulation

Gaming Benchmarks: Left 4 Dead / Particle Simulation



Left 4 Dead


Left 4 Dead (Latest Update)
Resolution: 1680x1050
Filtering: 4X MSAA / Anisotropic 8X
Graphic Settings: High
Shader Detail: Very High
Test 1: HWC Custom Timedemo
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)

Left 4 Dead is the latest disorienting, fast-paced zombie apocalypse mega-hit from Valve. L4D uses the latest version of the Source engine with enhancements such as multi-core processor support and physics-based animation. We test here at 1680x1050 with in-game details set to their highest levels, with MSAA 4X and AA 8X. For benching, we used a pre-recorded 20 minute timedemo taken on the No Mercy campaign during The Apartments mission.


Corei32120_Corei52400_50.jpg



Valve Particle Simulation Benchmark


Valve Particle Simulation Benchmark
Default
Comparison: Particle Performance Metric

Originally intended to demonstrate new processing effects added to Half Life 2: Episode 2 and future projects, the particle benchmark condenses what can be found throughout HL2:EP2 and combines it all into one small but deadly package. This test does not symbolize the performance scale for just Episode Two exclusively, but also for many other games and applications that utilize multi-core processing and particle effects. As you will see the benchmark does not score in FPS but rather in its own "Particle Performance Metric", which is useful for direct CPU comparisons.


Corei32120_Corei52400_51.jpg
 

MAC

Associate Review Editor
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
1,086
Location
Montreal
Gaming Benchmarks: Resident Evil 5 / World in Conflict

Gaming Benchmarks: Resident Evil 5 / World in Conflict



Resident Evil 5


Resident Evil 5 1.0.0.129
Resolution: 1680x1050
Anti-Aliasing: Off
Motion Blur: Off
Shadow Detail: High
Texture Detail: High
Overall Quality: High
Test 1: Built-in Timedemo
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)


Corei32120_Corei52400_52.jpg


World in Conflict


World in Conflict v1.010
Resolution: 1680x1050
Anti-Aliasing: 4X
Anisotropic Filtering: 4X
Graphic Settings: Very High
Test 1: Built-in Benchmark
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)

One of the most visually stunning real-time strategy games in recent history, World in Conflict can really push systems to the brink, which is what we attempt by running the game in DirectX 10 mode at 1680x1050 with all settings maxed out. For this test we used the in-game benchmarking tool.


Corei32120_Corei52400_53.jpg
 

MAC

Associate Review Editor
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
1,086
Location
Montreal
IGP Gaming Benchmarks

IGP Gaming Benchmarks


In order to get an idea of how modern IGP’s performan, we decided to see how the new Radeon HD 6550D graphics solution in the A8-3850 APU compares against the Intel GMA HD IGP (both 733Mhz & 900Mhz variants) found in the Clarkdale chips, the Intel HD Graphics 2000/3000 IGPs in the various Sandy Bridge chips (6 EUs @ 850-1100Mhz/ 12 EUs @ 850-1100Mhz/ 12 EUs @ 850-1350Mhz), and AMD's fastest AM3 platform IGP, the Radeon HD 4290 (40 shaders/700Mhz core clock/UMA+SidePort DDR3-1333) found in the 890GX chipset. We also threw in two low-priced discrete GPUs from AMD and NVIDIA, the Radeon HD 5550 GDDR5 (320 shaders/550Mhz core clock) and the GeForce GT 430 DDR3 (96 shaders/700Mhz core clock).

As we demonstrated in AMD A8-3850 APU review, both overall memory bandwidth and the amount of memory allocated to the IGP greatly affects gaming performance, so for these tests with allocated a 1GB UMA frame buffer size, and also tried three difference memory frequency/timing settings.


Futuremark 3DMark06


3DMark06 v1.1.0
Graphic Settings: Default
Resolution: 1280X1024

Test: Specific CPU Score and Full Run 3Dmarks
Comparison: Generated Score

The Futuremark 3DMark series has been a part of the backbone in computer and hardware reviews since its conception. The trend continues today as 3DMark06 provides consumers with a solid synthetic benchmark geared for performance and comparison in the 3D gaming realm. This remains one of the most sought after statistics, as well as an excellent tool for accurate CPU comparison, and it will undoubtedly be used for years to come.


Corei32120_Corei52400_54.jpg



Futuremark 3DMark Vantage


3DMark Vantage v1.0.1
Graphic Settings: Entry Preset
Resolution: 1024X768

Test: Specific CPU Score and Full Run 3Dmarks
Comparison: Generated Score

3DMark Vantage is the follow-up to the highly successful 3DMark06. It uses DirectX 10 exclusively so if you are running Windows XP, you can forget about this benchmark. Along with being a very capable graphics card testing application, it also has very heavily multi-threaded CPU tests, such Physics Simulation and Artificial Intelligence (AI), which makes it a good all-around gaming benchmark.


Corei32120_Corei52400_55.jpg



Far Cry 2


Far Cry 2 1.02
Resolution: 1280x1024
Anti Aliasing: 0
Quality Settings: Medium
Global Settings: DX9 Enabled

Test 1: Ranch Long Demo
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)

Far Cry 2 is the hot new new first-person shooter from Ubisoft's Montreal studio, and the first game to utilize the new visually stunning Dunia Engine, which will undoubtedly be used by numerous future games. Using the included Benchmarking Tool, we ran the Long Ranch demo in DX9 mode at 1280x1024 with all settings set to low.


Corei32120_Corei52400_56.jpg


Left 4 Dead


Left 4 Dead (Latest Update)
Resolution: 1680x1050
Filtering: 0X AA / 0X AF
Graphic Settings: Medium
Shader Detail: Medium
Test 1: HWC Custom Timedemo
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)

Left 4 Dead is the latest disorienting, fast-paced zombie apocalypse mega-hit from Valve. L4D uses the latest version of the Source engine with enhancements such as multi-core processor support and physics-based animation. We tested at 1280x1024 with in-game details set to low. For benching, we used a pre-recorded 20 minute timedemo taken on the No Mercy campaign during The Apartments mission.


Corei32120_Corei52400_57.jpg


World in Conflict


World in Conflict v1.010
Resolution: 1680x1050
Anti-Aliasing: 0X
Anisotropic Filtering: 0X
Graphic Settings: Medium (DX10)
Test 1: Built-in Benchmark
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)

One of the detailed and most visually stunning real-time tactical games in recent history, World in Conflict remains a staple in our gaming lineup . For this test we used the in-game benchmarking tool.


Corei32120_Corei52400_58.jpg


X3: Terran Conflict


X3: Terran Conflict 1.2.0.0
Resolution: 1680x1050
Anti-Aliasing: 0X
Anisotropic Filtering: 0X
Graphic Settings: Medium
Test 1: Built-in Benchmark
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)


Corei32120_Corei52400_59.jpg


As we conclusively demonstrated in our AMD 3850 APU review, Intel HD Graphics and 2000 and 3000 IGP’s don't hold a candle to what AMD is currently offering with their top-end APU. The Intel IGP’s will get you by in a pinch, but the HD 6550D is actually the first non-discrete graphics processor that we would willingly consider playing games with.
 

MAC

Associate Review Editor
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
1,086
Location
Montreal
Power Consumption / Temperature Testing

Power Consumption



For this section, every energy saving feature was enabled in the respective BIOSes and the Windows Vista power plan was changed from High Performance to Balanced.

For our idle test, we let the system idle for 15 minutes and measured the peak wattage through our UPM EM100 power meter.

For our CPU load test, we ran Prime 95 In-place large FFTs on all available threads for 15 minutes, measuring the peak wattage via the UPM EM100 power meter.

For our overall system load test, we ran Prime 95 In-place large FFTs on all available threads for 15 minutes, while simultaneously loading the GPU with OCCT v3.1.0 GPU:OCCT stress test at 1680x1050@60Hz in full screen mode.

Corei32120_Corei52400_60.jpg

As you can see, the Core i3-2120 had exceptionally low power consumption numbers, the lowest that we have seen so far. Similarly, the Core i5-2400 posted very low power consumption numbers, albeit not really any different than our two K-series models.

Corei32120_Corei52400_61.jpg

First and foremost, the Sandy Bridge chips in this graph have an almost unfair advantage in the form of the Intel DH67BL motherboard. This Intel-manufactured motherboard has unmatched idle power consumption, easily 10W less than comparable motherboards from the big three motherboard manufacturers. With that said, the Core i3-2120 once again had the lowest power consumption numbers that we've seen when using an IGP. The Core i5-2400 was also very impressive at idle, but full CPU load and full system load it had similar power consumptions as the higher-clocked K-series chips that feature the fully-fledged Graphics HD 3000 IGP.



Temperature Testing


For the temperature testing, since we were not given a default cooler from AMD, we used a Thermalright Ultra-120 Extreme with a Thermalright TR-FDB-1600 fan. The ambient temperature was 25°C/77°F. The application used to monitor temperatures was HWiNFO v3.82-1300. Keep in mind that the thermal sensors in most modern processors are not really accurate at measuring idle temperatures, hence the very small delta between the room temp and the idle results.

Idle CPU + Idle IGP: The system was left to idle for 15 minutes.
Idle GPU + Load IGP: OCCT v3.1.0 GPU stress test was run at 1680x1050 for 15 minutes.
Load CPU + Idle IGP: Prime 95 In-place large FFTs was run for 15 minutes.
Load CPU + Load IGP: Prime 95 In-place large FFTs and OCCT v3.1.0 GPU stress test were run for 15 minutes.

Corei32120_Corei52400_62.jpg

Obviously, these chips run very cool at idle, and even when the IGP is being fully taxed. However, given the dinky little heatsinks that come bundled with them, they can get quite toasty when fully loaded. The Core i5-2400 in particularly could really use a better stock heatsink.
 

MAC

Associate Review Editor
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
1,086
Location
Montreal
Overclocking Results

Overclocking Results



Corei32120_Corei52400_63a.jpg

As we all know by now, there is very little headroom when it comes to increasing the BCLK on Sandy Bridge processors. This is supposedly because of the unprecedented level of integration on Sandy Bridge (ie: just about everything is now on CPU itself), including the clock generator that used to be on the motherboard. As a result, on average most people should expect to achieve about 104-107Mhz, with a few incredibly rare chips being able to hit up to 110Mhz. It just depends on the quality of the silicon. As a result, the bulk of the overclocking has to be done via the CPU multiplier. However, while the K-series processors are fully unlocked, the rest of lineup is not.

Thankfully, Intel haven't completely forgotten about overclocking on these the regular locked or 'limited unlocked' Sandy Bridge chips. Those models that support Turbo Boost have four additional Turbo multipliers (or performance bins) unlocked above the highest Turbo frequency, but only when combined with a P67 or Z68 motherboard (there's really no CPU overclocking at all on H67).

With all that said, let's take a look at our results:


Corei32120_Corei52400_63th.jpg
Corei32120_Corei52400_64th.gif

Click on image to enlarge

While we initially began our overclocking endeavour on the Intel DP67BG, our unusually poor BCLK overclocking results on the i3-2120 convinced us to switch over to the ASUS P8P67 Deluxe...but to no avail. While this is obviously very poor, we actually haven't been able to find any i3-2120 overclocking attempts that are much better. They all seem to hit a wall before ever reaching a 104Mhz BCLK. So with overclocking out of the window, we tried a little undervolting for fun and we're able to get our chip fully stable at 1.000V. We likely could have gone even lower, but our interest waned.

Luckily, we had a bit more success with the Core i5-2400. The BCLK proved much more receptive to elevation, and we were able to hit a respectable 106MHz. In the BIOS, we were able to set the Turbo multiplier to 38X, which is 4 bins above the default 34X Turbo multi, so that combined with the higher BCLK gave us a very decent overclock. It is variable though. In single-threaded workloads, the top-end 38X multiplier is enabled and one core ramps up to 4028MHz. When all cores are being utilized though, the multiplier drops to 36X and the core clock is 3816MHz. Either way, no matter the workload, this overclock was stable with a slight vCore bump up to 1.306V.
 

MAC

Associate Review Editor
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
1,086
Location
Montreal
Conclusion

Conclusion



Although most of the attention paid towards Sandy Bridge has rightfully been focused on the multiplier-unlocked K models, Intel's mainstream LGA1155 processors are clearly no slouches. These two chips crushed their Intel predecessors across the board, and as such obviously didn’t leave AMD’s offerings looking all that rosy either.

To illustrate our point, take a look at these two tables:

Corei32120_Corei52400_67.jpg
Corei32120_Corei52400_68.jpg

As we demonstrated in our review, AMD’s A8-3850 APU is a very worthwhile product if you’re planning on making use of the integrated GPU. It features graphics performance that is head and shoulders above the IGP found in Intel’s mainstream Sandy Bridge models. However, let’s be honest, anyone building a system with a discrete GPU and with $135-150 to spend on a CPU should not be looking at the A8-3850. Thanks to massive price cuts across AMD’s lineup, you can now find the quad-core 3.4GHz Phenom II X4 965 for $130 and the six-core 2.8Ghz Phenom II X6 1055T for $155. These two chips offer significantly better CPU performance for your dollar than the top-end APU. Having said that, the sad fact remains that the diminutive dual-core/four-thread Core i3-2120 still spanks those two Phenom models in lightly-threaded workloads and all our games. Multi-threaded 2D applications are obviously a weakness though. Normally, we would now mention how well it overclocked and the. However, our sample really could not overclock at all, whereas either of the Phenom II’s can hit 3.8Ghz without breaking a sweat. So ultimately it really comes down to the type of apps you choose, whether you want to overclock, and even which manufacturer you prefer. There is no clear performance king in this price range.

The situation doesn’t seem that much clearer when you look at the Core i5-2400, since this $185 processor faces some stiff competition in the form of AMD's highest-end model, the $190 Phenom II X6 1100T. In lightly-threaded workloads, the Core i5-2400 proved to be one hell of a performer, constantly coming in right behind the two K-series chips. However, in the rare applications that use of more than four threads, the Phenom II X6 was obviously a fair bit faster than the i5-2400, and only lagged behind the Core i7-2600K and Core i7-980X. In all our games though, the Core i5 simply dominated thanks to its more modern microarchitecture. Unlike with the i3-2120, we did managed to overclock this chip thanks to the additional Turbo multipliers, and were able to get it running at between 3.8 to 4.0GHz depending on the workload. At those frequencies, given Sandy Bridge’s IPC advantage, we would give it the edge over a Phenom II X6 running at 4.0 to 4.2Ghz. Now the big question is, is it worth spending the additional $25 to get an i5-2500K instead? That obviously depends on your budget, and whether you care about potentially achieving a 400-800MHz higher overclock. Either way, there is no denying that the Core i5-2400 is very good processor.

Now obviously price and performance are not the only things that matter, people are concerned with power consumption nowadays too. If you are one of those people, then the choice is pretty clear cut. If you are building a system with a discrete GPU, nothing comes close to matching the power efficiency of the Sandy Bridge LGA1155 platform. Period. If an IGP is sufficient for your needs, and you aren’t planning on gaming, then the Core i3-2120 is still the ideal choice since it features the lowest overall power consumption numbers that we’ve ever seen. If you have to settle for an IGP and do want to game, a system based on the A8-3850 APU is a no-brainer. It might have 60% higher overall power consumption than a Core i3-based based, but it will have 80% higher average frame rates as well.

Corei32120_Corei52400_71.jpg
Corei32120_Corei52400_72.jpg

Core i3-2120......Core i5-2400


 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top