bit-tech.net

Intel Core i5-760 Review

Comments 1 to 25 of 43

Reply
mi1ez 15th October 2010, 10:45 Quote
Nice. This may well be my next CPU, replacing my Q6600. Might wait and see what happens with Sandy Bridge first though...
rjkoneill 15th October 2010, 10:54 Quote
OcUK have this cpu £10 cheaper than you listed today only.

this chip has been out for ages - why so long for the review?
PingCrosby 15th October 2010, 10:55 Quote
I've got one. Its class.
rickysio 15th October 2010, 11:06 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by mi1ez
Nice. This may well be my next CPU, replacing my Q6600. Might wait and see what happens with Sandy Bridge first though...

Got a Q6600 here, I'm waiting for SB myself.
AcidJiles 15th October 2010, 11:17 Quote
Just bought one will arrive today. Haven't done overclocking in a long time. Will see how I get on with bit-techs guide for the 750 http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2009/09/21/overclocking-intel-s-core-i5-750/1
AcidJiles 15th October 2010, 11:20 Quote
deleted
ulfar 15th October 2010, 11:48 Quote
i wonder how long it will take 'til the turbo boost issue is solved. kinda want to know how a fully functioning 760 performs against a 750 or 970BE (at stock)
MaverickWill 15th October 2010, 12:07 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by ulfar
i wonder how long it will take 'til the turbo boost issue is solved. kinda want to know how a fully functioning 760 performs against a 750 or 970BE (at stock)
Quote:
Originally Posted by The article
Performance-wise, the i5-760 was a surprisingly mixed bag. It fared well against its most closely priced AMD competitor, the Phenom II X4 970 Black Edition. At stock speeds for example the i5-760 pulled out a lead of 140 points in our Media Benchmarks, despite running 700MHz slower than the AMD chip. Crysis also seemed to prefer the Intel chip, with our test rig managing a 27fps minimum with the i5-760 inserted against the 23fps minimum we saw when using the X4 970.

These gaps increased when both the chips were overclocked too; with both chips running at 4.1GHz, the i5-760 was a staggering 35 per cent faster than the X4 970 in our Media Benchmarks. At these speeds, the i5-760 took the lead in every one of our tests, including those that the X4 970 had proved dominant in at stock speeds such as our Cinebench and WPrime tests.

With the competition from AMD comprehensively destroyed...

A bit better than that. ;-)
Xir 15th October 2010, 12:12 Quote
Quote:
it affects only those who run their CPUs at stock speeds. Running the i5-760 at stock speeds, however, is a travesty

I disagree, with the turboboost working well, you'll save a lot of power (heat and noise) during normal operation but gain the advantage of speed under load.

Yes, it overclocks great to 4.1 Ghz...but it uses 100W more (which you need to cool away).
All the time you're...surfing bit-tech :D , it doesn't need to run at 4.1 Ghz, does it?

And while there are great overclocking gadgets out there, the software that allows you to say: OC now (4.1 Ghz), I'm gaming, and stop overclocking, I'm going to surf, isn't really around now, is it?
steve30x 15th October 2010, 12:12 Quote
I got a 760 and I cant get it above 3.9GHZ because it gets too hot with my corsair H50 it reaches above 70c if I use 1.3v and 4ghz. I think it could be my motherboard is causing problems though. This Maximus III Gene is a very unstable motherboard (Even when my CPU is not overclocked)

PS> If I am not gaming I have my CPU set to stock bios settings with asus profile.
memeroot 15th October 2010, 12:24 Quote
figures compared to 930/950 ?
Chicken76 15th October 2010, 12:26 Quote
Has anyone been able to replicate the power consumption figures? The difference between this one and the i5-750 is supposed to be in favor of the 750 as it runs at a lower frequency, yet this one manages to consume less, by a significant margin. Have they made more changes than they admitted, or have Bit-Tech just gotten lucky with that sample chip?
ulfar 15th October 2010, 12:30 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xir
And while there are great overclocking gadgets out there, the software that allows you to say: OC now (4.1 Ghz), I'm gaming, and stop overclocking, I'm going to surf, isn't really around now, is it?

doesn't the "easy OC"-button-thingy, which can be found on some mobo's, work that way?
i thought it was like "i got a fever, and the only remedy is more cowbell!*", and then just push it again to switch off the oc (after rebooting or whatever).

*cowbell being power in this case
ulfar 15th October 2010, 12:32 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicken76
Has anyone been able to replicate the power consumption figures? The difference between this one and the i5-750 is supposed to be in favor of the 750 as it runs at a lower frequency, yet this one manages to consume less, by a significant margin. Have they made more changes than they admitted, or have Bit-Tech just gotten lucky with that sample chip?

might be due to various reasons (as mentioned in the article).
could be better energy management, the "lack" of turbo boost, or just bt being "lucky" with this chip.
mrbens 15th October 2010, 12:44 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xir
Quote:
it affects only those who run their CPUs at stock speeds. Running the i5-760 at stock speeds, however, is a travesty

And while there are great overclocking gadgets out there, the software that allows you to say: OC now (4.1 Ghz), I'm gaming, and stop overclocking, I'm going to surf, isn't really around now, is it?

Intel Turbostep :)
Phil Rhodes 15th October 2010, 12:57 Quote
Maybe I'm overlooking something here, but it's mentioned that the thing performed somewhat more slowly in a couple of instance than the 750, then you're surprised that it draws less power.

Um. Well, yes?
Xtrafresh 15th October 2010, 13:03 Quote
Paul, on which exact board and BIOS did you test? I'm trying to dig a little deeper into the turbo boost thing. The review states you use a H55M-UD2H, but when i looked at your picture to see the revision number, it turns out you posted a pic of the P55A-UD3R (rev 1.0).

The UD2H shows compatibility on the 760 starting at F9 BIOS, and then a turbo boost fix at F10. Worth a little test?
http://www.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=3503#

The story is exactly the same for the P55A-UD3R aswell by the way, i5-750 support from F9 upwards, and a turbo boost fix at F10.

Also, doesn't the fact that some boards need a BIOS update to support this CPU at all imply that there is more going on under the hood then a simple multiplier bump?
favst89 15th October 2010, 13:27 Quote
I got mine awhile ago and didn't notice any such lack in the turbo boost, using my ga-p55a-ud3 and everything on stock it would clock up to around 3.3ghz with a single core being used and would run the multiplier at 22x even with all four cores loaded rather than the base 21. This was even before upgrading the bios (there was a mistake on the gigabyte website, when I looked, where it said all the processors needed F8 to work and I didn't bother checking again till I got round to over clocking it).
AcidJiles 15th October 2010, 14:26 Quote
Looking to OC it when I have it. Whats the best way to oc it so its only oced when I need it eg in games but not generally? is the Hotkey OC from gigabyte any good?
xaser04 15th October 2010, 14:30 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xir
Quote:
it affects only those who run their CPUs at stock speeds. Running the i5-760 at stock speeds, however, is a travesty

I disagree, with the turboboost working well, you'll save a lot of power (heat and noise) during normal operation but gain the advantage of speed under load.

Yes, it overclocks great to 4.1 Ghz...but it uses 100W more (which you need to cool away).
All the time you're...surfing bit-tech :D , it doesn't need to run at 4.1 Ghz, does it?

And while there are great overclocking gadgets out there, the software that allows you to say: OC now (4.1 Ghz), I'm gaming, and stop overclocking, I'm going to surf, isn't really around now, is it?

Intel Speedstep or whatever they call it now works in this way.

My i7 920 clocks down when it isn't loaded (even though it's overclocked) and this chip should too (assuming to don't switch the features off in the bios).
V3ctor 15th October 2010, 15:31 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickysio
Quote:
Originally Posted by mi1ez
Nice. This may well be my next CPU, replacing my Q6600. Might wait and see what happens with Sandy Bridge first though...

Got a Q6600 here, I'm waiting for SB myself.

I'm waiting on Ivy Bridge... :D It should appear in Q4/2011... :P
Quote:
Ivy Bridge processors may be released as early as the second half of 2011. Ivy Bridge will replace dual-core processors with quad-core processors at the entry level segment, while delivering hexa-core and octa-core processors for mainstream and higher-end level segments.
(Wiki)
Zaim 15th October 2010, 16:25 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lizard
Intel finally gets around to updating the brilliant i5-750. Let's hope that hasn't broken it.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2010/10/15/intel-core-i5-760-review/1

The review was good but disappointing. why didn't you include the Phenom X6 1055t? its the same price as the I5? you had the i7 in there so don't understand why the X6 from amd isn't there.
Nature 15th October 2010, 16:59 Quote
Dear Mr. Goodhead,

i5-760
Speed8/10
Features9/10
Value9/10
Overall9/10

Phenom 2 X4 Black
Speed7/10
Features9/10
Value7/10
Overall7/10

Why do you round down for one and round up for another?
Sloth 15th October 2010, 17:14 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nature
Dear Mr. Goodhead,

i5-760
Speed8/10
Features9/10
Value9/10
Overall9/10

Phenom 2 X4 Black
Speed7/10
Features9/10
Value7/10
Overall7/10

Why do you round down for one and round up for another?
If memory serves, the overall value isn't a rounding of the top three. Different readers and customers may value each of the first three scores differently, some may want the most speed and not care about value as much. Some may be just the opposite. And for any given product there may be features which aren't sufficiently covered by the first three scores. The Overall score is Bit-tech's/the author's perception of the product as a whole. None of the scores are based on a scientifically rigid process. Look at the benchmarks for those types of figures. :)

In the case of the two products you list I'd assume that the i5-760 scored as if it was rounded up because of its overclocking potential. The X4 Black was probably scored lower because even though it's a decent product, there are better options at its price point.
Material 15th October 2010, 18:04 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xtrafresh
The review states you use a H55M-UD2H, but when i looked at your picture to see the revision number, it turns out you posted a pic of the P55A-UD3R (rev 1.0).

The UD2H shows compatibility on the 760 starting at F9 BIOS, and then a turbo boost fix at F10.

That's a good spot, we needed a picture for the how we test page and I'd forgotten to take one so I dug up that one in a rush and didn't check it close enough. I've swapped it out now.

We used the latest F11 BIOS for testing, the first thing we did when we found the issue was to check the BIOS was up to date.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums