Core 2 Quadro Review - Overclocking
(Page 5 of 5 )
Though this setup really isn't prepared for overclocking, being passively cooled and all, we still made an attempt at overclocking it. We kept the voltage down at 1.2V (against the default of 1.3V). and managed to bring this CPU to a firm 2.7GHz with a 1200MHz FSB. It didn't want to go further, however, regardless of multiplier. I'm uncertain as to why it was limited. I have heard that a bug in this board actually has the multiplier at higher than what it should, which could explain the seemingly higher performance than Core 2 Duo at single threaded tasks.
Super Pi 1M | C2Q @ Stock | C2Q @ 2.7GHz | AMD FX60 |
1 Instance | 21.013 | 18.625 | 35.188 |
2 Instances | 21.103 | 18.813 | 35.813 |
4 Instances | 24.457 | 21.278 | 74.177 |
Still, these are some rather impressive results, 18 seconds in a single threaded test on a quad core CPU cooled by a passive cooler. It's amazing when you compare it to the 21.7 second AMD world record held by a single cored FX57 cooled via liquid nitrogen.
SiSoftware | C2Q @ Stock | C2Q @ 2.7GHz | AMD FX60 |
Arithmetic (Dhrystone) | 57072 | 64148 | 21420 |
Arithmetic (Whetstone) | 22403 | 24046 | 11252 |
Multimedia (Int) | 258337 | 292393 | 47499 |
Multimedia (Float) | 141786 | 159448 | 51977 |
Here we see some truly incredible results with the Core 2 Quadro performing up to six times as fast as the FX60.
It was, however disappointing that we couldn't raise the FSB far beyond 300MHz, though it was pointed out to me that this was a problem with the board and that other boards such as the P5B have no problem scaling well with Core 2 Quadros.
Power Usage
As the intended replacement for a CPU range that had a power density of far greater than that of a nuclear power station, no review would be complete without a test of its power usage.
Intel has not yet specified any TDP for this CPU, however, since it is basically two E6600 slabbed on one PCB, one would assume it's quite simply double the 65W TDP of the E6600, giving 130W.
However we decided to confirm this. Our cooling has a watt-to-degree ratio of 0.25W/°C. We were running with an ambient temperature of 26°C, and at full load on all four cores, temperatures maxed at 63°C, giving a delta in temperature of 37°C, giving a power usage of 148W, slightly above our estimate, and even in excess of the 135W Pentium Extreme Edition 955. Performance-wise though this CPU is more than twice as fast as the 955, thus still giving it a lead in the more important performance-per-watt ratio.
We overclocked the chip to 2.7GHz and repeated the test. The CPU maxed at 66°C giving a delta of 40°C, increasing the power usage to 160W. Not a bad increase in power usage given we increased clocks by 13%, while power usage only went up by 8%.
Here is a table comparing the Core 2 Quadro previous high-end chips from Intel.
CPU | Clock | VCore | Power Usage (Watts) |
Presler 955 | 3.46GHz | 1.3V | 130W |
Presler 955 | 4.26GHz | 1.3V | 183W |
Presler 955 | 4.50GHz | 1.55V | 330W |
Smithfield840 | 3.20GHz | 1.35V | 130W |
Smithfield840 | 4.00GHz | 1.4V | 270W |
| Kentsfield 6600 | 2.40GHz | 1.2V | 148W |
Kentsfield 6600 | 2.70GHz | 1.2V | 160W |
While the power usage is still comparable to Intel's previous line of CPUs, you have to remember that there are four cores under the hood, as opposed to their previous lines having only two cores. When you consider that, it's truly amazing that all four CPUs can run under a passive heatsink without any real heat troubles.
Conclusion
It is clear now that Intel have reclaimed the performance crown, with this chip totally annihilating every other desktop chip on the market. However it will still be many months before release, and the cost of this chip is expected to be somewhat provocative, estimated at around USD 700 to USD 1000.
Pros
- Incredibly fast at both multithreaded and single threaded applications.
Cons
- Motherboard companies still need time to make their boards able to overclock this beast. Power usage is quite high.
- Expensive
| DISCLAIMER: The content provided in this article is not warranted or guaranteed by Developer Shed, Inc. The content provided is intended for entertainment and/or educational purposes in order to introduce to the reader key ideas, concepts, and/or product reviews. As such it is incumbent upon the reader to employ real-world tactics for security and implementation of best practices. We are not liable for any negative consequences that may result from implementing any information covered in our articles or tutorials. If this is a hardware review, it is not recommended to open and/or modify your hardware. |
| Recommended by Dev Hardware |
|---|
|
