In 2009, the American microprocessor manufacturer Intel presented a new model line of crystals based on the modern Lynnfield architecture. The cheapest processor from this line was the Core i5 750, the technical characteristics of which were almost identical to last year's line. Nevertheless, these crystals are very popular among users and allow solving many modern problems.

Market positioning and price range

Engineers from the innovative technology development section, when developing the LGA 1156 processor socket, divided the die market into several categories:

- Celeron and Penrium series processors. The former were designed to assemble budget system units, ideal for office tasks, while the latter had a higher level of performance, sufficient to run some modern computer games with low GUI settings. The main difference between both representatives was the amount of cache memory and clock speed, due to which higher performance is achieved;

- CPUs of the Core i3 and i5 families, to which the model of the crystal considered in our today's article belongs. These processors are designed for advanced users who need increased performance. Budget models have only two physical cores, however, thanks to hyper-threading technology that can process program code in four threads, these solutions are in no way inferior to similar AMD processors with 4 cores each. The CPU models of the Core i5 line are more powerful due to the full four cores, increased cache, as well as proprietary TurboBoost technology, which provides a huge increase in performance when performing more complex tasks.

— Core i7 crystals are the ideal solution for enthusiasts and professionals who, due to the specifics of their work, need powerful, productive stationary computers. These processor models have four physical cores and HyperThreading technology, thanks to which the crystal is capable of operating in eight threads. In addition, this line of microprocessors has an increased amount of cache memory and an increased clock speed.

Despite the fact that the Core i5 750 CPU is a representative of the middle price range, in terms of its hardware characteristics and performance level, it may well compete with some of its older counterparts. The thing is that most modern programs and computer games are designed to work with quad-core processors, so there is no tangible difference in the process of performing various tasks between our today's hero and the flagship lines of crystals.

Factory equipment

Consumers have two delivery options for this processor: Tray and Box. The first option is cheaper and, in addition to the microprocessor itself, the consumer receives an FGT, an Intel branded sticker that can be stuck on the system unit, and an instruction manual upon purchase. The tray package is designed mainly for more advanced users who assemble a powerful system unit on their own and want to install a more efficient cooling system for their CPU. The boxed version, which among ordinary people is called boxed, in addition to all of the above, contains Intel's proprietary cooling fan and thermal paste to ensure better thermal conductivity between the crystal and the cooling radiator.

The CPU Core i5 750 is designed to work with all motherboards based on the LGA1156 socket. A feature of this connector is that it assumes operation on a single chip. At the time the processor went on sale, Socket LGA1156 made it possible to assemble completely different system units: from budget and simple machines to powerful gaming computers. This processor socket was popular until 2011, after which it was gradually replaced by the more modern LGA1155. Nevertheless, many users today continue to use processors and motherboards with socket 1156 due to the fact that their performance is enough to this day to solve a large number of tasks.

Technological process

Considering the fact that the Core i5 750 CPU hit the shelves in 2009, it is quite obvious that it was manufactured using a forty-five nanometer process technology, which was one of the most modern at that time. This technology made it possible to create reliable and productive processors, with which there were no problems. Later, engineers at Intel developed a 32nm process that allowed for thinner crystal wafers.

Architecture

As mentioned at the beginning of the article, the Core i5 750 CPU is based on four physical cores. At the same time, support for HyperThreading technology is not provided in this model, as a result of which the processor operates in a four-threaded mode. Nevertheless, this did not prevent the crystal from coping with the most complex tasks and working with all modern software. Therefore, if we compare it with representatives of the older generation Core i7 crystals, then the difference in the speed of task execution will not be noticeable.

cache memory

Like any other modern processor, the Core i5 750 has a three-level cache memory, which has the following hardware characteristics:

- The cache memory of the first level consists of four clusters, each of which is 64 KB, working with one computing module;

- The second level cache is also arranged, however, the size of each block is 256 kilobytes;

- The third level cache is used by all computing modules of the processor, and the size of each cluster is 2 megabytes.

RAM compatible

One of the key features of the 1156 processor socket is that engineers have completely redesigned compatibility with RAM modules. Among the main changes is the transfer of the northbridge, which is responsible for supplying power to the chip, and the RAM controller to the CPU, thanks to which the engineers were able to significantly increase the speed of the RAM memory. As for compatibility with RAM modules, the Core i5 750 supports third-generation DDR RAM sticks with a bandwidth of 1066 MB. At the same time, it should be noted that installing a more expensive RAM memory that supports a higher frequency does not give any increase in the speed of information exchange between the RAM and the microprocessor.

Thermal package and operating temperature

The thermal package of the microprocessor considered in our today's article is 95 watts. Thus, the maximum temperature of the crystal when performing complex operations does not exceed 72 degrees. The temperature in normal operation is around 45 degrees, and after overclocking it rises to 55 degrees. However, this all concerns the official information provided by the manufacturer, but how does this crystal behave in practice? At maximum load, it is possible to bring the processor to the maximum temperature only if the cooling cooler fails, or when the overclocked CPU is running resource-intensive applications on a weak cooling system.

Clock frequency

The maximum frequency of the Core i5 750 is 2.7 GHz, which is not used when performing everyday tasks. The chip supports the innovative TurboBoost technology, which automatically adjusts the clock frequency of each core at the software level, depending on the complexity of the operations performed. With the simultaneous operation of four cores in four-thread mode, the peak clock frequency is 2.8 GHz, and when performing tasks in 2 threads, this figure increased to 2.93 GHz. But when only one computing unit was working, the frequency of operation could increase to 3.2 gigahertz. In addition, the manufacturer supplies the crystal to stores with an unlocked multiplier, so anyone can overclock the CPU and get a thirty percent performance boost.

Retail value and consumer reviews

Buying a Core i5 750 CPU will cost users about $213, which is quite acceptable, since in 2009 a powerful gaming machine could be assembled on the basis of this crystal. Moreover, even today this CPU has not lost its relevance and perfectly copes with any tasks. Some problems may arise when running the latest computer games with the maximum settings for graphic effects, but at the minimum settings this kid provides a very comfortable gameplay.

Conclusion

The Core i5 750 CPU from Intel Corporation became a real high-tech masterpiece in 2009, the demand for which remains to this day. This crystal will be an excellent solution for most average users who do not distinguish between work and leisure, and use their computer both for office tasks and to enjoy their favorite toys. The main advantages of this model are low cost, excellent performance and low power consumption.

Introduction

The launch of the Intel LGA 1156 platform proved to be very successful, with online publications and user opinions very positive. Our first Core i5 articles covered processor and platform technologies, and gaming performance. Now it's time to explore the possibilities of overclocking new processors. How well can you overclock the latest Intel platform? What will be the impact of Turbo Boost technology? What about power consumption at increased clock speeds? We will try to answer all these questions in the article.

P55: “Next BX?”

This phrase is often used to describe a new chipset or platform that has the potential to become the de facto standard, that is, to dominate all direct competitors for more time than the life cycle of a conventional product implies. A long time ago, the 440BX chipset that powered the second generation Pentium II became the most popular chipset, although some competitors offered great specs on paper. BX provided a lot for its price, and journalists often remember the name of this product.

Many users are still running Pentium 4s, Pentium Ds or Athlon 64/X2s or even first generation Core 2 systems - and they want to upgrade to four cores and maybe Windows 7 as well. Core i5 is one of the most attractive options in terms of price / performance ratio for today, especially for users with serious overclocking ambitions.

Does the P55 platform have the potential to be the next BX? Yes and no. On the one hand, Intel will be promoting the LGA 1156 socket interface for at least a couple of years, although the pinout and electrical specifications may change. From what we know today, we can assume that the underlying platform will survive until 2011, and all 32nm Westmere processors can be installed on this socket. So yes, he has good prospects.

However, there are some features that promise to become relevant soon and that the P55 platform does not support today. The first is USB 3.0. The second is SATA with a 6 Gb / s interface. Of course, the accelerated SATA interface will only have a significant impact on flash-based SSDs and eSATA fixtures that connect multiple drives through a single eSATA interface. But USB 3.0, we think, should become the standard once it's released, as most external drives are typically limited to only 30 MB/s due to the USB 2.0 bottleneck.

Acceleration: good speeds, but some obstacles

For our project, we used an MSI P55-GD65 motherboard, planning to overclock an entry-level Core i5-750 processor to 4.3 GHz. However, we were able to reach frequencies just above 4 GHz by turning off some important processor features.

Choosing the Best LGA 1156 Processor for Overclocking

Intel has released three different processors so far, all based on the LGA 1156 interface: the Core i5-750 at 2.66GHz, the Core i7-860 at 2.8GHz, and the fastest Core i7-870 at 2.93GHz. These processors differ not only in the nominal clock speed, but also in the implementation of the Turbo Boost acceleration function. The 800-series processors can accelerate individual cores more aggressively than other models. Let me give you a small table.

Many people expect that faster processor models will overclock better, but this is not always confirmed in practice. Since the cores of all existing LGA 1156 processors are the same, we decided to analyze the prices first. And the price when buying a batch of 1000 pieces from the Core i7-870 is $562. We think it's a bit pricey for enthusiasts looking for the best price/performance ratio, so we decided to look at the remaining models: Core-i7-860 for $284 and i5-750 for $196.

Since in our review at the time of the launch of the processor and related articles, we usually used faster models, we initially decided to take an entry-level processor in the overclocking project. Indeed, this model will be the most attractive to most of our readers.

We'll start at the stock clock speed of 2.66 GHz, and this model's implementation of Turbo Boost can push the clock speed up to a maximum of 3.2 GHz. Since the Core i7-870 reaches 3.6 GHz with the highest single core Turbo Boost, we decided to start overclocking from 3.6 GHz, after which we will check the maximum frequency that the most affordable Core i5 processor can reach.

Platform description

You can find many results of successful overclocking of different platforms based on the LGA 1156 architecture on the Internet (there are also results that are better to avoid; we have provided additional details in review of entry-level motherboards based on the P55 chipset). All major motherboard manufacturers consider the P55 chipset to be a key product, so they all invest a lot of money in development. We have already used three different motherboards based on the P55 chipset in article dedicated to the release of the processor, so we decided to take the flagship model MSI P55-GD65 for overclocking. The P55-GD80 model is also on the market, which has a larger heat pipe cooling system, as well as three x16 PCI Express 2.0 slots instead of two. However, the P55-GD80's three slots are limited to 16, 8, and 4 lanes, while the P55-GD65 card operates in 16 and 8 lane configurations.

MSI has implemented a seven-phase dynamic voltage regulator, a heat pipe cooling system, and many other features that motherboard manufacturers usually put on overclocker models. What sets the MSI board apart from many others is a small feature: OC Genie Overclocking Assistance is a simple solution that automatically overclocks your system by increasing the base frequency upon activation. MSI claims that the system itself manages all the necessary settings, but this function requires high-quality platform components. But for this review, we decided to ditch all the fancy features and opt for the traditional overclocking method.

We installed the latest BIOS, which allows you to disable Intel Overspeed protection, and then proceeded to our overclocking project. The biggest multiplier we could choose was the maximum Turbo Boost mode with four cores active - that is, one step above the default 20x (21 x 133 = 2.8 GHz). We got a higher clock speed by increasing the base frequency to 215 MHz.

The stock voltage of the i5-750 is 1.25V - and with that, we were able to achieve exactly the same maximum clock speed that Intel specifies for the Core i7-870 processor with the maximum single-core Turbo Boost mode: 3.6 GHz.

3.6 GHz idle.

3.6 GHz - memory settings.

The result is quite impressive, but we did not expect less. We were able to overclock the Core i7 processors on the LGA 1366 socket in exactly the same way without much voltage increase.

3.7 GHz idle.

3.7 GHz under load.

3.7 GHz - memory settings.

We reached 3.8 GHz without any problems. However, we had to increase the BIOS voltage from 1.25V to 1.32V.

3.8 GHz idle.

3.8 GHz under load.

3.8 GHz - memory settings.

3.9 GHz idle.

3.9 GHz under load.

3.9 GHz - memory settings.

4.0 GHz idle.

4.0 GHz under load.

4.0 GHz - memory settings.

We were able to reach 4.0 GHz with a further increase in voltage to 1.45 V. We also increased the voltage of the PCH chipset (P55) to ensure stability, but our first problems did not show up until 4.1 GHz.

Remember that it was the 1.45V that was the problem when we ran cheap motherboard tests. Three models on the P55 (ASRock, ECS and MSI) failed. We plan to release material next week, in which we will review the steps taken by each manufacturer to address the identified deficiencies.

4.1 GHz idle.

4.1 GHz under load.

4.1 GHz - memory settings.

We were able to get the Core i5-750 to run at 4.1GHz by setting Vcore in the BIOS to 1.465V, but the system was unable to return from peak to idle without crashing. Increasing the CPU or platform voltage further didn't help either. We were able to further increase clock speeds when we turned off C-state support in the BIOS.

Unfortunately, the power consumption of the system after this step in idle mode increased by a significant 34 watts. Of course, we were able to achieve higher clock speeds, but we also got clear evidence that it is better to keep the processor in the smallest possible idle state so that transistors and entire functional blocks are turned off when they are not needed.

4.2 GHz idle.

4.2 GHz under load.

4.2 GHz - memory settings.

To achieve stable operation at a frequency of 4.2 GHz, we had to increase the voltage to 1.52 V.

4.3 GHz idle.

4.3 GHz under load.

4.3 GHz - memory settings.

By increasing the voltage of our Core i5-750 to 1.55 V, we were able to reach 4.3 GHz, but this setting no longer mattered. The system was stable enough to run Fritz tests and take CPU-Z readings, but we weren't able to complete the entire suite of tests. However, we still don't recommend this setting for day-to-day work, as idle power consumption rises to 127W. Let's see what level of performance we can get after overclocking to 4.2 GHz, and how this frequency will affect efficiency.

Table of clock frequencies and voltages

Test configuration

Tests and settings

All the games we tested showed impressive benefits. Left 4 Dead scales especially well with clock speed. 3DMark Vantage doesn't run much faster as this test relies more on graphics performance.

Application performance also improves significantly after overclocking.

The same can be said about audio and video encoding tests. Higher processor clock speeds have a noticeable effect.

The power consumption of the system does not change much, even if you increase the frequency of the processor and its voltage. The processor's power-saving features provide excellent power efficiency by turning off blocks and cores when they are not needed. However, we had to disable C-state support to overclock the processor above 4 GHz, and this move resulted in a noticeable impact on system idle power consumption.

The difference in power consumption at peak load is also noticeable. Power consumption almost doubles when moving from 2.66 to 4.2 GHz. Of course, the performance will not double in this case, that is, the efficiency of the system will suffer from overclocking.

Total energy consumed per PCMark Vantage run (Wh).

Average power consumption per PCMark Vantage run (wattage).

Efficiency: The result in points for the average power consumption in watts.

As you might expect, stock clock speeds with Turbo Mode enabled provide the most efficiency (performance per watt). Increasing clock speeds and voltage increases performance in the good old fashioned way, but increases power consumption even more. If you need an efficient car, then it is better to refuse serious overclocking.

Our expectations for performance gains were high, but realistic. The Intel Nehalem architecture is unrivaled in performance per clock today; we expected it to scale nicely with every megahertz added to the clock speed. In fact, our test system based on the MSI P55-GD65 motherboard provided a significant and almost linear performance increase up to 4 GHz, when we had to turn off the processor's internal power saving system (C-states) in order to reach the maximum clock speed. Of course, we don't recommend taking this step if you want to keep idle power low.

Knowing that there are many examples of 4.5 GHz and higher frequencies on the Internet, our results seem disappointing. But remember that we used an entry-level Intel Core i5-750 processor in this project, which has a nominal clock speed of 2.66 GHz. If we take a reasonable maximum of 4 GHz, then we still get a 1.33 GHz increase in clock speed, or 50 percent. In addition, we did not care much about the choice of cooling system. The Thermalright MUX-120 air cooler performed well, but liquid or more powerful air solutions can provide even higher overclocking limits.

The Core i5-750 is a great processor for overclocking, but you shouldn't get too carried away with the process to avoid excessive power consumption. Yes, you can get 4.2 GHz frequencies similar to many LGA 1366 platforms that have about the same overclocking potential - and much cheaper. But, again, we cannot fail to note that the usual "rough" overclocking is no longer as attractive as it used to be.

Intel today is changing the very concept of overclocking, as it changes the processor specifications from being tied to clock frequency to being tied to a thermal package. As long as the processor does not exceed certain thermal and electrical thresholds, it can run as fast as possible. In fact, it is on such a model that future AMD and Intel processors can be built. The Core i5 processor and our overclocking project clearly show that static frequencies are no longer so interesting. What really matters is the clock speed range and the thermal/electrical limits that the processor can operate within. And overclocking in the future may be about changing those limits rather than hitting any top clock speed.

We don't know if the P55 platform can be called "the next BX", but the Core i5/i7 processors for the new Intel LGA 1156 interface are of great practical value whether you overclock them or not.

At present, the opinion formed under the influence of system requirements has already settled down that a productive desktop computer, focused on modern demanding games, should have a powerful quad-core processor and a high-performance graphics card of the latest generation, and not rarely a couple of video cards. However, given the prices for new processor models, such a computer can cost a pretty penny. For example: the most affordable latest generation Intel Core i7-920 processor costs over $300 at the time of writing. An entry-level motherboard based on the Intel X58 Express chipset (more details in the ASUS P6T review), compatible with this processor, will cost about $200, and a modest three-channel RAM kit from $75. In total, for the combination “processor + motherboard + memory”, you will need to pay such an amount that is enough to buy a full-fledged ready-made computer based on AMD products, and the processor will also be quad-core in this assembly, and the latest generation video card. To resolve such an incident, Intel, whose brainchild is the above-proposed "expensive" system, presented, in its opinion, more affordable proposals: Intel Core i7-860; Intel Core i7-870 and Intel Core i5-750 on the same Nehalem microarchitecture. Also, to reduce the cost of the finished system, a new Intel P55 Express system logic was introduced (more details in the GIGABYTE GA-P55M-UD2 review), on the basis of which you can create more affordable motherboards than on Intel X58 compatible with Intel Core i7-920. In this review, we will try to figure out how much more affordable high-performance solutions from Intel have become, and in general, have they remained high-performance? We will judge by the Intel Core i5-750 processor, which at the time of this writing is offered at a price of about $240 and is the most affordable offer on the revolutionary Nehalem microarchitecture.

Package

The CPU-Z program, although the latest version 1.52.1, is inherently unable to convey all information about the capabilities of the processor. The fact is that the Intel Core i5-750 carries several innovative technologies that can only be seen during the operation of the system, and a screenshot of the program is able to display the state of affairs only at one point in time. Naturally, all innovations will be considered and analyzed in detail, but a little later, since it is simply impossible to describe such a volume of information in one paragraph. At this stage, it should be noted that the processor in the nominal mode operates at a frequency of 2.66 GHz, the voltage supplied by the motherboard in the "AUTO" mode is 1.232 V (with Turbo Boost technology enabled 1.304 V). Also worth noting is the QPI value of 2.4 GHz, which indicates the frequency of the bus of the same name. This bus can be said to play the role of an FSB, by analogy with processors for the Socket LGA 775 platform. However, unlike the "classic" FSB, which connected the processor to the north bridge of the motherboard, the QPI bus connects the processor core with the RAM controller and the bus controller PCI-E, it is noteworthy that the latter are built into the processor, and there is no north bridge in Socket LGA 1156 motherboards at all.

For a better understanding of the above image and innovations in the Socket LGA 1156 platform, you should track the evolution of Intel platforms, and changes in the corresponding processors.

We should start with the Socket LGA 775 platform, which appeared on the market as a result of the improvement of the Pentium 4 series processors. But it is pointless to consider all stages of evolution, so let's start with the Intel P45 chipset, which is still popular today.

As can be seen from the block diagram of the Intel P45 chipset, the processor communicates with the north bridge (MCH) via the FSB bus (with a bandwidth of 10.6 GB / s). The north bridge, in turn, is able to communicate with two channels of RAM (6.5 GB / s bandwidth when using DDR2 or 12.5 GB / s with DDR3 modules), the south bridge (ICH) via the DMI bus (2 GB / s) and one PCI-E x16 v2.0 port or two PCI-E x8 v2.0 ports.

In such an "assembly" all elements are balanced and do not infringe on each other, with the exception of the restriction on PCI-E lines. Two video cards will work in x8 mode instead of x16 and will lose a little in performance due to the halving of the bandwidth of the PCI-E x16 v2.0 port.

The Intel X48 chipset is the latest and most productive for the Socket LGA 775 platform. It differs from the Intel P45 by the presence of as many as two PCI-E x16 v2.0 lanes, which, when using two video cards with the appropriate interfaces, will not be “impaired” in performance, because the bandwidth the capacity of the PCI-E x16 v 2.0 port is 5 GB/s.

The Nehalem microarchitecture processors brought with them the Intel X58 chipset and the Socket LGA 1366 platform, which have reshuffled the controller layout over the years. From now on, the memory controller has moved into the processor itself (similar to AMD solutions), thus enabling the latter to communicate with the memory bypassing the north bridge. The processor itself began to communicate with the north bridge via the QPI bus. Its bandwidth is 25.6 GB / s, which is twice as much as that of the Socket LGA 775 platform (in the best case, the FSB can provide a bandwidth of 12.8 GB / s.). The northbridge, in turn, provided two PCI-E x16 v2.0 ports and communicated with the southbridge via the DMI bus. This alignment of "powers" made it possible to more fully use the video system, which has two video adapters with a PCI-E x16 v2.0 connection interface, a disk subsystem consisting of at least ten drives, a pair of network adapters, a powerful sound card, etc.

Such features could not be cheap, so it is not surprising that a set of motherboard and processor platform Socket LGA 1366 will cost from about $500.

That is why Intel recently announced the "popular" Nehalem and its accompanying Socket LGA 1156 platform with the only chipset supporting Intel P55 Express.

Yes, the Intel P55 chipset is not replete with "cosmic figures", but the absence of a north bridge is immediately evident. In the Socket LGA 1366 platform, the northbridge, by and large, served only as a QPI => 2xPCI-E x16 v2.0 + DMI switch. Transferring it after the memory controller to the processor itself was simply a revolutionary move. Now the processor communicates with the RAM and video card almost without "intermediaries", which will naturally affect the performance of the system as a whole. But, since the Socket LGA 1156 platform came out under the slogan: "people's Nehalem", there are some simplifications in comparison with the Socket LGA 1366 platform.

Firstly, the memory controller lost one channel, and became dual-channel, like the Socket LGA 775 platform, but did not undergo any other changes, which is proved by the Memory tab of the CPU-Z program. In all cases (when using Intel Core i7-920 and Intel Core i7-860 processors), timings and operating frequencies were the same.

Secondly, the number of PCI-E bus lines has decreased to 16, which returned the video system bandwidth to the level of the Intel P45 chipset (one PCI-E x16 v2.0 or two PCI-E x8 v2.0).

Returning to the main topic, I would like to note that when buying a processor, now, willy-nilly, you have to buy a part of the chipset (northbridge), which we considered a little higher. Let's not forget about the characteristics of the processor itself, which are not limited by the clock frequency and the QPI bus.

The Caches tab revealed to us the identity of both the volume and the organization of the cache memory of the Intel Core i5-750 and Intel Core i7-9 * 0, and Intel Core i7-8 * 0 processors.

For a more visual comparison of all the above changes, we suggest that you familiarize yourself with the following table, which presents the most “bright” models of all four generations.

Speaking about the Intel Core i5-750, we see an updated implementation of the Nehalem architecture, which involves the use of a high-speed QPI bus and communication with RAM and a video adapter without any "intermediaries", which is a definite plus, not to mention a more pleasant cost. Moreover, motherboards for this processor cost only ~$100+ (for example, GIGABYTE GA-P55M-UD2). Such a platform is noticeably more affordable than a bunch of Intel Core i7-920 and even an inexpensive motherboard based on the Intel X58 chipset.

But the good news does not end on these optimistic notes. Intel Turbo Boost technology is simply revolutionary. And its version, which was implemented in the processors of the Intel Core i7-9 * 0 line, simply looks frivolous against the background of the implementation of the latter in the Intel Core i7-8 * 0 and Intel Core i5-7 * 0 lines. Recall that the processors of the Intel Core i7-9 * 0 line, with the activation of Intel Turbo Boost technology, could dynamically (independently) increase their multiplier by one, thereby increasing the clock frequency of all cores by 133 MHz. Here is what the new interpretation of this technology looks like:

When a processor is executing a single-threaded task, it on one's own changes its multiplier from 20 (clock frequency 2.66 MHz) to 24 and ends up with the resulting clock frequency of one of the cores of 3200 MHz, which is 540 (!) MHz is greater than nominal. What is this, if not legalized overclocking? For some games where only one core is used due to the use of an old-fashioned engine, this processor mode will be a real gift. Further more, technicians and marketers apparently decided that single-threaded tasks are nothing more than giving antiquity and it was a long time ago, and indeed it’s not true at all. But two-threaded tasks, i.e. optimized for dual-core processors is just a relic of the past that is still ubiquitous. So why not force the work of two-threaded tasks? Therefore, when only two cores are loaded, the processor independently increases the multiplier, as in the first case from 20 to 24, which ultimately makes it possible to work at the same cherished clock frequency of 3.2 GHz already for two cores (!) . Fabulous!

The operation of the Intel Turbo Boost processor

To test the operation of Intel Turbo Boost technology, the processor was initially launched in nominal mode without turning it on. The specialized CPUID TMonitor program monitored the operation of all cores separately.

As can be seen from the screenshot of the CPU-Z program, all cores operate at the standard x20 multiplier and remain in this mode regardless of the load. But this is not entirely true and you should not trust the CPU-Z program from now on. The Enhanced Halt State (C1E) energy-saving technology in idle mode reduced the clock frequency to 1200 MHz on all processor cores and this is already a true value, which the CPUID TMonitor program modestly proved to us.

The next step in the BIOS of the motherboard were disabled three cores to more clearly and unambiguously represent the operation of Intel Turbo Boost. Simply put, the Intel Core i5-750 processor has been turned into a single-core processor, and Intel Turbo Boost Technology has been activated.

From the very beginning and without stopping, the processor worked at a frequency of 3.2 GHz, regardless of the level and complexity of the task.

By switching the Intel Core i5-750 processor to dual-core mode (disabling two cores in the BIOS), the effect was similar to the previous one. Regardless of the task type, both cores ran at 3.2 GHz. Fritz Chess Benchmark, running in dual-threaded mode, served as an excellent test suite.

Next, it's time to run the Intel Core i5-750 processor at full capacity. With all four cores turned on, he was given a clean, single-threaded task using the Fritz Chess Benchmark program. To my great surprise, the Intel Turbo Boost technology worked not only clearly and without "jaggies", increasing the multiplier of one core to x21, but also deftly shifted the task from one core to another.

Deciding to repeat the previous experience, the once popular Super Pi program was adopted. The result was completely identical. Intel Turbo Boost technology still deftly played with a single-threaded process, flipping it from a relatively busier core to an idle one. If the operating system, for personal reasons, loaded one of the cores with the execution of any system service, then the Super Pi process “smartly jumped” to a freer core.

To be sure, the experiment was repeated a third time. Now the Lame Explorer utility, which is a wrapper for the corresponding codec, has been taken as a "load". And again we were pleased with the effect! One of the compression cores worked properly at a clock frequency of 2.8 GHz.

As much as we would not like to move on to testing on this optimistic note, but there was still a “fly in the ointment” in this “barrel of honey” ...

Cooling and power consumption

Important performance characteristics of the processor, and indeed the entire system, of course, are power consumption and heat dissipation. It is doubly interesting to check the performance characteristics, because the processor under study has a declared thermal package of up to 95 W, and is equipped with a rather modest cooler. Therefore, we measured the power consumption of the entire system and the temperature of the Intel Core i5-750 in various modes using a boxed cooler and an ASUS Maximus III Formula motherboard.

As a result, we got very interesting results. First, you should pay attention to power consumption - 165 watts at the very peak of the load seems to be an incredibly small value. This is exactly the architectural features of this platform. After all, the main consumer now is the processor, which also acts as the north bridge, and the Intel P55 Express chipset consumes only 5 watts. It also uses economical DDR3 RAM. As a result, if all low-consuming components are taken away from the total power consumption of 165 W, it turns out that more than half of the energy is “eaten up” by the processor. And it is from the processor that this energy in the form of heat will have to be dissipated by the cooler.

Secondly, when using the "boxed" cooler, we recorded a significant heating of the Intel Core i5-750 processor. Moreover, the system was assembled in a fairly well-ventilated CODEGEN M603 MidiTower case with a pair of 120 mm fans for intake / exhaust. This is the "fly in the ointment". When the processor was running at maximum load, even with Intel Turbo Boost technology disabled, its temperature went beyond the declared maximum 72.7 ° C. To be sure of the measurement results, we repeated the tests with different motherboards. The result turned out to be approximately the same, but with one caveat - different motherboards set different core voltages in the "AUTO" mode, although not in a very large range. Depending on the supply voltage, there was a dependence on power consumption and processor heating, but with a not very large spread. Thus, the expediency of using a "boxed" cooler, as well as its presence in the package, is doubtful. That is why the complete "boxed" cooler E41759-002 was replaced by Scythe Kama Angle.

When testing, the Bench for testing Processors No. 1 was used

Alas, the miracle did not happen... Although there was hope for the Intel Core i5-750 thanks to Intel Turbo Boost technology, synthetic tests showed another "vinaigrette" of results, giving preference either to one of the models - representatives of the Nehalem generation, or to the already outdated Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550. The AMD Phenom II X4 955 was a complete fiasco in synthetic tests, despite its 3.2 GHz clock speed and 8 MB total cache, just like the Nehalem representatives.

Game tests showed a more linear picture. The resource-intensive games Word in Conflict, Far Cray 2 and Race Driver:GRID gave preference to representatives of the Nehalem architecture, arranging them according to price requests. The now “outdated” Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 is quite significantly behind the top three, although it is in a price category higher than the Intel Core i5-750. The exception was the demo version of Tom Clancy`s H.A.W.X., which favored AMD Phenom II X4 955 and Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550. In her opinion, Intel Core i5-750, Intel Core i7-860 and even Intel Core i7-920 have insufficient performance. Apparently, this application is primarily concerned with the clock frequency of the processor.

In general, given the cost of the new Intel Core i5-750 processors, they quite successfully compete with junior solutions for the LGA1366 platform and older processors for the LGA775. Therefore, when completing a new productive system, you should pay attention to the LGA1156 platform.

Efficiency of Intel Turbo Boost Technology

Having received not quite the test results that were expected, it was decided to evaluate the effectiveness of Intel Turbo Boost technology in terms of its impact on performance.

Oddly enough, but the average performance increase in all test programs and games turned out to be only 2.38%, but completely free and without a noticeable increase in power consumption. Suppose that this became possible due to a mismatch in the type of load, because to enable the mechanism for increasing the multiplier from x20 to x24, a strictly single-threaded or two-threaded load is required. It turned out to be extremely problematic to achieve this from test programs. But even with such conditions, there is some acceleration, resulting in 1-6% additional performance. Therefore, we recommend that you do not forget to activate Intel Turbo Boost technology in the BIOS.

Overclocking

Overclocking technique for Intel Core i5-750 processors; The Intel Core i7-860 and Intel Core i8-870 (Socket LGA 1156 platform, Lynnfield core) are slightly different from the Intel Core i7-920 line (Socket LGA 1366 platform, Bloomfield core). The fact is that the ratio of the BCLK frequency (similar to FSB on the Socket LGA 775 platform) and the RAM frequency is set by the corresponding multiplier, which can take a value from x2 to x6. Thus, the processor operating in normal mode (without overclocking) can theoretically work with memory, the frequency is sometimes in the range from 533 MHz (133 * 2 * 2) to 1600 MHz (133 * 6 * 2). In turn, this makes it possible to overclock the processor to the desired level without using too high-frequency, and as a result, expensive memory. For example: when overclocking the processor to 4.0 GHz, you will need to increase the BCLK frequency from 133 (2660 / 20) MHz to 200 (4000 / 20) MHz, but in this case it is theoretically possible to use memory with a frequency of 800 MHz (200 * 2 * 2 ) up to 2400 MHz (200*6*2).

The processor that came to us for testing was overclocked to 4209 MHz (BCLK - 210 MHz) at a supply voltage of 1.440 V, which in percentage terms is 58% of the “additive” relative to the standard mode. Further overclocking was limited by the stability of the system, i. the start of the operating system was also possible with a processor frequency of 4.5 GHz, but it and applications worked with errors. If it were the Socket LGA 775 platform, then such a result would be a record, but for now this is just a single fact, many of which are statistics. For comparison, the previously tested Intel Core i7-860 was able to overclock to 4074 MHz (BCLK - 194 MHz) at a supply voltage of 1.296 V; Intel Core i7-920 conquered the frequency of 3990 MHz (BCLK - 190 MHz) with a supply voltage of 1.360 V, and the Intel Core i7-940 was able to show stable operation at a frequency of 3910 MHz (BCLK - 170 MHz) when applying 1.296 V to it.

The average increase in test programs was 37,9 %. Comparing again with the Intel Core i7-860, Intel Core i7-920 and Intel Core i7-940, which showed a performance increase in overclocked state 28,7% , 18,8% And 13,8% , the result of the acceleration of the Intel Core i5-750 can be described as extremely high. Judging by the capabilities of processors oriented to the Socket LGA 775 and AM3 platforms, the Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 and AMD Phenom II X4 955 "accelerated" due to overclocking by 18% And 13% respectively. Therefore, we can say that the Intel Core i5-750 processor has a very high overclocking potential, which provides the opportunity to get a lot of "free performance".

Features of the processor's built-in memory controller

Updating the location of the memory controller could not but affect its properties. That is why we will test all possible modes of memory operation and evaluate changes in performance.

The first thing that came to mind was to fill all the motherboard slots for memory. Four slots of memory were installed in four slots, of the same type that was used in testing.

It should be noted right away that neither the frequency nor the timings of the modules changed their values, however, the Command Rate parameter, which characterizes the delay of the controller when executing commands, changed its value from 1T to 2T.

How much such a “change” will affect performance will be shown by the following testing:

The drop in performance is noticeable in all test programs. The average is 0.90%. Of course, this is not much, but, nevertheless, the conclusion is unambiguous: due to the needs of modern games, the required amount of memory is at least 3 GB. And since two identical modules are required to activate the Dual Channel mode, the best option would be to purchase two two-gigabyte memory sticks at once. The option “two one-gigabyte now and two more over time”, as you can see, is not entirely rational.

Actually, about Dual Channel and Single Channel ... It is not uncommon that, due to financial difficulties, one bar of RAM is bought, and later another one is bought, sometimes with a volume different from the first. We forcibly disabled the Dual Channel mode by installing modules in only one channel to assess the performance drop in this case and got the following results:

The performance drop averaged only 4.49%, although in some tasks it was more noticeable. The conclusion is as simple as in the previous experience: you should not save on buying memory when switching (purchasing) to the Socket LGA 1156 platform.

The next experience was nothing more than forced memory slowdown. This experiment was made in order to determine the dependence of system performance on the frequency of RAM. Suddenly you decide to save money and buy stale DDR3-800

Thanks to the connection between BCLK and the memory frequency through the x2, x4 and x6 multipliers, implemented in the processors of the Intel Core i5-7 * 0 and Intel Core i7-8 * 0 lines, it was not difficult to change the memory frequency. The results speak for themselves:

The average performance drop in the test programs was 4.06%. This is even less than from the “loss” of the Dual Channel mode. Of course, in the case of tasks closely related to memory performance, the increase will be about 25%, but in all other applications this factor is not so significant. Thus, just at the memory frequency, when buying a system, some savings are possible, although with dubious prospects.

Sufficient throughput of the QPI bus

And finally, I would like to check the feasibility of using the fast QPI bus, which directly connects the processor cores and the memory controller with the PCI-E controller. The QPI bus was forcibly slowed down from 2400 MHz to 2133 MHz, a percentage of -12.5%. The performance change results are as follows:

So, when the QPI bus slowed down by 12.5%, the average performance drop was only 1.3%, which is a mere trifle. Obviously, the processors of the Intel Core i5-7*0 and Intel Core i7-8*0 lines received a high-performance QPI bus more "inherited" from the processors of the Core i7-9*0 line, rather than out of necessity. Taking into account that “only three “consumers” of traffic sit on it (a memory controller, a PCI-E x16 v2.0 controller and a DMI bus connecting the processor with the chipset), its bandwidth turned out to be somewhat excessive rather than necessary.

Conclusion

Finally, Intel was able to provide an Intel Core i5-750 processor that is affordable and worth the money spent. First, the full implementation of Intel Turbo Boost technology makes the processor more flexible. Where else can you find a processor that independently increases the frequency of two cores at once by 540 (!) MHz? Secondly, its price, even taking into account some speculation with the novelty, is more pleasant than other processors based on the Nehalem architecture, and it is even cheaper than the Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 or AMD Phenom II X4 955 . Thirdly, I would like to remember that even an entry-level motherboard based on the Intel P55 chipset, such as the GIGABYTE GA-P55M-UD2, fully implements all the capabilities of the processor and at the same time costs just over $100. Thus, such a bundle will be even cheaper than the average motherboard for the Socket LGA 775 platform with a processor of the same performance.

Subscribe to our channels

Socket LGA1156 L3 cache size 8192 KB Number of cores 4 CPU frequency 2667 MHz Integrated graphics core No

General characteristics

Core

Frequency characteristics

Cache

This material opens a series of notes in which I will tell you about the overclocking potential of interesting pieces of iron. Processors, graphics cards, RAM - these are the three main components that every overclocker overclocks. The idea of ​​creating a base for overclocking has been around for a long time, but only the statistics are scarce, so we will tell you about our impressions of overclocking our wards.

We start with, perhaps, the most interesting Intel processors at the moment - the Core i5 750. The cheapest processors of the current generation will face each other today, and we will find out which of the 8 copies will be the best.

test stand

To study the platform for socket 1156, we chose the following configuration:

• Motherboard Asus P7P55D Deluxe
• Cooler Scythe Ninja 2
• RAM 2x2Gb OCZ Flex 1600MHz CL6 1.65v
• Video card Saphire 4890 OC (plug in PCI-E required)
• Chiftec 1200W power supply
• Hard drive Seagate 7200.12 250Gb

This is the first time I have come across an Asus motherboard based on the P55 chipset, and I want to note that the first acquaintance can be considered successful. The board easily and seamlessly worked with all the set voltages. Of the features, I would like to note that the voltage set in the BIOS for the processor coincided with the readings from CPU-Z, which is very pleasing.

Test Methodology

All eight processors were tested at three frequencies:

• max valid frequency - maximum valid CPU-Z frequency.
• max bench frequency - the frequency at which the processor can be made to work in light benchmarks, the Super Pi1M test is taken as an indicator.
• max stable frequency - the frequency at which the processor will work 24 hours, 7 days a week, 365 days a year, without turning off for a second. Naturally, I'm joking - in our conditions of express testing it is difficult to find a really stable frequency. But as an estimated one, we will take the frequency of passing the Hyper Pi 32M test - the same Super Pi32M is only multi-threaded.

From the settings in the BIOS were used:

• CPU Voltage: 1.35-1.45V;
• CPU PLL: 1.9-2.0V;
• IMC Voltage: 1.4V;
• Dram Bus Voltage: 1.65V

The system was overclocked from under Windows by a utility from Asus - TurboV. For tests, the operating system Windows XP SP2 was used.

conclusions

Eight processors of three weeks of production took part in testing: six copies - the 22nd week, one copy - the 24th week and one copy of the 30th week. Based on the results, we can determine the winner of our testing: it was a copy with serial number 6, released on the 30th week of 2009. This processor is the coldest, and he was the only one who obeyed the coveted numbers of 4.6 GHz. The processors of the 22nd week of release can be called strong middle peasants, half of the processors showed results close to 4600 MHz, but at the same time, the other half overclocked by 50 MHz worse. And the most unfortunate, in my opinion, was the processor released on the 24th week of 2009, its distinctive features were a hot temper and zero response to voltage increases higher than 1.4 V.

The frequency at which the processors were able to withstand Super Pi1M averaged 4400-4450 MHz, the best processor was able to pass 1M at 4535 MHz, and the worst only at 4380 MHz. 100 MHz means a lot in benchmarking. But in terms of stability for all processors, the spread in frequency is not so high. Everyone withstood 4200 MHz, the winner even 4300 MHz. With confidence for a home system, you can set 4 GHz and use the computer for your own pleasure.