Intel Ivy Bridge Guide for Gamers
A Core Question. Do modern gaming graphics cards require a quad-core CPU to show their full potential? Many gamers will be faced with this choice when it's time to buy a new notebook. To finally put the question to rest, we have tested Intel's current Ivy Bridge generation with various games. Keep reading to find out if high-end GPUs also play well with a dual-core CPU.
Tasked with choosing the right CP, many gamers feel left out in the cold: Various tech articles by the usual websites or print magazines make it sound like there's no way around a quad-core if you consider yourself to be in the "PC" camp. But what's the situation like in the notebook arena, where you have to make do with slimmed-down and therefore slower graphics cards? Our forums show that price savvy gamers are often unsure whether a specific CPU works well with a specific card.
After our last, now slightly dated round of tests focused on the midrange and enthusiast segments (still based on the Sandy Bridge generation), we'll now take a look at the very top of the pile, represented by NVIDIA's GeForce GTX 680M. A note of thanks is due to our partner Schenker Notebooks (mysn.de), who provided us with a test sample, including nine brand-new Ivy Bridge models.
Testing Environment
Weighing in at just less than 3.2 kg (~7 pounds), the Schenker XMG P502 PRO, which is based on the P150EM Barebone made by the Taiwanese manufacturer Clevo, is ideally suited for graphics card and CPU tests alike, thanks to its user-friendly design. Hidden inside the chassis of the 15.6-inch gaming notebook we find Intel's modern H77 chipset.
For the purpose of this review, we opted for 8 GB of DDR3 RAM (2 x 4096 MB in dual channel mode), along with a 320 GB HDD running at 7200 RPM. The operating system (Windows 7 Professional 64-bit) was up-to-date, of course. As a GPU driver we enlisted the ForceWare 306.02 Beta because the WHQL-certified version 306.23 arrived just a bit too late.
Test Setup:
- 15.6“ Full-HD Non-Glare
- Intel HM77 Chipset
- Nvidia GeForce GTX 680M (ForceWare 306.02 Beta)
- 8 GByte DDR3-RAM (Corsair Vengeance, 1600 MHz)
- 320 GByte HDD (Seagate Momentus ST9320423AS, 7200 rpm)
- Windows 7 Professional 64 Bit
Processors:
- Core i7-3820QM, 2,7-3,7 GHz, 4 cores, 8 threads, 8 MByte L3-cache, 45 watts TDP
- Core i7-3720QM, 2,6-3,6 GHz, 4 cores, 8 threads, 6 MByte L3-cache, 45 watts TDP
- Core i7-3610QM, 2,3-3,3 GHz, 4 cores, 8 threads, 6 MByte L3-cache, 45 watts TDP
- Core i7-3612QM, 2,1-3,1 GHz, 4 cores, 8 threads, 6 MByte L3-cache, 35 watts TDP
- Core i7-3520M, 2,9-3,6 GHz, 2 cores, 4 threads, 4 MByte L3-cache, 35 watts TDP
- Core i5-3360M, 2,8-3,5 GHz, 2 cores, 4 threads, 3 MByte L3-cache, 35 watts TDP
- Core i5-3320M, 2,6-3,3 GHz, 2 cores, 4 threads, 3 MByte L3-cache, 35 watts TDP
- Core i5-3210M, 2,5-3,1 GHz, 2 cores, 4 threads, 3 MByte L3-cache, 35 watts TDP
- Core i3-3110M, 2,4 GHz, 2 cores, 4 threads, 3 MByte L3-cache, 35 watts TDP
Benchmarks
Let's cut to the chase and get straight to the most interesting aspect: performance. The five chosen games cover almost the entire range. There's a racing game (Dirt Showdown), a member of the role-playing family (Skyrim), a popular action hit (Battlefield 3), a brand-new MMO (Guild Wars 2), and one of the last highlights of the floundering strategy genre (Shogun 2). Judging by our previous experience and/or other tech benchmarks, these titles all benefit from a strong CPU.
In order to guarantee a high degree of practical relevance, we have opted for graphically demanding settings. While lower configurations might reveal the differences more clearly, let's be honest: who would want to run their high-end GPU at 1366x768 pixels and medium level details? Hence, every game was run at 1920x1680 pixels and high to maximum graphics options (sometimes including anti-aliasing). To reduce variability, each benchmark was performed twice, and the average of both runs is listed in our tables.
Before we'll look at the results, a word of caution: while the weaker of the quad-core models i7-3610QM and i7-3612QM, as well as all dual-core processors, ran at around 200 MHz below their Turbo maximum, the quad-core i7-3720QM and i7-3820QM sometimes approached their base frequencies. According to Schenker, the problem also affects the top-end Core i7-3920XM model. What does this mean in terms of our comparison? Well, the two fastest quad-cores may be performing below their true capabilities, so results should be taken with a grain of salt.
Guild Wars 2
The fact that the CPU plays quite a major role in Guild Wars 2 should be nothing new to many readers. Still, just how massively the choice of CPU impacts performance, was a surprise even to us. The difference between the cheapest dual-core Core i3-3110M (no Turbo Boost technology) and the expensive Core i7-3820QM was a whopping 23 fps. The popular MMO doesn't just scale with clock speed, but also with the number of cores - a rare sight.
Our benchmark sequence (1920x1080, Best Appearance preset) required a Core i5-3320M in order to run at more than 30 fps. More than 40 fps was the exclusive realm of quad-core models. In summary, a dual-core is enough for playability, but an optimum result requires a laptop equipped with a quad-core CPU.
Dirt Showdown
The action-packed Dirt Showdown is mainly concerned about the number of cores. Even though all dual-cores were able to render 1920x1080 pixels, four times anti-aliasing and the Ultra preset, subjectively the gameplay did not always feel smooth. With a quad-core, Showdown always runs smoothly, no matter what the clock speed (this applies to Intel only).
The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
In Skyrim, the entire Ivy Bridge range did well. While we were able to measure certain differences in 1920x1080 and Ultra settings, we don't expect these to be noticeable in practice. The attractively priced Core i5-3210M and the potent Core i7-3820QM were separated by a mere two fps. Again, the Core i3-3110M trailed slightly.
Battlefield 3
For Battlefield 3, we made use of our well-proven benchmark routine. The linear sequence of events during the single-player mission "Operation Swordbreaker" ensures a good reproducibility. Because this passage includes little physics which makes it quite GPU-heavy, the Ivy Bridge models all ended up on pretty much the same level. 1920x1080 pixels and the "High" preset resulted in 49-51 fps. In giant multiplayer battles with dozens of opponents, vehicles, and destructible objects (difficult to measure due to the variable gameplay), the difference should be larger.
Total War: Shogun 2
Although Shogun 2 includes a dedicated CPU benchmark, we prefer to rely on the standard graphics test (Benchmark DX11 Graphics High 1080p). Firstly, the CPU test only runs under DirectX 9. Secondly, even a Core i7-3610QM only manages a meager 20 fps. And thirdly, the graphics benchmark looks more realistic to us, thanks to its camera pans and the changes between close-up and bird's eye perspectives.
But back to topic: like in Battlefield 3, most Ivy Bridge CPUs saw eye-to-eye in terms of performance. At 47 fps, the Core i3-3110M came in minimally slower than its siblings that managed an average of 48-49 fps. The same is true for the minimum fps value, whose importance should not be underestimated. Only during Dirt Showdown and Guild Wars 2, were considerable differences showing in this respect, in line with expectations given the average values.
Power Consumption
The total consumption of the system was measured directly at the power socket (Voltraft VC 940). While the dual-core equipped notebook took up between 120 Watts (i3-3110M) and 130 Watts (i7-3520M) on average during Battlefield 3, the quad-core configurations allowed themselves between 126 Watts (i7-3612QM) and 138 Watts (i7-3820QM) by the same measure. Overall, power consumption varied by about 20 percent, which seems acceptable, given the performance difference.
Temperature
During our temperature measurements, we relied on the CPUID Hardware Monitor. According to the well-known tool, the quad-cores heated up a bit more than their dual-core counterparts. Except for the most power-efficient 35 Watt model i7-3612QM, all quad-cores reached temperatures above 70 °C during Battlefield 3. By contrast, a majority of the dual-cores remained below the 70 °C threshold. Thanks to the separate cooling cycles, the GPU was largely unaffected. Depending on the CPU, the GeForce GTX 680M reached between 80 °C and 86 °C. Specially applied thermal grease Prolimatech PK-1 was used as a cooling agent.
System Noise
As you can see from the table, the choice of CPU had at most a minimum impact on the system noise. Whether a weak dual-core or a powerful quad-core was fitted, after 15 minutes of Battlefield 3, the XMG P502 PRO emitted a clearly audible 47 dB (Voltcraft SL 320, 15cm (~6 inches) distance). In desktop replacement laptops, the noise is mainly determined by the graphics card.
Verdict
Guild Wars 2 and Dirt Showdown clearly show that a lot has changed in terms of CPU requirements. In some titles, high-end graphics cards like the GeForce GTX 680M are craving for a potent quad-core partner, and are noticeably restricted by dual-core CPUs. However, Guild Wars 2 and Dirt Showdown are the exception, rather than the norm. While other games may theoretically also benefit from a stronger CPU, the processor is rarely the determinant factor. A Core i5-3210M is more than enough for most titles.
We would advise against the cheap entry-level Core i3-3110M, despite its good value-for-money, because the lack of a Turbo can sometimes make itself felt negatively. Speaking of money: The price of the current top-range Core i7-3920XM does not pay off, even for serious gamers. The same is true for the fastest dual-core chip, the Core i7-3520M. The marginal performance edge over the Core i5-3360M does not justify the higher purchase price, even more so since its emissions are in the quad-core range.
Price-conscious gamers hit the sweet spot with the Core i5-3210M or the Core i5-3320M. If you've got a little more money to spend, you should go for the Core i7-3610QM. The quad-core is sometimes much faster, and also more future-proof. Largely flying under the radar, the Core i7-3612QM meanwhile combines the advantages of both camps, namely a high performance, as well as low power consumption and moderate heat generation.
In conclusion, we hope that our comparison will make your choice a little easier. Please use the comment section below for questions or further suggestions.
12 comments
Got questions or something to add to our article? Even without registering you can post in the comments!Read all comments / answer
| #12 Re: Intel Ivy Bridge Guide for Gamers | Klaus Hinum, 21:51 09.12 |
The GX60 review will of course be translated soon, in short, yes it clearly impacts the gaming performance down to mid range levels of a GTX 660M (for CPU dependend games).... | |
| » read whole comment | |
| #11 Re: Intel Ivy Bridge Guide for Gamers | Florian Glaser, 17:05 09.12 |
Totally fresh: http://www.notebookcheck.com/Test-MSI-GX60-Notebook.85141.0.html... | |
| » read whole comment | |
| #10 Re: Intel Ivy Bridge Guide for Gamers | Eduardo Ballesteros, 16:56 09.12 |
Hi, my question is Amd A10 and Amd7970m cause bottleneck?Thanks... | |
| » read whole comment | |
| #9 Re: Intel Ivy Bridge Guide for Gamers | HTWingNut, 00:36 27.10 |
While FPS may not be too different between quad and dual core, more demanding games like BF3 and Skyrim can show hiccups or stutters during gameplay. Only when you use something like Throttlestop to force Turbo mode all the time will they go away, almost completely but not quite.... | |
| » read whole comment | |
| #8 Re: Intel Ivy Bridge Guide for Gamers | AlexJ, 08:35 20.09 |
[quote author=ava link=topic=37497.msg191871#msg191871 date=1348054736]Very good article! However, you could have benchmarked several more games in this comparison and one more mid-range GPU (say GTX 660M or ATI alternative) to emphasize the point. Hardly any gamer will look to spend enormous amounts of $$$ on a GTX 680M and complement it with intel's i5. Those that do get an i5 will chose a less expensive GPU such as GTX 650M, 660 or ATI alternative..[/quote]Nice article, i think the same, how you can compare CPUs power if all the work is taken by the GPU?Alex... | |
| » read whole comment | |
| #7 Re: Intel Ivy Bridge Guide for Gamers | Zax, 00:14 20.09 |
Thanks again. With the recent trend of CPUs producing more heat than mainstream graphics cards it's nice to see that 4 thread CPUs are still viable.... | |
| » read whole comment | |
| #6 Re: Intel Ivy Bridge Guide for Gamers | ava, 13:38 19.09 |
Very good article! However, you could have benchmarked several more games in this comparison and one more mid-range GPU (say GTX 660M or ATI alternative) to emphasize the point. Hardly any gamer will look to spend enormous amounts of $$$ on a GTX 680M and complement it with intel's i5. Those that do get an i5 will chose a less expensive GPU such as GTX 650M, 660 or ATI alternative..... | |
| » read whole comment | |
| #5 Re: Intel Ivy Bridge Guide for Gamers | Florian Glaser, 11:24 19.09 |
[quote author=Kristinn link=topic=37497.msg191853#msg191853 date=1348044657]You failed to test the perhaps most important aspect here, physics heavy AAA multiplayer games such as Battlefield 3. The issue of inconsistency can be solved by joining servers running same map, with same amount of players (preferably full 64 people server), and taking averages over long games. A long conquest game can last from 40 minutes to an hour. Taking the average of the averages from 3 or 4 such games will ensure through the Law of Large Numbers that the result is consistent. Such information would be invaluable to see if it feasible to use dual core hyper threaded chips with a moderately capable graphics card.[/quote]Sounds nice, but i really don´t have the time for such long tests. Other gaming-notebooks and gaming-articles are waiting as well. A whole day just for Battlefield 3 is not very efficient :)... | |
| » read whole comment | |
| #4 Re: Intel Ivy Bridge Guide for Gamers | Kristinn, 10:50 19.09 |
You failed to test the perhaps most important aspect here, physics heavy AAA multiplayer games such as Battlefield 3. The issue of inconsistency can be solved by joining servers running same map, with same amount of players (preferably full 64 people server), and taking averages over long games. A long conquest game can last from 40 minutes to an hour. Taking the average of the averages from 3 or 4 such games will ensure through the Law of Large Numbers that the result is consistent. Such information would be invaluable to see if it feasible to use dual core hyper threaded chips with a moderately capable graphics card.... | |
| » read whole comment | |
| #3 Re: Intel Ivy Bridge Guide for Gamers | GD, 10:33 19.09 |
Using single player in BF3 is no meaning...multi-player is really cpu demanding ... | |
| » read whole comment | |
| #2 Re: Intel Ivy Bridge Guide for Gamers | Hræsvelgr, 09:12 19.09 |
This test was run with an highend GPU - only for big, heavy and expensive Notebooks. All on Clevo Barebone.But they all are still build on intel-mainboards. So there is no way to get a notebook with AMD-CPU and so, you cant run a comparable test with 680M and AMD CPUIn the List for Processor Benchmarks, you can see, top AMD only reach i3 or kower i5 Power.But i dont believe, that there will be any way, to get a System with High end GPU (no matters if nvidia oder amd) with an AMD-CPU... | |
| » read whole comment | |
| #1 Re: Intel Ivy Bridge Guide for Gamers | Meteorhead, 09:04 19.09 |
This guide is excellent and among the few that should be a little more emphasized to the less educated gamers. Just because the top-top-notch Intel processor costs 120$ more than "just" the second best that doesn't mean it will be 50% better, but infact 2% at most.What I would like to see is to compliment these tests with Quad- and Dual-core AMD chips to see how much impact Intel strength in terms of CPU bring about a game. My guess is that the benefit would only be marginal and the stronger IGP of an AMD would come in handy a lot more times, than the extra ??% raw strength of an Intel CPU.Waiting for the extension of this test!... | |
| » read whole comment | |








































