0 Comments
|
|
5.1 Out of 10 | | by Legit Reviews (May, 2011) by Legit Reviews (May, 2011) |
|
CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of the Intel Core i7 990X among desktop CPUs (over 75W)
Performance | |
Benchmark performance using all cores | |
PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more |
Single-core Performance | |
Individual core benchmark performance | |
PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more |
Integrated Graphics | |
Integrated GPU performance for graphics | |
Fire Strike |
Integrated Graphics (OpenCL) | |
Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing | |
CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more |
Performance per Watt | |
How efficiently does the processor use electricity? | |
Fire Strike, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more |
Value | |
Are you paying a premium for performance? | |
Fire Strike, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more |
5.1 | CPUBoss Score |
Combination of all six facets | |
Benchmarks Real world tests of the Intel Core i7 990X
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
PassMark (Single Core)
Reviews Word on the street for the Intel Core i7 990X
![]() | 8.0 |
|
---|---|---|
![]() | 8.0 |
|
Overall | 8.6 Out of 10 |
What People Are Saying Give it to me straight
Socket Type
by Legit Reviews (May, 2011)The 32 million runs were an additional .337 seconds faster for a grand total of 1.362 seconds below our starting point!
by Legit Reviews (May, 2011)Coming at us with 3.46GHz of processing power per core and up to 3.73GHz with turbo enabled, it's sure to be a fun processor to play with.
by Legit Reviews (May, 2011)Increasing the voltage of the 990X allowed us to fo faster yet, and we were able to knock off an additional 9.159 seconds for a grand total of 38.975 (23.6%) seconds below default!
Socket
by PCMag (Mar, 2011)Whereas the Core i7-980X took 3 minutes and 27 seconds in our test applying a dozen complex filters in Adobe Photoshop CS5 ($699 to $999 list, 5 stars), the Core i7-990X trimmed it down to an even 3 minutes 20 seconds.
by Legit Reviews (May, 2011)The Intel Core i7 2600K pulled out ahead of the crowd with a score of 1.55 while the Intel Core i7 990X Extreme had a respectable 1.25.
by PCMag (Mar, 2011)We saw similarly small increases in our 3DMark 11 and 3DMark Vantage gaming tests (9,332 to 9,591 and 32,129 to 33,382, respectively) and comprehensive Geekbench benchmark (13,083 to 13,586), as well as throughout our more probing AIDA64 and SiSoftware Sandra processor tests.
Performance
by Tech Radar (Mar, 2011)It's vast, and possibly a little vulgar, in terms of sheer size, performance and importantly cost.
by Legit Reviews (May, 2011)Benchmark Results: The Intel Core i7 990X Extreme is significantly faster in wPrime than anything else we have tested.
by Legit Reviews (May, 2011)Much of that comes from the fact that the 990X is a Hex-core processor and those benchmarks scale for multiple cores.
Multicore
by PCMag (Mar, 2011)At least for now—with AMD's new Fusion platform making headroom and the Bulldozer core barreling toward fruition, it's legitimately possible that could change by the end of the year.
by PCMag (Mar, 2011)It acquitted itself fairly handsomely on our tests, finishing a solid but seldom-distant third behind the Core i7-990X and the Core i7-980X across the board, but providing a compelling supporting option for those who want to come to the six-core party without a huge financial obligation.
by PCMag (Mar, 2011)One thing remains clear: If you want the most in six-core power, you have to go to Intel.
Applications
by PCMag (Mar, 2011)But it's the fastest chip you'll find, especially if your business or personal computer use thrives on highly threaded workloads.
by Legit Reviews (May, 2011)With a lightly treaded application Intel's Turbo mode will push the 990X up one more multiplier for a speed of 3.73GHz.
by PCMag (Mar, 2011)As Sandy Bridge chips are loaded with technologies for improving everyday media handling, this is not a huge surprise.
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary
Clock speed | 3.46 GHz |
---|---|
Turbo clock speed | 3.73 GHz |
Cores | Hexa core |
Socket type | LGA 1366 |
Is unlocked | Yes |
features
Has a NX bit | Yes |
---|---|
Supports trusted computing | No |
Has virtualization support | Yes |
Instruction set extensions |
|
Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes |
power consumption
TDP | 130W |
---|---|
Annual home energy cost | 31.32 $/year |
Annual commercial energy cost | 113.88 $/year |
Performance per watt | 6.36 pt/W |
Typical power consumption | 105.63W |
memory controller
Memory controller | Built-in |
---|---|
Memory type |
|
Channels | Triple Channel |
Supports ECC | No |
Maximum bandwidth | 25,599.99 MB/s |
Maximum memory size | 24,576 MB |
details
Architecture | x86-64 |
---|---|
Threads | 12 threads |
L2 cache | 2 MB |
L2 cache per core | 0.33 MB/core |
L3 cache | 12 MB |
L3 cache per core | 2 MB/core |
Manufacture process | 32 nm |
Max CPUs | 1 |
Clock multiplier | 26 |
Voltage range | 0.8 - 1.38V |
Operating temperature | Unknown - 67.9°C |
overclocking
Overclock popularity | 54 |
---|---|
Overclocked clock speed | 4.58 GHz |
Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.47 GHz |
PassMark (Overclocked) | 4,092.9 |
Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.58 GHz |
integrated graphics
GPU | None |
---|---|
Label | None |
Latest DirectX | None |
Number of displays supported | None |
GPU clock speed | None |
Turbo clock speed | None |
3DMark06 | None |
bus
Architecture | QPI |
---|---|
Number of links | 1 |
Data rate | 25,600 MB/s |
Transfer rate | 6,400 MT/s |
Clock speed | 3,200 MHz |

Follow us
Compare
Popular Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$305 | $300 | |
W3520 vs 2500 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
6200U vs 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$272 | $350 | |
4790K vs 6700K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$350 | ||
6700K vs 7th Gen A12-9700P | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
4200U vs 6410 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
6200U vs 7th Gen A9-9420 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$180 | ||
3470 vs 5200 | ||