Greetings, dear colleagues and guests of the expert club. Today we will talk about desktop processors. Unlike the rapidly developing market of ARM processors for mobile and media solutions, the x86 processor market is not developing as dynamically as several years ago; there have been no significant breakthroughs since the advent of the Sandy Bridge family, and the development of desktop processors at this stage , first of all, is to reduce the chip area (technical process), reduce heat dissipation, reduce power consumption, improve integrated graphics and update instructions.

Production technology has changed significantly central processing units, but this did not significantly affect performance. For example, Sandy Bridge processors, the production of which began back in 2009, are still largely relevant (especially their older segments). Intel, which has long been the leader in the desktop processor market, is no longer trying very hard to raise the performance bar that it set back in 2009, and in response to AMD solutions, with an emphasis on integrated graphics, it began to do the same on the her. Such developments are undoubtedly very useful for mobile platforms, where installing a discrete card has a detrimental effect on battery life, useful for the budget segment, in which more or less powerful integrated graphics can turn heads, and useful for work solutions, where graphics are just a nice bonus , but is virtually useless in the older segment. Intel, which has completely conquered the senior segment of desktop solutions, has gone on the offensive on the front of budget solutions. The first attempt to change something was the Ivi Bridge family: by reducing the chip area and improving graphics, Intel stopped losing out in the budget and multimedia PC market. However main mistake Intel (in the desktop processor market) used high-performance graphics only in top-end solutions; budget and mid-range solutions never received sufficient graphics performance. It was decided to correct this error with the Huswell family, in which productive solutions are used even in budget series. Even the Intel DualCore graphics are slightly faster than those found in the previous generation i3 and i5 desktops, so AMD may have to step up its APUs a bit. What exactly has improved in the new solutions from Intel? Will they be able to somehow compete with AMD APUs in terms of graphics performance? And what surprises await us from budget solutions? All this is what you and I must find out.

First, let's look at 2 new representatives of the Core i3 family: 4330 and 4130. The i3 4330 solution is notable not only for its very high frequency, for its class - 3.5 GHz, being, in fact, the fastest desktop dual-core processor (only the i3 4340 is faster - 3.6 GHz), but also also an increased cache and Intel HD4600 graphics, which is found in older Intel solutions. Yes, you heard right, in the new solutions from Intel, each line has processors with improved graphics (the frequency of these graphics for all is 1150 MHz; in previous generations, the graphics frequency varied depending on the family).

The i3 4130 processor has a slightly lower frequency, 1 MB less cache and slightly weaker Intel HD 4400 graphics. Both new products have a lower TDP of 54 W, are made using a 22 nm process technology and support the Hyper-Threading function

Specifications

Intel Core I3 4330

Socket – H3 (LGA 1150)

Line – Intel Core i3

Core – Haswell

Technological process – 22 nm

Processor frequency – 3500 MHz

GPU model – Intel HD Graphics 4600

Stream processors – 20

Number of cores – 2

L1 cache size – 64 KB

L2 cache size – 512 KB

L3 cache size – 4096 KB

SSE4 support – yes

Heat dissipation – 54 W

Intel Core i3 4130

Socket – H3 (LGA 1150)

Line – Intel Core i3

Core – Haswell

Technological process – 22 nm

Processor frequency – 3400 MHz

Integrated graphics core – yes

GPU model – Intel HD Graphics 4400

Maximum graphics core frequency – 1150 MHz

Stream processors – 16

Built-in memory controller – yes

Maximum memory bandwidth – 25.6 GB/s

Number of cores – 2

L1 cache size – 64 KB

L2 cache size – 512 KB

L3 cache size – 3072 KB

Hyper-Threading support – yes

SSE4 support – yes

Virtualization Technology support – yes

Heat dissipation – 54 W

Packaging and accessories

We received the Core i3 4330 in the BOX package, so we can see the new packaging design for Intel processors. The new packaging does not have a strong emphasis on the line (unlike Sandy Bridge, where the design of the Pentium Dualcore and Core iX series was very different).

The package includes, as usual, instructions, a branded sticker and a boxed cooler. Let's take a closer look at the latter. It's no secret that each new series of processors takes a step towards lowering TDP; this trend allows manufacturers to save more and more on CO. On this moment Instead of BOX coolers from Delta (which were used to cool older processors of the Sandy Bridge family) with a copper base, simpler ones from Foxconn (F90T12NS1A7), made entirely of aluminum, are used.

Appearance

Actually, the design of the processor on the heat distribution cover side has not actually changed. But the type of contact surface and the design of the microcircuit have changed.

A cooler that is now used throughout the Haswell family, from the simplest to the most expensive. But reducing the TDP of top-end processors to 84 W did the trick; the cooler is designed for a maximum TDP of 90 W, so for everyday tasks this cooler is quite enough for any processor.

Test stand

To draw a full conclusion, we need to compare the results of our guests with other processors, namely:

Intel Core i3 Sandy Bridge and Ivi Bridge (i3 2130 3.4 GHz and i3 3210 3.2 GHz);

Intel Pentium DualCore G2140 3.3 GHz;

Comparison with budget processors of the previous generation will help us feel the changes in the series. A comparison with the AMD A4 will allow you to find out whether budget solutions from Intel can compete in terms of graphics capabilities with budget APUs from AMD. The presence of the older AMD A10 processor in the test will allow us not only to set the bar for the race participants (the A10 solution has the fastest graphics built into the processor), but will also allow us to show whether 2-core Intel solutions can compete with 4-core ones AMD solutions.

Test bench:

The choice of motherboards and power supplies was determined only by their availability (what was at hand was used). The same strips were used for tests random access memory, in order to minimize their impact on the test, this will especially affect graphics tests (we are dealing with integrated graphics). In order to speed up the testing process and also reduce the impact on synthetics hard drive(especially in encoding and archiving tests), we will use SSD for the test. For the “purity of the experiment,” we used the same boxed cooler for modifications from Intel, as well as a boxed cooler from AMD to draw conclusions about heat dissipation.

This is what the test bench looks like, based on Intel Haswell processors.

Participants of our testing.

Boxed coolers from Intel and AMD participating in testing.

Characteristics of test participants:

As we can see from the table, the AMD A4 attracts with its low price; in terms of this indicator, it is absolutely unrivaled. The quad-core A10 costs virtually the same as an Intel Core i3 4330, which once again confirms that it is worth adding it to the tests.

Testing and Performance

1. Synthetic tests

In order to be able to carry out any parallel, for testing we tried to use memory of the same frequency at 1600 MHz (with the exception of processors that did not support this frequency). We also tried to take into account that the graphics from AMD (especially the A10 processor) have significantly higher theoretical performance, therefore, in the tests we would get a result that would be limited by memory bandwidth. In order to understand how much bandwidth could affect graphics performance, we decided to use memory in dual-channel mode for our today's guests and for AMD processors (fortunately, the test memory sticks were sufficient for this; the memory switched to the frequency in the BIOS without any problems 1866 and even 2133 MHz, increasing timing), for graphics tests and games. Please note that all graphics are clickable, it is possible to see the original size image.

In the popular 3DMark benchmark, our guests performed very well, absolutely equal conditions catching up and even overtaking not only the A4 5300 processor, but even the A10 6700 processor, the latter was able to regain its leadership only with an increase in memory bandwidth; on Intel processors, memory bandwidth had a slight effect. Actually, the result was pleasantly surprising; the graphics from Intel became much better; it was not only able to outperform the cheap A4, but also compete with the A10, even if it had limited memory bandwidth. As for the difference between the graphics of the HD4400 and HD4600, the difference between them in this test was about 10%, which is generally quite predictable.

In the Heaven Benchmark, the advantage of using dual-channel memory with AMD processors is still evident; performance has increased by more than 2 times, moreover, both in the case of the A10 and A4 processors. The increase in bandwidth again did not significantly improve the performance of Haswell processors; they hold up quite vigorously, regardless of the memory channel width.

In the OpenGL Cinebench test. The performance gain from increasing memory bandwidth for the AMD A4 5300 processor is not so huge, but the increase for the A10 6700 is again more than 100%. Naturally, when using a wide memory bandwidth, the A10 has no competitors, but using single-channel 1600 MHz memory, the i3 4330 processor was able to snatch the lead.

Having finished with graphics performance, we will smoothly move on to combined and computing performance. In the Cinebench CPU test, the i3 4330 processor turned out to be the absolute leader, the second place was taken by the i3 4130, as if breaking a number of i3 processors, the A10 6700 “wedged in” to 3rd place, the rest of the i3 processors were literally “breathing” in its back. In general, in terms of computing performance, we can say that progress has been made to a greater extent by AMD processors, which were able to reach the level of i3 processors in terms of computing. Changes in the architecture of the new Haswell processors helped them gain only about 10-15% compared to their predecessors (this is most noticeable with the i3 4130 and i3 2130 processors, which are completely analogues in frequency, but with the new processor, by about 14% faster, and the i3 4330, which has a frequency 100 MHz higher, is already almost 18% faster than its “brother”. Between Haswell processors, in this test, performance differs by only 3%, that is, approximately the same.

In the PCMark 7 combined test, AMD processors turned out to be absolute outsiders, losing even to the Pentium G2140. The reason for this is most likely optimization and problems with multi-threading of the tester itself, since even the i3 2130, which has prohibitively weak graphics, passed this test more successfully (hence, the 1600 MHz bandwidth and single-channel mode are not the reason). Haswell representatives again took the lead, leaving their closest competitors 20% behind.

In the SVPmark 3 benchmark, which evaluates a processor's video encoding capabilities, as well as computing and graphics performance, the A10 processor was able to perform with the best side. Bypassing the i3 4330 processor in all tests. This tester actually did not notice a difference in the performance of the i3 4330 and i3 4130.

In WinRar, which also does not work very well with a large number of cores, there is not much difference from using HyperThreading or full-fledged cores. If you look at the graph, you can understand that within generations of Intel Core, the archiver is more sensitive to frequency than to generation. In single-threaded mode, the difference between the A10 and A4 processors virtually disappeared, and in the same mode, AMD processors turned out to be the weakest among all participants. In multi-threaded mode, the A10 was able to beat the i3 3210, but couldn't come close to Haswell's results.

In another well-known archiver, 7Zip, the situation is somewhat different. In multi-threaded mode, although the archiver does not see much difference between threads and cores, there is a clear priority in the direction of processor frequency, so the winner in the 7Zip test was the A10 6700. In single-threaded mode, the aforementioned processor did not even manage to overtake the Pentium G2140. Our today's participants were able to take their rightful place, getting excellent results in both multi-threaded and single-threaded modes.

2. Gaming performance

Since there were quite a lot of configurations for tests, large quantity We were not able to test games, however, given that all processors have rather mediocre graphics for games, this drawback is not so significant. So, let's look at 3 games: DoTA 2, Mass Effect 3 and World of Tanks (2 games were taken, the performance of which worries many and one platform game to test the capabilities of the integrated graphics on one of the games in the Unreal engine).

IN DoTA 2, with medium graphics settings, it is possible to play comfortably on most of the tested processors. It is absolutely impossible to play on an Intel Core i3 2130 processor, with its Intel HD 2000 graphics, and there were also slight drops in FPS in large battles on the Pentium G2140, i3 3210 and A4 5300 (in single-channel memory mode). The absolute leader was the AMD A10 6700; in dual-channel mode it simply had no equal, but even in single-channel mode, the processor retained its leadership due to the narrow bus and low frequency. Our guests today performed well; in any case, there were no stutters, freezes or drops in FPS to an unplayable level, which is what they undoubtedly surpassed the processors of previous generations. Interestingly, in dual-channel memory mode, even the cheap A4 5300 shows a more than acceptable level of performance in this game.

IN Mass Effect 3, where the settings were lowered primarily to allow all processors to run this game, the leader was again the A10 6700 processor. Haswell processors were barely able to compete even with AMD processor The A4 5300, however, produced a fairly acceptable level of performance. On previous generation processors, the game showed quite low or sometimes saggy FPS, which generally makes the game on these processors, at Full HD resolution without discrete graphics, uncomfortable.

IN popular game World of Tanks, at medium graphics settings, only the A10 6700 processor allowed me to play comfortably; in other configurations, there was a drop in FPS in massive battles. Naturally, you can reduce the graphics to minimum and play comfortably on any of the processors, except, perhaps, the Core i3 2130 (the game refused to start at all), but the choice of settings is not accidental; this is the highest quality picture for our configurations. The FPS drop is not very critical in the case of Haswell processors, so playing at medium settings, with anti-aliasing disabled, is possible on these processors, but sometimes the FPS will drop, so some may consider this unacceptable, while others will not even notice short-term “losses” » frames.

3. Load temperature

The processors are not overly hot-tempered, so all test participants show acceptable heating indicators, even on Box coolers. Naturally, the situation may change if they get into a poorly ventilated case, but I think overheating will not happen even in this case. The hottest was the old Core i3 2130. Haswell processors did not turn out to be cooler than their predecessors in the form of Ivi, the coldest among the participants in the “tournament” was the Intel Pentium G2140, however, this processor has the HyperThreading function disabled, which undoubtedly increases the “ardor” of the processor .

conclusions

Having tested and compared new processors from Intel, we saw that the Haswell series turned out to be quite successful in terms of integrated graphics. In terms of integrated graphics, new Intel processors can not only outperform junior APUs from AMD in some tests and games, but even in some places compete with the champions represented by older APUs. The computing side of the processors also turned out to be at its best, although it did not go very far from previous generations.

Pros:

+ excellent performance; + productive integrated video; + presence of HyperThreading; + 22 nm technical process; + low heat generation; + low power consumption.

Minuses:

- the price of the platform is still somewhat inflated (buying a PC on platforms of previous generations is much cheaper).

As for the choice between the i3 4130 and i3 4330 processors, it all depends on your goals, in general we found that the graphics gap between them was approximately 10%, and the gap in computing power was about 3%, is it worth paying extra for this? 600-800 rubles, it’s up to you to decide, with the same price and a difference of 100-200 rubles, the choice is obvious, when buying a PC with discrete graphics, the choice is also obvious. When choosing between the AMD A10 6700 and Intel Core i3 4330, you need to prioritize what is more important for you. If your goal is only games, and you are not planning to purchase discrete graphics, then the A10 6700 processor is for you, but if discrete graphics are in In the future or on a computer you will not only play, then the i3 4330 is a much better option. Using the example of new processors, we were able to understand that Intel was able to seriously improve the graphics, making it competitive with AMD, taking into account the fact that the new processors are still somewhat faster in terms of computing power, and also have slightly lower power consumption, but they just have slightly weaker graphics, the choice is not as obvious as it was before and we can safely say that Intel has every chance of winning these “budget wars”.

Thank you all for your attention, see you next time, AnSoReN was with you.

P.S. I would like to express my gratitude to the site administration of DNS and Technopoint for providing the site for testing.

This article provides a small comparison of i3 i5 i7 processors. Typical tasks for all Core series processors will also be briefly described. The names of Intel processors vary so much that the average user will not understand what one or another processor name means. Of course, in itself it carries its own meaning, but at first glance, it is a confusion of abbreviations and numbers.

Before purchasing a new processor from Intel, a reasonable question will arise: what is the difference between i3 i5 i7 processors. To understand all this, we can divide all Core processor names into two groups. The first, most interesting for us, is the line (i3/i5/i7). We will focus our attention on it. The remaining part of the name, including numbers and letters, shows us distinctive features one or another processor, which we will consider below.

There are a couple of main features in the Core series. The socket (socket for installing a processor) in the same generation will always be the same. You will not need another motherboard for the same Core i3, unlike i5 or i7. All processors have a built-in graphics core. The sixth generation Skylake we are considering uses 1151 sockets and integrated HD530 graphics.

Core i3

Even though i3 processors are the least powerful among the Core processor series, they are an excellent choice for everyday tasks. They have two physical cores, but Hyper-Threading technology smooths out this drawback. Hyper-Threading doubles the available processor threads by emulating 4 "virtual" cores. The L3 cache capacity reaches 3-4 MB, depending on the specific model, and frequencies vary from 2.7 to 3.9 GHz. You can buy a processor for 110-140 US dollars.

He can do everything a little, but he can’t do anything perfectly. The performance of these processors is enough to make the system responsive, but heavy tasks like rendering or video editing will be a pain on them. They are fast enough to expose a modern graphics card, so they can be used in gaming systems entry level with an average video card.

Core i5

Sitting exactly in the middle between the i3 and i7 lines, the i5 line of processors have many of the latest features with pretty good power efficiency. This series lacks Hyper-Threading technology, but has 4 physical cores, Turbo Boost, and processor models with an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. The amount of L3 cache reaches 6 MB (in i5 desktop models).

Turbo Boost allows the processor to temporarily increase the frequency of one or more cores under load, at the expense of increased power consumption and reduced processing power of other cores. In essence, this technology is a kind of overclocking of the physical core. Sixth generation i5 frequencies range from 2.2 to 3.5 GHz, and prices range from $180 to $220

Core i7

At the top are the i7 line of processors. They have four logical cores, like in the i5 line. Hyper-Threading is also present, creating as many as 8 threads on 4 physical cores. These processors have the highest frequencies, reaching 4 GHz by default and 4.2 GHz in Turbo Boost. i7s come with 8 MB of L3 cache, and you can purchase a processor in this line for prices ranging from $300 to $340.

Although these processors are endowed with the highest performance, this is clearly more than enough for the average user. It is the processors of this line that will allow you to see by eye how the i3 i5 i7 processors differ. i7 processors are great for programs that can take full advantage of all 8 threads. Despite this, many games to this day use only 4 cores. Even Photoshop benefits from working with more than 2 cores only when special filters and operations are used. If you don't work in Maya and Autodesk on a regular basis, you will see virtually no increase in how the i3 i5 i7 differ in simple tasks.

Index values

A processor from any manufacturer has its own indexes, located in the remainder of the name after the manufacturer and product number. The higher the product ID, the more powerful the processor usually is. Letters T, U And Y denote processors designed for low power consumption. Letter K at the end indicate processors with overclocking potential, and P indicates the presence of a less powerful graphics core. If you want a more detailed description of the indexes, take a look at the Intel website.

What to buy?

Without going into all these designations, we can say that Core processors make it easy to determine which one is best for you. This can be seen even from one symbol in the name of the line. The difference between i3 i5 i7 is the processing power. Another difference between i3 i5 i7 processors is the graphics core. In i5 and i7 it is usually the same, but in i3 it is weaker. Unfortunately, not all users think about how the i3 i5 i7 differs and choose a processor whose capabilities are simply not used, or vice versa.

Most users will be happy with the i5, which offers a good price-to-power ratio. The i3 will still be an excellent choice for budget builds; it is a good option for the money. If you are confident that your processor will be tasked with heavy tasks such as rendering or editing large video files or modeling, then the capabilities of the Core i7 will completely satisfy you.

I think that this article has clarified how i3 i5 i7 processors differ. I hope this information will play a role in choosing a particular processor when purchasing.

Hello, dear subscribers of our blog. Today I will try to explain how the i3 processor differs from the i5. Surely many people are interested in why one Intel Core costs so much more than another, although you won’t immediately understand what the point is. In this article we will analyze which stone is best suited for PC games and work tasks.

The comparison will be multi-stage and contain summary tables. By the way, in the second part we will look at and also advise which one for certain tasks.

Separately, I would like to say that we do not specifically mention mobile processors - everything is much more complicated there, and besides, special attention is paid to labeling rather than numerical value chips and characteristics.

Difference between Coffee Lake and previous generations

The release of the 8th generation of Intel Core literally put the entire computer hardware market on edge. The difference between previous generations is colossal, and is expressed in the following figures:

As you can see, the usual concept has changed radically, as well as the technical characteristics. This was facilitated by the release of AMD Ryzen, which included 4 computing cores (Ryzen 3 1200) in the minimum configuration.

I'm glad that the built-in video remains, as do most proprietary technologies and instructions. Another thing is that the quality of graphics has not changed compared to Kaby Lake - still the same Intel UHD 630.

Difference between i3 and i5

First, let's look at the classic confrontation between processors, and then switch to the more recent Coffee Lake. The confrontation scheme will include several points.

• Number of Cores

The more physical cores, the more operations the chip performs per clock cycle. For i3 this indicator is 2, for i5 – 4, respectively.

For Coffee Lake the situation is as follows: both chips added 2 physical cores, but i5 is still the leader in this area.

• Turbo Boost

This technology allows you to significantly increase the CPU frequency in automatic mode only in cases where it is really necessary. In essence, this is a “lazy” version of overclocking by a multiplier, which is limited by the limitations of the platform, heat package and cooling. Only i5 has this mode, when i3 has fixed frequencies.

• Hyper-Threading

For processors, one physical core usually receives one stream of data, which is processed by this core. This function (i.e. HT) allows you to use 2 threads per core at once.

Many people mistakenly believe that virtual cores are almost identical to physical ones, but in fact the processor performs one operation not with one, but with two hands, to put it as simply and intelligibly as possible.

i3 processors of the second, third, fourth and even seventh generations supported this function, but with the advent of Coffee Lake the number of physical computing units increased from 2 to 4, and the need for the technology disappeared. Core i5s do not support the mode natively.

• Cache size

Part two: "The most important characteristics of each Intel Core i3/i5/i7 processor family. Which of these chips are of particular interest"

Introduction

First, we will present the most important characteristics of each family of Intel Core i3/i5/i7 processors, and then we will talk about which of these chips are of particular interest. For the convenience of readers, we considered it appropriate to present the information in the form of a kind of reference book, and summarize all the data on current models of the model in small tables. The prices we give are Russian retail prices, fixed at the time of publication of this material, for processors in a “boxed” configuration (that is, with a proprietary cooler).

Core i3

Core i3 (Clarkdale) is the latest generation dual-core processor designed for entry-level desktop computers. First introduced on January 7, 2010. Installed in LGA1156 connector. Produced using 32nm technology.

Equipped with a built-in PCI Express 2.0 x16 controller, thanks to which graphics accelerator Can be connected directly to the processor. To connect to the system logic set, a DMI (Digital Media Interface) bus with a bandwidth of 2 GB/s is used.

Core i3 processors have a built-in GMA HD graphics core with twelve pipelines and a clock speed of 733 MHz.

The base clock frequency for all Core i3 models is 133 MHz, nominal frequencies are achieved by using multipliers.

Compatible chipsets: Intel H55 Express, H57 Express, P55 Express, Q57 Express

Main technical parameters of Core i3

• Nehalem microarchitecture
• Two cores
• L3 cache - 4 MB, common to all cores
• Built-in PCI Express 2.0 x16 controller
• Integrated graphics adapter with a clock frequency of 733 MHz
• SSE 4.2 instruction set
• AES-NIS instruction set

Core i5

Core i5 (Clarkdale or Lynnfield) is the latest generation dual or quad-core processor designed for mid-range desktop computers. First introduced on September 8, 2009. Installed in LGA1156 connector. Dual-core Clarkdale are manufactured using 32nm technology, quad-core Lynnfield - using 45nm technology.

Equipped with a built-in dual-channel DDR3-1066/1333 RAM controller with a voltage of up to 1.6 V. Modules designed for higher voltages will not work with this chip and may even damage it.

Equipped with a built-in PCI Express 2.0 x16 controller, thanks to which the graphics accelerator can be connected directly to the processor. In models with a built-in GMA HD graphics core, one video card in x16 mode can be connected to the chip; in models without built-in graphics, two video cards in x8 mode each can be connected.

To connect to the system logic set, a DMI (Digital Media Interface) bus with a bandwidth of 2 GB/s is used.

Dual-core models (6xx series) have a built-in GMA HD graphics adapter and Hyper-Threading technology; quad-core (7xx series) do not have graphics or Hyper-Threading. In models whose number ends in 1, the graphics clock speed is 900 MHz, in models whose number ends in 0, the graphics core operates at 733 MHz.

All Core i5s feature Turbo Boost technology for automatically increasing the clock speed in resource-intensive tasks.

The base clock frequency for all Core i5 models is 133 MHz, nominal frequencies are achieved by using multipliers.

Compatible chipsets: Intel H55 Express, H57 Express, P55 Express, Q57 Express.

Main technical parameters of Core i5

• Nehalem microarchitecture
• Two or four cores
• L1 cache - 64 KB (32 KB data and 32 KB instruction) per core
• L2 cache - 256 KB per core
• L3 cache - 4 or 8 MB, common to all cores
• Built-in dual-channel DDR3-1066/1333 MHz RAM controller
• Integrated PCI Express 2.0 controller (one x16 lane or two x8 lanes on models without integrated graphics)
• Integrated graphics adapter with a clock frequency of 733 or 900 MHz
• Support for VT virtualization technology
• Support for 64-bit Intel EM64T instructions
• Support for Hyper-Threading technology in dual-core models
• SSE 4.2 instruction set
• AES-NIS instruction set
• Antivirus technology Execute Disable Bit
• Enhanced SpeedStep technology

Core i7

Core i7 (Bloomfield, Lynnfield or Gulftown) is the latest generation four or six-core processor designed for high-end desktop computers. First introduced in November 2008. Quad-core Bloomfield and Lynnfield are manufactured using 45 nm technology, six-core Lynnfield - using 32 nm technology.

Available in two modifications: 9xx series (for LGA1366 socket) with a built-in three-channel memory controller and QPI bus, and 8xx series (for LGA1156 socket) with a dual-channel memory controller, built-in PCI Express 2.0 controller and DMI bus) DDR3-1066/1333 RAM is supported with voltages up to 1.6 V. Modules designed for higher voltages will not work with this chip and may even damage it.

Processors for the LGA1366 socket are equipped with a high-speed QPI bus operating at a frequency of 2.4 GHz (up to 4.8 GB/s) in regular i7s and at a frequency of 3.2 GHz (6.4 GB/s) in Extreme modifications (these include i7-965, i7-975 and i7-980X.

Chips for the LGA1156 connector are equipped with a built-in PCI Express 2.0 x16 controller, thanks to which the graphics accelerator can be connected directly to the processor. To connect to the system logic set, a DMI (Digital Media Interface) bus with a bandwidth of 2 GB/s is used here.

All Core i7s feature Turbo Boost technology for automatically increasing the clock speed in resource-intensive tasks, as well as Hyper-Threading technology.

The base clock frequency for all Core i7 models is 133 MHz, nominal frequencies are achieved by using multipliers. In Core i7 Extreme modifications, the multiplier is unlocked, which allows you to freely increase the processor clock speed.

Compatible chipsets: 8xx series - Intel H55 Express, H57 Express, P55 Express, Q57 Express, 9xx series - Intel X58 Express.

Main technical parameters of Core i7

• Nehalem microarchitecture
• Four or six cores
• L1 cache - 64 KB (32 KB data and 32 KB instruction) per core
• L2 cache - 256 KB per core
• L3 cache - 8 or 12 MB, common to all cores
• Built-in dual-channel (LGA1156) or triple-channel (LGA1366) DDR3-1066/1333 MHz RAM controller
• QPI bus operating at 2.4 GHz (4.8 GB/s) or 3.2 GHz (6.4 GB/s) on LGA1366 models
• DMI bus (2 GB/s) on LGA1156 models
• Integrated PCI Express 2.0 controller (one x16 lane or two x8 lanes on models without integrated graphics) on LGA1156 models
• Support for VT virtualization technology
• Support for 64-bit Intel EM64T instructions
• Hyper-Threading technology support
• Turbo Boost technology support
• SSE 4.2 instruction set
• AES-NIS instruction set for i7-980X
• Antivirus technology Execute Disable Bit
• Enhanced SpeedStep technology

What to choose?

The Core i3-530 and 540 processors are quite powerful and inexpensive chips, and the price difference between them is negligible, so there is no point in purchasing the 530 unless you are strictly on a budget.

The Core i3 series chips are direct competitors to the previous generation Core 2 Duo Exxx processors: they cost about the same and provide a comparable level of performance, although slightly faster. However, although motherboards Since the LGA1156 socket is more expensive than its LGA775 counterparts, buying an i3 chip is a smarter long-term investment than a Core 2 Duo, since these processors are not only fast enough today, but can also be replaced with any LGA1156 chip in the future - even the super-powerful Core i7. If the i3-530 is too expensive for you, you can pay attention to the Pentium G6950 (the “boxed” version complete with a standard cooler will cost about 3,200 rubles), which is slower than both “three rubles”, but practically not inferior to most Core 2 Duo.

As for the quad-core Core 2 Quad, which are slightly more expensive than the dual-core Core i3 (for example, the “boxed” Core 2 Quad Q8300 costs about 5,000 rubles), then buying them today only makes sense for an upgrade existing system for the LGA775 socket - in this case it is a very reasonable choice.

All Core i5 600-series processors offer high performance, but unless you need a chip with integrated graphics, there's little point in buying a model from this family. These models are aimed, rather, at the corporate market - an office computer does not need powerful graphics, and the simpler it is in design, the more convenient it is to maintain.

For the same money that they ask for chips of the 600 family, it is better to buy a quad-core i5-750 - this is an ideal choice for building a powerful home PC for a reasonable price. If you make a choice within the 600 series, you should know that the 661 differs from the 660 only in slightly faster integrated graphics, but at the same time increased power consumption and the lack of hardware support for VT-d I/O virtualization, which is only relevant for corporate users. In other words, if you are buying a CPU for a home computer, it makes sense to choose the Core i5-661.

To build a powerful gaming PC, the best choice according to the price/performance criterion - Core i7-860, all other options will cost much more, since a more expensive motherboard on the X58 Express chipset for the LGA1366 socket will be required.

The six-core “extreme” Core i7-980X is the unsurpassed leader in performance not only of the entire modern line of Intel desktop processors, but also of competing AMD models. Therefore, you should not be surprised that a system based on it will cost a rather impressive amount. Lovers of the very best can prepare their wallets - this chip is about to appear on the shelves of Russian stores, replacing the previous flagship Core i7-975

In the process of assembling or purchasing a new computer, users are always faced with a question. In this article we will look at Intel Core i3, i5 and i7 processors, and also tell you the difference between these chips and what is better to choose for your computer.

Difference No. 1. Number of cores and support for Hyper-threading.

Perhaps, The main difference between Intel Core i3, i5 and i7 processors is the number of physical cores and support for Hyper-threading technology, which creates two threads of computation for each actually existing physical core. Creating two computation threads per core allows for more efficient use of the processing power of the processor core. Therefore, processors with Hyper-threading support have some performance benefits.

The number of cores and support for Hyper-threading technology for most Intel Core i3, i5 and i7 processors can be summarized in the following table.

But there are exceptions to this table. Firstly, these are Intel Core i7 processors from their “Extreme” line. These processors can have 6 or 8 physical computing cores. Moreover, they, like all Core i7 processors, have support for Hyper-threading technology, which means the number of threads is twice the number of cores. Secondly, some mobile processors (laptop processors) are exempt. So, some Intel Core i5 mobile processors have only 2 physical cores, but at the same time have support for Hyper-threading.

It should also be noted that Intel has already planned to increase the number of cores in its processors. According to latest news, Intel Core i5 and i7 processors with Coffee Lake architecture, scheduled for release in 2018, will each have 6 physical cores and 12 threads.

Therefore, you should not completely trust the table provided. If you are interested in the number of cores in a particular Intel processor, then it is better to check the official information on the website.

Difference No. 2. Cache memory size.

Also, Intel Core i3, i5 and i7 processors differ in cache memory size. The higher the processor class, the larger the cache memory it receives. Intel Core i7 processors get the most cache, Intel Core i5 slightly less, and Intel Core i3 processors even less. Specific values you need to look at the characteristics of the processors. But as an example, you can compare several processors from the 6th generation.

You need to understand that a decrease in cache memory is associated with a decrease in the number of cores and threads. But, nevertheless, there is such a difference.

Difference number 3. Clock frequencies.

Typically, higher-end processors come with higher clock speeds. But, not everything is so simple here. It is not uncommon for Intel Core i3 to have higher frequencies than Intel Core i7. For example, let's take 3 processors from the 6th generation line.

In this way, Intel is trying to maintain the performance of Intel Core i3 processors at the desired level.

Difference No. 4. Heat dissipation.

Another important difference between Intel Core i3, i5 and i7 processors is the level of heat dissipation. The characteristic known as TDP or thermal design power is responsible for this. This characteristic tells you how much heat the processor cooling system should dissipate. As an example, let's take the TDP of three 6th generation Intel processors. As can be seen from the table, the higher the processor class, the more heat it produces and the more powerful the cooling system is needed.

It should be noted that TDP tends to decrease. With each generation of processors, the TDP becomes lower. For example, the TDP of the 2nd generation Intel Core i5 processor was 95 W. Now, as we see, only 65 W.

Which is better Intel Core i3, i5 or i7?

The answer to this question depends on what kind of performance you need. The difference in the number of cores, threads, cache and clock speeds creates a noticeable difference in performance between the Core i3, i5 and i7.

• The Intel Core i3 processor is an excellent option for an office or budget home computer. If you have a video card of the appropriate level, you can play computer games on a computer with an Intel Core i3 processor.
• Intel Core i5 processor – suitable for a powerful work or gaming computer. A modern Intel Core i5 can handle any video card without any problems, so on a computer with such a processor you can play any games even at maximum settings.
• The Intel Core i7 processor is an option for those who know exactly why they need such performance. A computer with such a processor is suitable, for example, for editing videos or conducting game streams.