Power and overclocking
| Power consumption - idle (system) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intel Core i7 950 | Intel Core i7 870 | Intel Core i7 920 | AMD Phenom II X4 965 BE | Intel Core i7 975 EE | Intel Core i5 750 | Intel Core i7 860 | Intel Core 2 Q9650 |
| 146 | 113 | 155 | 110 | 159 | 110 | 112 | 118 |
Looking at power-draw from a platform point of view, LGA1366 chips, whilst undeniably fast, aren't the best in terms of frugality. That appears to be fixed on our particular P55/LGA1156 combination as idle-draw drops by around 30W and matches the Q9650 and 965BE's.
| Power consumption - load 2D (system) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intel Core i7 950 | Intel Core i7 870 | Intel Core i7 920 | AMD Phenom II X4 965 BE | Intel Core i7 975 EE | Intel Core i5 750 | Intel Core i7 860 | Intel Core 2 Q9650 |
| 232 | 215 | 251 | 205 | 283 | 181 | 210 | 168 |
Load power-draw is defined as running wPrime32 and noted down the maximum draw whilst the benchmark is in progress. Again, the draw is lower than LGA1366 but varies on which LGA1156 is in the socket. Unsurprisingly, the Core i5 750 does best, followed by 860 and 870.
Overclocking
Adding no more than 10 per cent to various lines and using a Thermalright MUX-120, we overclocked the sample Core i5 750 (2.67GHz native) to 3.8GHz with excellent stability. 4GHz, we reckon, would require voltages that would be a worry for long-term use.
The Core i7 870 overclocked to 3.925GHz using the same cooler, highlighting that there's plenty of headroom for Intel to work with. We can see why the company's been bullish with the Turbo Boost settings.
