Please register or login. There are 0 registered and 1727 anonymous users currently online. Current bandwidth usage: 326.30 kbit/s December 17 - 04:37pm EST 
Hardware Analysis
      
Forums Product Prices
  Contents 
 
 

  Latest Topics 
 

More >>
 

    
 
 

  You Are Here: 
 
/ Forums / Intel's Core i7, is it ever enough?
 

  Everyone likes more speed 
 
 Author 
 Date Written 
 Tools 
Continue Reading on Page: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, Next >>
u64 Jan 11, 2010, 10:27am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Everyone likes more bang for thier buck
I picked games because that's where speed matters most, because they're <b>interactive</b>.
Few users grind thier teeth waiting those extra seconds of mp3-encoding, lol
You have to be a pretty hardcore PDF-maker to notice those extra seconds. But if you
happen to be one of those few that make a living editing video or images every day long,
then perhaps an Intel might serve you best. The cost of your professional time comes into
play and i dont have those numbers.

No one should use AVG because it's too slow for practical use, especially if you really
do need speed. Then benchmarking a good-speed Free Antivirus like Avira or such makes sense.
Once the game or program is up and running, most files have been scanned and AV-speed
dont matter anymore.

So that's why i picked games.

As for 'false random' picking, (i did say pseudo-random) but i agree more data paints a
clearer and bigger picture. I added FarCry2 to give us three 3D Engines. Should be enough
for every gamer :P

Btw, Phenom2 X4 965 is $184.99 on Directron from
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/2009-desktop-cpu-charts/GTA...,1402.html


Athlon2 X2 250. . (66.60+36.9+111.0) / 67.000 = 3.2015 BangForTheBuck
Phenom2 X2 550 (75.30+41.0+127.7) / 99.000 = 2.4646
Phenom X4 9650 (72.40+48.8+102.1) / 104.99 = 2.1269
Phenom2 X4 965 (90.90+62.1+156.0) / 184.99 = 1.6704
i5 750 . . . . . . . . (103.1+60.8+157.8) / 199.99 = 1.6085
C2D E8400 . . . . (80.30+45.8+129.8) / 190.00 = 1.3468
i7-920 . . . . . . . . (108.4+60.5+145.9) / 288.99 = 1.0893
C2D E8600 . . . . (84.10+48.3+138.6) / 296.92 = 0.9127
i7-975E . . . . . . . (113.1+62.4+198.8) / 999.99 = 0.3743

Enough math for me today. But i'm tempted to do one for 3D-cards someday :D


P4 1700 256k SSE2 256M-800MHz Geforce3 200/460 128bit 64M SystemIdle:99W 0

100G 8M
D: FAT16 64k Pagefile Evt
C: NTFS 4k 32bit TweakedXP3Pro (boots in 16s)

80G 8M
E: FAT16 64k Pagefile Evt
F: NTFS 4k
Want to enjoy less advertisements and more features? Click here to become a Hardware Analysis registered user.
<a class= Jan 11, 2010, 02:19pm EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
I like my apps to open up before I even clicked on it.

_______________________________________________________
3930K @ 5.00Ghz | GA-X79-UD3P | 16Gb DDR3 | GTX770 | W7 x64
dark41 Jan 11, 2010, 11:24pm EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List

Edited: Jan 11, 2010, 11:38pm EST

 
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
u64, you picked a game benchmark where your AMD gets 0.3FPS more than the i5 750. That's a good choice because almost all games have roughly the same results with these 2 CPUs. No teeth grinding involved with that either, as its not even worth mentioning. As I said, games are basically a draw.

Your mathematic calculatons are stills**t. They don't take into consideration how much the time saved is worth, which makes the rest of the conclusions worthless. Maybe your time isn't worth much, but mine sure is. To me, the middle/higher end CPU that can be overclocked to match the fastest CPU is the best value. No chart/formula can accurately display that how much the time saved is worth.

Now to further your argument that AMD is better bang for the buck, you're suggesting that gaming is the only thing where speed is important to gamers? I think most gamers would disagree with that too. Most unbiased gamers would still agree that the Intel is better bang for the buck because it also beats the AMD by a substantial margin in many other applications, such as encoding/decoding. Apparently you have no idea just how much those applications are used by people these days. As a custom system builder, I can tell you that 80% of my customers (who are also the more computer literate for the most part) request these apps installed on their systems, both gamers and non-gamers. Most of the 20% who don't request them are older folks who don't know what a computer game (other than card games and Free Cell) or encoding/decoding are.

As for prices, I only picked Newegg because you used it. I can get the i5 750 in Australia for $179 (from wholesaler suppliers), which is $20 less than I can get the the x4 965 here anywhere. I can also get the 15 750 for $188AUD online:

http://www.instantpcshop.com.au/pcshop/446/index.php?productID=6348

With the exchange rate, both of these examples make the Intel cheaper than the AMD for $184USD. If the USA had a website like staticice, i'm sure you could find the i5 750 for less too.

Bottom line is that I blew out your argument for AMD being better bang for the buck at that price point, and you still refuse to admit it. Your loss. By all means, buy AMD to help out their struggling market as we all need the competition to keep Intel honest for pricing. But if you post rubbish about either company being better value, be prepared to back up your argument with facts. In this case you have no facts to support your position. :)

EX38-DS5
E8500@4.0GHz (445x9, 1.40v) TRUE Black
Corsair HX620W
2x2gb Kingston HyperX 9600
HIS IceQ4 HD4850
2X1TB F1s (RAID 0) XP Pro/Win7 Ult 64
Auzen X-Fi Prelude 7.1
Cambridge Soundworks 500w 5.1
G5, Antec 1200
dark41 Jan 11, 2010, 11:40pm EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
sovietdoc said:
I like my apps to open up before I even clicked on it.


Don't we all?! But if we get to the point where my keyboard types what I'm thinking, I'm in big trouble. :)

EX38-DS5
E8500@4.0GHz (445x9, 1.40v) TRUE Black
Corsair HX620W
2x2gb Kingston HyperX 9600
HIS IceQ4 HD4850
2X1TB F1s (RAID 0) XP Pro/Win7 Ult 64
Auzen X-Fi Prelude 7.1
Cambridge Soundworks 500w 5.1
G5, Antec 1200
Dr. Peaceful Jan 12, 2010, 01:30am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
Wow suddenly so many people posted on this old discussion thread. New "faces" and looong posts, too.

Good reads, though. ;)

Radomir Jordanovic Jan 12, 2010, 01:59am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List

Edited: Jan 12, 2010, 01:59am EST

 
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
I'm back because I'm still subscribed to the thread from a long, long time ago. It's good stuff. Overall, I agree that u64 is incorrect unless he's talking about seriously sub-$200 CPUs. This thread hasn't really shown much since its reemergence aside from one of the people from the group sees $50 Athlon II X2 CPUs and wants them to run at speeds generally comparable to a Core 2 Duo E6600.

I went to Fry's Electronics on Black Friday (I used to work there, so I've figured out a sub-15 minute shopping system), and there I got a $40 combo of an MSI ATX board and Athlon II X2 250. That's definitely worth it. Unfortunately, the combo only went up to $60 after Black Friday, so I feel a little cheated even with such an awesome deal.

Even if you don't get deals like that, the AM3 Athlons in the sub-$100 range with a motherboard that actually supports them are a great deal. This is where I find AMD to be bang for the buck. For these CPUs also you'd buy a chipset like the AMD 770 instead of a true Crossfrie & such capable motherboard. It makes a great home PC and only uses 65W for the CPU. I have my fan for the Athlon II running at 900 rpm on a tiny heatsink, like half a fist, and the processor stays in the 30s with just a rear exhaust fan.

Silverstone 750W, Asus P5KC, C2 Q6600, 2GB OCZ DDR3 1600
ATI HD 4850 512MB, 1TB Caviar. 1TB Seagate
dark41 Jan 12, 2010, 05:11am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
Radomir Jordanovic said:
I'm back because I'm still subscribed to the thread from a long, long time ago. It's good stuff. Overall, I agree that u64 is incorrect unless he's talking about seriously sub-$200 CPUs. This thread hasn't really shown much since its reemergence aside from one of the people from the group sees $50 Athlon II X2 CPUs and wants them to run at speeds generally comparable to a Core 2 Duo E6600.

I went to Fry's Electronics on Black Friday (I used to work there, so I've figured out a sub-15 minute shopping system), and there I got a $40 combo of an MSI ATX board and Athlon II X2 250. That's definitely worth it. Unfortunately, the combo only went up to $60 after Black Friday, so I feel a little cheated even with such an awesome deal.

Even if you don't get deals like that, the AM3 Athlons in the sub-$100 range with a motherboard that actually supports them are a great deal. This is where I find AMD to be bang for the buck. For these CPUs also you'd buy a chipset like the AMD 770 instead of a true Crossfrie & such capable motherboard. It makes a great home PC and only uses 65W for the CPU. I have my fan for the Athlon II running at 900 rpm on a tiny heatsink, like half a fist, and the processor stays in the 30s with just a rear exhaust fan.



I couldn't agree more. AMD has the low end market cornered for the time being, but that's all.

I'm not exactly new here, but haven't gotten anything from this forum, reviews, opinions, updated threads, etc., nothing for a year or so. Kind of surprised it was still here. Same thing, out of the blue I got an email that this thread had been replied to, so thought I'd add my 2 cents worth.

Things have changed a bit since the thread was first started as far as prices and Intel increasing their lead on high end. I was only dreaming about an i7 setup when the thread started, but now they (i7), the i5, and the i3 are all very affordable. :)

EX38-DS5
E8500@4.0GHz (445x9, 1.40v) TRUE Black
Corsair HX620W
2x2gb Kingston HyperX 9600
HIS IceQ4 HD4850
2X1TB F1s (RAID 0) XP Pro/Win7 Ult 64
Auzen X-Fi Prelude 7.1
Cambridge Soundworks 500w 5.1
G5, Antec 1200
u64 Jan 12, 2010, 09:46am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Not everyone likes math, apparently
dark41, I see your shop sells i5 750. This dont mix well with your claim that
the i5 750 is the greatest CPU on the planet.
Sorry mate. Best of wishes for you and your business. (You might need it)

I totally agree with you on one point. Overclocking is missing in the banchmarks.
That would be a more RealWorld comparison.

P4 1700 256k SSE2 256M-800MHz Geforce3 200/460 128bit 64M SystemIdle:99W 0

100G 8M
D: FAT16 64k Pagefile Evt
C: NTFS 4k 32bit TweakedXP3Pro (boots in 16s)

80G 8M
E: FAT16 64k Pagefile Evt
F: NTFS 4k
Suspended User Jan 12, 2010, 10:10am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
u64 said:
Btw, you didnt blind-test, did ya :D

I never compared C2D to P2. I'm not THAT silly :P
I say, a DualCore P2 wouldnt be twice as fast as a SingleCore P2.
And a DualCore C2D isnt twice as fast as a SingleCore C2D. At least i havent seen
any bechmarks suggesting otherwise. It dissapoint me because i would like them
to be twice as fast.

Going from 3GHz to 6GHz never cuts the job time in half. My point is that for each
Hz added we get lesser and lesser performance out of each Hz. Again, show me a
benchmark that say otherwise and i'm very happy to be proven wrong.

Yes, not ALL AMD give more bang for the buck. Just most of them.
Pick a random gaming benchmark and do the math, fps/buck.

In short, spending twice the money never give us twice the bang.




I have never seen a single Core C2D...

u64 Jan 12, 2010, 12:27pm EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> SingleCore Core2 Duo, hehe
True. And i've never seen a DualCore Pentium2. To improve the comparison
i gave a theoretical perfect example.

There's lots of benchmarks on DualCores with only one Core active though.

Hmm, wonder if it's theoretically possible to doubble the performance when
the software is perfectly optimized...?

I'm no CPU expert, i also dont understand why they added more cores instead
of adding more instructions to SingleCore...
Is that what Intel tried with Itanium? But they forgot to stay x86-compatible.


P4 1700 256k SSE2 256M-800MHz Geforce3 200/460 128bit 64M SystemIdle:99W 0

100G 8M
D: FAT16 64k Pagefile Evt
C: NTFS 4k 32bit TweakedXP3Pro (boots in 16s)

80G 8M
E: FAT16 64k Pagefile Evt
F: NTFS 4k
Suspended User Jan 12, 2010, 12:44pm EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
u64 said:
True. And i've never seen a DualCore Pentium2. To improve the comparison
i gave a theoretical perfect example.

There's lots of benchmarks on DualCores with only one Core active though.

Hmm, wonder if it's theoretically possible to doubble the performance when
the software is perfectly optimized...?

I'm no CPU expert, i also dont understand why they added more cores instead
of adding more instructions to SingleCore...
Is that what Intel tried with Itanium? But they forgot to stay x86-compatible.



I was making fun of your loose statement....

They add more cores to divide instructions across cores.

Think of each core as lane, 100 instructions on a single lane ( core ) would be a nightmare....100 instructions across 4 lanes ( cores ) is far more efficient.

<a class= Jan 12, 2010, 12:48pm EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
AMD is leet when it comes to low end and midrange. I can't really call i5 a "midrange" because it beats the i7 which is supposed to be the high end. Not to mention, while for me 200-300 bux may not be that much of a deal, in most parts of the world that'd be considered "expensive" for a cpu.

_______________________________________________________
3930K @ 5.00Ghz | GA-X79-UD3P | 16Gb DDR3 | GTX770 | W7 x64
u64 Jan 12, 2010, 03:39pm EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Cores
I suppose so. Or it's easier to slap on another core and not bother inventing
anything new. Or both.

Why not start with a known Core that all software are already optimized for
and with really high IPC (Instructions Per Cycle). Why not build a 64Core i486...?

Rumors suggest Intel is doing something like this, but for GPU, not CPU.

P4 1700 256k SSE2 256M-800MHz Geforce3 200/460 128bit 64M SystemIdle:99W 0

100G 8M
D: FAT16 64k Pagefile Evt
C: NTFS 4k 32bit TweakedXP3Pro (boots in 16s)

80G 8M
E: FAT16 64k Pagefile Evt
F: NTFS 4k
Radomir Jordanovic Jan 12, 2010, 05:04pm EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
Wow, I find myself being entirely against u64 now. Just because some guy sells a processor doesn't mean he can't say it's one of the best out there right now. The 750 won't be purchased from dark at some greater rate because of his posting on Hardware Analysis. No offense to the site, but just saying.

u64 is a poopsteak. Don't read anything else he writes. He's wrong, and he makes no sense. Dark didn't say that the 750 is the greatest CPU ever, but that it beats AMD's top dog right now basically makes it the CPU to get if you actually want an AMD because of its price.

Silverstone 750W, Asus P5KC, C2 Q6600, 2GB OCZ DDR3 1600
ATI HD 4850 512MB, 1TB Caviar. 1TB Seagate
dark41 Jan 12, 2010, 08:56pm EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List

Edited: Jan 13, 2010, 01:08am EST

 
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
Actually, I don't know what u64 is talking about. We don't sell CPUs or any components for that matter. We build custom systems. We're a niche builder, only dealing with middle to high end systems. We refer people who want cheap stuff to the retail stores, as that's their specialty. Just so happens that our bottom of the line system (which is just an example on our website since we don't build anything without orders) uses an i5 750. We recently switched to that CPU/motherboard/memory example for good reasons, because it costs the same to build as the E8500 systems and performs much better. But it also happens to be the system that people are asking for right now, outselling all other systems combined 2-1 for us. Other system builders may have different experiences, but that is ours.

I'll build anything a customer asks for, within reason, but we don't deal with cheap components. Over the years we've found that cheap components and very high end components have the highest failure rates. So if people ask our opinions, we refer to mid range or mid/high end components, which is what our example on our website is. In the 15 years of being in this niche market, we can count our RMAs on both hands so I'm very happy with the results as keeping the customer happy has always been our primary goal.

I do consider a $200-300 midrange as the high end is around $1000, but that's just my way of defining performance/price points. To each their own.

I currently lean towards Intel for 1 very simple reason. In our 15 years of business, we've never had a single Intel CPU fail on one of our systems. Not 1. That's a pretty impressive track record.

AMD is a completely different story for us. From K6, to K7, to A64 we've had multiple failures. My own systems used to run AMD, but after a failed 3500+ Windsor and 3700+ San Diego (both within a month of each other), I quit using them for our systems completely. Also the AMD motherboards of the past were much less than dependable (SIS and Nforce3/4 chipset boards were constantly coming in for repairs, not our systems), The Phenoms and Phenom IIs might be much better, but I'm very happy with our Intels so it would take something pretty special to convince me to switch.

I've got 2 shops, one in USA and one in Australia. I've been in business for 15 years (in USA and 7 yrs in Australia), and will retire in the next year or so (at 51-52 yrs old). We have plans to travel around Australia on my BMW, and then possibly Europe. The business has paid for 2 very nice houses, in cash. I don't owe anyone anything and have a nice cushion in a bank in both USA and AU.

So if anyone thinks I don't know my business, I'm not bothered by their opinions. I have pretty thick skin. ;) We've never advertised other than 2 years in each country with a full page telephone book ad. We rely on word of mouth advertising, and have been very busy and profitable since day 1. But most importantly, we have heaps of happy customers.

u64 doesn't mean any harm. He's just a fanboy with blinders on, which is pretty typical for fanboys. I can understand his loyalty, and he has good reasons for wanting AMD to succeed. We're all better off with AMD in business. And yes, all I said was that the 15 750 is better bang for the buck at that price point than the Phenom II x4 965. To me its just good business sense to go with the horse who has a reputation for winning, and right now, that's not AMD for the price points we care to cater to. But if people choose to see things differently, even with all the evidence that I provided to back up my claims, that's really just their problem, not mine.

To each their own. :)

EX38-DS5
E8500@4.0GHz (445x9, 1.40v) TRUE Black
Corsair HX620W
2x2gb Kingston HyperX 9600
HIS IceQ4 HD4850
2X1TB F1s (RAID 0) XP Pro/Win7 Ult 64
Auzen X-Fi Prelude 7.1
Cambridge Soundworks 500w 5.1
G5, Antec 1200
Radomir Jordanovic Jan 12, 2010, 10:55pm EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
Very well said! You apparently do some really good business. Congratulations on your success.

Silverstone 750W, Asus P5KC, C2 Q6600, 2GB OCZ DDR3 1600
ATI HD 4850 512MB, 1TB Caviar. 1TB Seagate
dark41 Jan 13, 2010, 01:09am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
Radomir Jordanovic said:
Very well said! You apparently do some really good business. Congratulations on your success.


Thank you. :)

EX38-DS5
E8500@4.0GHz (445x9, 1.40v) TRUE Black
Corsair HX620W
2x2gb Kingston HyperX 9600
HIS IceQ4 HD4850
2X1TB F1s (RAID 0) XP Pro/Win7 Ult 64
Auzen X-Fi Prelude 7.1
Cambridge Soundworks 500w 5.1
G5, Antec 1200
u64 Jan 13, 2010, 07:06am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> -
dark41,
Hmm, highly informative. I've re-read mine and your posts, trying to see
things from your perspective with all information in mind.
In hindsight, i've been way off several times.
It's the way i try to dig out information, i'm curious, and at the same time
very sceptical of information until i find it reasonably confirmed.
Makes me seem like,
1. A moron for always asking the wierd questions. And
2. A complete jerk for never accepting people's answers.
Trust me, it's a common theme in most my conversations. But it helps me explore
and learn completly unexpected new cool things at times. Otherwise i would have
stopped my behaviour long time ago :D


P4 1700 256k SSE2 256M-800MHz Geforce3 200/460 128bit 64M SystemIdle:99W 0

100G 8M
D: FAT16 64k Pagefile Evt
C: NTFS 4k 32bit TweakedXP3Pro (boots in 16s)

80G 8M
E: FAT16 64k Pagefile Evt
F: NTFS 4k
Radomir Jordanovic Jan 13, 2010, 02:23pm EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
Wow, you've really turned around! I know this is between you and dark, but I just can't hold back from congratulating you. In my mind, you are no longer a poopsteak. Have a great day!

Silverstone 750W, Asus P5KC, C2 Q6600, 2GB OCZ DDR3 1600
ATI HD 4850 512MB, 1TB Caviar. 1TB Seagate
G. G. Jan 13, 2010, 02:59pm EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
It was enjoyable reading this old thread... hehehe..

But there is a couple items I noticed and would like to bring up....


Kieran B said:
I have never seen a single Core C2D...



and you would be absolutely correct... because there was never a single core C2D... D = Duo = two. lol

The C2D was designed with two cores sharing L2 on a single die. But when you talk about C2D quads, then it will be 2 x dual core sharing L2 on a single package. In the past, the way they would simulate a C2D dual core is to turn off one of the cores. Hence the benchmarks of single vs duals.. Then came Nehalems.... Quad cores on a single die sharing L3.



Then there is u64's signature..... hmmmm ... this is what he has displayed

P4 1700 256k SSE2 256M-800MHz Geforce3 200/460 128bit 64M SystemIdle:99W 0

100G 8M
D: FAT16 64k Pagefile Evt
C: NTFS 4k 32bit TweakedXP3Pro (boots in 16s)

80G 8M
E: FAT16 64k Pagefile Evt
F: NTFS 4k



isnt this kinda odd ???

Well.... for a fella to come in and feverishly defends how AMD is THE "Best Bang for the BUCK" would sport that old/slow antique Intel hardware as his signature for all to see.... lol

if AMD is such a big bang in the dollar/performance catagory...... I would think he would be the first to be on the bandwagon to have himself a worthy AMD system to be displayed for all to see... Heck.... even today's rock bottom 300.00 specials from either AMD or Intel will be alot faster than what is displayed in his sig... LOL...

Just thought it was kinda funny seeing someone so hardup on price/performance but still has a system that is 3 to 4 generation behind... man .. you are missing out on a whole lot of good stuff... if that system is good enough for you... well... that's ok.... you might as well throw in a mullet hair du and a GMC Pacer with it too..... lol





---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-

Write a Reply >>

Continue Reading on Page: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, Next >>

 

    
 
 

  Topic Tools 
 
RSS UpdatesRSS Updates
 

  Related Articles 
 
 

  Newsletter 
 
A weekly newsletter featuring an editorial and a roundup of the latest articles, news and other interesting topics.

Please enter your email address below and click Subscribe.