8 replies to this topic

[bbqroast]

I have been looking at computers recently and it appears that for a non over-clocker i7 is a complete waste of money. A few people at my school seem to believe that anything other than i7 is crap (ironically they are using Pentium age processors), however the difference between i5 and i7 is minute and after seeing i5s overclocked to 5GHz (being used properly in everyday life) only computer enthusiasts would really benefit from the i7.

I cannot help think that Captain Sparkles wasted a lot of money on his i7 990x (~$900) which he only runs at 4.2GHz (0.5GHz faster than a default clock $200 i5 with turbo boost).

So what is so amazing about i7?

[Alexander]

If you wish to crunch large numbers, scaling horizontally (think multiple networked nodes) rather than vertically (measly 30% faster iXYZ) is less expensive and works. This is true for gaming, a lot of the physics and shading is done across many many cores, taking more away from the processor to justify a small upgrade.

I would only get an i5 if I were to render videos or do heavy work, where raw computations are important to minimise the time you are at the computer.

Alexander.

[bbqroast]

What would you get instead of a i5?? Shouldn't a GPU be doing all the shading?

[Simon Vandenhende]

I always worked with AMD and these are also good processors. I don't think an i7 processor is worth it's money. Because you can already play all games on it's highest details with an amd II X4 or intel i5.

[Sublime]

Intel = Application heavy workload (Processor performance)
Amd = Gaming, common workload (Graphics driven)

If you got a lot of extra cash to waste and want that extra performance, go for Intel. If you're on a budget and still want great performance, go for AMD. Go check out the new AMD bulldozer FX series (8-core) that really puts the i7 2600k in its place.

[bbqroast]

Seriously? The bulldozer series isn't that great, half the sites I read say AMD has lost the desktop chip war. No doubt AMD/ATI make good GPUs but their CPUs aren't so great besides most games utilize the GPU more than the CPU. In my opinion:
i3: Raw computations - no fancy stuff
i5: General Computing/Gaming
i7: Heavy application work/*some* games/advanced simulations
Intel has in a way addressed everything from AMD-level to super high grade technology. Unsurprisingly many lists I find have AMD chips only appearing a good 15 places down at $500 below a $300 i7.

The i7's place is a golden throne of glory (my new laptop has one =P).

[lethalwire]

bbqroast said:

What would you get instead of a i5?? Shouldn't a GPU be doing all the shading?

The i5 (2500k?) would be used for all the calculations needed for rendering an image. Have you not ever tried rendering a 3d image with some software like 3dsmax, cinema 4d, maya, etc?


The bulldozer series doesn't put anything into any place. I've also read that AMD is beginning to slack off in the quality of their GPU drivers.

I don't do much gaming, but when I do I know it's going to be graphic intense and I'd still prefer an Intel processor over and AMD processor. Why? I've never had a problem with an Intel processor and they're stunningly FAST. Especially the Sandy Bridge K series lineup.

The only reason I have an ATI gpu right now is because Nvidia seems notorious for gpu's that run HOT. I could NOT keep the last nvidia card I had cool, even @ system idle. (Maybe shotty hardware config. on my end)

The only reason I'd need to buy an i7-2600k over an i5-2500k is if I needed the extra 2mb cache or the hyperthreading technology.

What I don't understand is why you're even speaking of a 990x. That trash is so 2 years ago. :p

[Alexander]

Quote

The i5 (2500k?) would be used for all the calculations needed for rendering an image. Have you not ever tried rendering a 3d image with some software like 3dsmax, cinema 4d, maya, etc?

I would tell you "compare an i7 extreme ($1k) to a cheap render farm built with $60 AMDs". If you're rendering things, you wouldn't be placing an i5 in a gaming computer you'd save money by scaling horizontally.

It seems we can only move vertical in the gaming market, until the day where you can buy a 6x10 pack of ARM cpus, plug them in, and play a game that actually uses them and doesn't require a huge i5 to have single core performance necessary past the video card capability.

[lethalwire]

Yes someone who specifically needs rendering power would aim towards a render farm.
Someone who games, does some programming, rendering, modeling, photoshoping, etc. wouldn't want a render farm.

I'd go with the best processor for my general needs and get an i5-2500k. I also see the most bang for your buck with this processor.
In the end, I think it really depends on what the user is doing.

I see where you're going with the horizontal scaling. Would you call SLI horizontal scaling? Maybe it's more of limited horizontal scaling.