# Phenom II x4 965 vs i5/i7



## greydor

It really depends on what you're going to be doing with the system. I'll try to take a non-biased approach, but keep in mind the AMD band will recommend AMD and the Intel folks will recommend, well, Intel. The fact remains that the AMD 955/965 and the i5/i7 aren't much different in games. Where you're going to see a difference is in multimedia applications, video editing, 3d design, etc. Intel has AMD beat on that big time. For gaming, the most cost effective solution is actually to go with a 955, regardless of power consumption. Your power supply that you currently have is more than enough to handle an AMD and 1-2 decent cards. In conclusion, if you're in some sort of digital design field, go with the i5 (or i7). If you're gaming on a budget, go with AMD.

Also, AMD processors overclock fairly easy, with the i5 and i7 being no more/less difficult.


----------



## Chilly

In "General" Intel Core i5 beats AMD's Phenom II X4 line of processors. The Phenom II might be able to reach about the same performance as a Core i5 with a good overclock.

AMD Phenom II mainly competes Intel Core 2 Quad series of processors. While Intel Core i7 are still "Winners" in performance wise.

However, when comparing both AMD Phenom II and Intel Core i7 there will be a dramatic difference in Synthetic Benchmarks, but for gaming, Core i7 will give you more performance, but the Phenom II will do the job just fine


----------



## lardo5150

Good info.
Yes, no design here. Only gaming.
I kind of thought that I might have to up my powersupply, so that was good info.

How about future proof, I know nothing is truly future proof, but how far out could you push the 965?

Can you recommened 3 good boards for the 965? I only ask because I am researching all three (AMD, i5, i7), and I know zero about the AMD. I would prefer boards that are sli/crossfire ready. I dont even know if the 965 uses tri or dual channel, I will have to google that now


----------



## lardo5150

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Chilly* 
In "General" Intel Core i5 beats AMD's Phenom II X4 line of processors. The Phenom II might be able to reach about the same performance as a Core i5 with a good overclock.

AMD Phenom II mainly competes Intel Core 2 Quad series of processors. While Intel Core i7 are still "Winners" in performance wise.

However, when comparing both AMD Phenom II and Intel Core i7 there will be a dramatic difference in Synthetic Benchmarks, but for gaming, Core i7 will give you more performance, but the Phenom II will do the job just fine









decisions decisions. I have another thread with i5 vs i7. It is back and forth.

It is hard trying to balance out performance and the all mighty dollar


----------



## Chilly

I'll help you out with those questions that you asked:

For the "Top" motherboards for the Socket AM3, I would check this thread out: http://www.overclock.net/amd-motherb...-o-c-able.html

There are some motherboards that use DDR2 RAM instead of DDR3 RAM for cost purposes. Asus uses a "E" at the end of their motherboard's model number/name, while Gigabyte uses "T/-T" this indicates that it uses DDR3 RAM.

Socket AM3 is fairly new, it came out this spring I believe, so it'll be around for quite some time.


----------



## Chilly

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lardo5150* 
decisions decisions. I have another thread with i5 vs i7. It is back and forth.

It is hard trying to balance out performance and the all mighty dollar









The main difference between Core i5 and Core i7 is Hyperthreading. Core i5 has 4 cores with 4 threads, while Core i7 has Hyperthreading, which enables 4 cores to have 8 threads, it's kind of like having 2 Quad Core processors with one socket.


----------



## lardo5150

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Chilly* 
The main difference between Core i5 and Core i7 is Hyperthreading. Core i5 has 4 cores with 4 threads, while Core i7 has Hyperthreading, which enables 4 cores to have 8 threads, it's kind of like having 2 Quad Core processors with one socket.

Games dont even utilize the hyperthreading, so I am really starting to sway to the 1156 socket.


----------



## dir_d

Youll be happy with AMD...specially if you want to save alil money for a better GFX card. Im using the new C3 stepping of the 965 and im stable with low temps at 4Ghz. People will argue that the i5 at 4Ghz will beat a 965 at 4Ghz which is true but they dont have the future proofing (hexacores) or the two 16x PCI-E 2.0 lanes which will be utilized more with bigger and better cards coming out.


----------



## XiZeL

id go for the the AMD the new one 125TDP, if your gaming thers no prob and you will be on AM3 i think we will have some suprises quite soon for that socket


----------



## Dopamin3

I would recommend the i5 750. While the Phenom II will do okay in games, it is lacking in comparison in other areas. The overall cost of the i5 should be the about the same as a 965 with 790FX board. Why pay the same price for something that isn't as good?


----------



## [VoDkA]

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Chilly* 
In "General" Intel Core i5 beats AMD's Phenom II X4 line of processors. The Phenom II might be able to reach about the same performance as a Core i5 with a good overclock.

AMD Phenom II mainly competes Intel Core 2 Quad series of processors. While Intel Core i7 are still "Winners" in performance wise.

However, when comparing both AMD Phenom II and Intel Core i7 there will be a dramatic difference in Synthetic Benchmarks, but for gaming, Core i7 will give you more performance, but the Phenom II will do the job just fine









nah


----------



## Skylit

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lardo5150* 
Games dont even utilize the hyperthreading, so I am really starting to sway to the 1156 socket.

i5 would be a good upgrade for you. AMD doesn't really have anything able to compete with the current intel processors like others have said.(I wish they did) Oh and also, there's no such thing as "future proof"







. For what we know 1366 could be replaced in a year or so and AMD tries to keep there stuff backwards compatible, but a very slim amount of people actually just upgrade processors. New boards get stuff added on them making it compelling to buy a new version.


----------



## Chilly

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[VoDkA]*


nah


Nah? You gotta add more information than just say "Nah."


----------



## ChrisB17

Both are good. Just get what you can afford. On a side note you asked what a good motherboard is. I'd suggest the Asus M4A79-T deluxe. Which BTW I am selling one. But its just a good solid board for Am3.


----------



## wickedout

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[VoDkA]*


nah


Funny. Both the i5/i7 are great CPU's! The Phenom II x4 965 is good but nothing like the i5/i7. I've owned both.

My i5 beat my old PII X4 940 BE in every benchmark I did.

So the i5 rocks and gets the job done!!


----------



## dir_d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *wickedout*


Funny. Both the i5/i7 are great CPU's! The Phenom II x4 965 is good but nothing like the i5/i7. I've owned both.

My i5 beat my old PII X4 940 BE in every benchmark I did.

So the i5 rocks and gets the job done!!


Benchmarks ya..but real world whats 10 seconds compare to cost...You need to think of those factors also. I will easily give up some time and maybe FPS to save some money...


----------



## godsgift2dagame

Gotta love the AMD/Intel warfare going on in every CPU related thread.

If you can afford it, i5/7

If just gaming, save money with AM3


----------



## exad

I just finished reading as much as I could because I was wondering if I should go AM3 or i5 or i7 and in the end, real world performance, you'll probably be happier knowing you saved money going with an AM3 build that may not beat an i7 but will come close in every day tasks.

I am not a fanboy of either AMD or Intel, I would use either one depending on price/performance ratio. If you just want to benchmark all day, go intel, if you actually plan on using your computer, either one will do the job but AMD will be cheaper and come pretty close to intel.


----------



## NrGx

Quote:



Originally Posted by *exad*


I just finished reading as much as I could because I was wondering if I should go AM3 or i5 or i7 and in the end, real world performance, you'll probably be happier knowing you saved money going with an AM3 build that may not beat an i7 but will come close in every day tasks.

I am not a fanboy of either AMD or Intel, I would use either one depending on price/performance ratio. If you just want to benchmark all day, go intel, if you actually plan on using your computer, either one will do the job but AMD will be cheaper and come pretty close to intel.


I don't think Intel is much more expensive than AMD to be honest. Furthermore, once overclocked, the difference really is night and day. Almost no AMD processor (except extreme cooled ones) will keep up with my Q9550 and that's saying something considering it took me 20 minutes to overclock.


----------



## wickedout

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dir_d*


Benchmarks ya..but real world whats 10 seconds compare to cost...You need to think of those factors also. I will easily give up some time and maybe FPS to save some money...


It really comes down to cost and what someone can afford. Both Intel and AMD make good products.

I would pay a little more for better performance.


----------



## exad

Quote:



Originally Posted by *wickedout*


It really comes down to cost and what someone can afford. Both Intel and AMD make good products.

I would pay a little more for better performance.


...you didn't go i7?


----------



## lardo5150

Quote:



Originally Posted by *wickedout*


It really comes down to cost and what someone can afford. Both Intel and AMD make good products.

I would pay a little more for better performance.


So why didnt you go with the i7?


----------



## -iceblade^

Quote:



Originally Posted by *lardo5150*


So, I am trying to find a comparison between these cpu's.

I found two links:
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/
and
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/2...hmarks,60.html

One has the AMD beating the i7, the other has the i7 beating AMD.

The AMD is more cost effective. I have never had an AMD.

With regards to overclocking, how does the AMD stack up? Does it overclock easy like the i7?
This AMD is stock 3.4ghz, but has a power consumption of 140W, seems to suck on power pretty bad.

What is everyone's thoughts? I am not looking for an AMD vs Intel, just what is a better option considering budget and performance. Should I just shell out the extra cash for the i7?


i'm too lazy to read the article, but if that is the X4 965, they released a new one which has a TDP of 125W (i think) and apparently hit 7 or so ghz with extreme cooling.


----------



## -iceblade^

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[VoDkA]*


nah


are you kidding me?

nah?

nah what? he's right. please, post more constructive comments than just 'nah', unless you're trolling, in which case we'll all be happy to report you


----------



## jimibgood

AMD fanboys stop. I own A 955 and 965...... i5 and i7 dominate.


----------



## sp4wners

I would go with Core i5. It's faster in general than Phenom II, and the price is the same, or even lower. For example in my country, Core i5 and Phenom II X4 955 are priced 200$. So I don't see a point of getting AMD if Intel has faster CPU for the same price. Good mobo for AMD 200$, good mobo for Core i5=200$. All the prices are from my country. And I got one Phenom II, but it's X4 920 @ 4GHz. My Core i7 owns it


----------



## iandh

Quote:


Originally Posted by *jimibgood* 
AMD fanboys stop. I own A 955 and 965...... i5 and i7 dominate.

Yeah, until you try slapping a dual fermi board into an x8 PCI-E slot.









edit: I would like to add though, i5 power consumption numbers are superb.


----------



## wickedout

Quote:



Originally Posted by *lardo5150*


So why didnt you go with the i7?


Didn't need hyperthreading. And saved myself like $90.00. With that extra cash I got me some me more DDR3 ram.


----------



## wickedout

Quote:



Originally Posted by *jimibgood*


AMD fanboys stop. I own A 955 and 965...... i5 and i7 dominate.


Well there you have it! The i5 and i7 dominate both the 955 and 965.


----------



## ChrisB17

Not really. P55 is let down by its terrible PCIe setup. When fermi or the 5870x2 come out and you want to xfire or SLI on a p55 it will be a disappointment.


----------



## Riou

*yawn* *passes out*


----------



## exad

You guys act as though a phenom II and core i7 is like comparing a 486 to a core 2 duo. There's no domination, they're pretty close in real world activity. Core i7 and i5 dominate the benchmarks which is great if you only buy a pc to run benchmarks all day and smile about benchmark scores.


----------



## ChrisB17

I'd like to also say. I had a I7 rig and it was in no way better than my Phenom II rig. Actually I prefer the phenom rig when gaming to the I7.


----------



## Imglidinhere

It's hard to compare AMD and Intel in any aspect. Both companies built their cores to operate in a certain way. Similiar to Nvidia and ATI.

You have to know what each is good at. AMD seems good at gaming as do Intel chips, The thing you'd have to do to find out would be to get the EXACT same setup with a Core i7 and a Phenom II operating at the SAME exact clock and test a game. I always talk about Fallout 3 because it really hampers your system in all aspects.

So take my setup in the sig, but swap out the 3 ghz Phenom II for an i7 3ghz and test it. I like the Phenom IIs because they're cheaper on newegg and I like things to run good at stock and you can improve as you go. The chipset I have should last a good couple years. Especially an OCed one at that.

And as a final note, Phenom IIs are made, as it seems nowadays, to be overclocked the moment they are bought. They're selling 3.6ghz black edition cores for dirt cheap. Who's gonna pick those up? You guys, the overclockers who know what to do and how to do it properly.


----------



## tofunater

I've owned both and have to say that, while my i7 rig is fast as hell, its not really that much faster than my 720BE was considering how much more I payed for this rig.


----------



## ikillerzi

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tofunater*


I've owned both and have to say that, while my i7 rig is fast as hell, its not really that much faster than my 720BE was considering how much more I payed for this rig.


Which is why i went 720 BE until 1 / 2 more generations... people put too much stress on cpu nowadays. AND BOTTLENECKS. Gets me going when someone says a 940be will bottleneck a gtx 280 badly. My 720 BE does FINE on 3 monitors all full hd and a 5870. Also, kept the same mobo I used with my 6000+.


----------



## NrGx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandh* 
Yeah, until you try slapping a dual fermi board into an x8 PCI-E slot.









edit: I would like to add though, i5 power consumption numbers are superb.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *ChrisB17* 
Not really. P55 is let down by its terrible PCIe setup. When fermi or the 5870x2 come out and you want to xfire or SLI on a p55 it will be a disappointment.

This sort of argument doesn't really hold water because if you can afford a high end GPU setup (most likely more than $500), it would probably mean you'd get a high end enthusiast platform like the LGA1366. In terms of making a mainstream computer, a LGA1156 and a single GTX285/HD5870 is probably the sweet spot.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ChrisB17* 
I'd like to also say. I had a I7 rig and it was in no way better than my Phenom II rig. Actually I prefer the phenom rig when gaming to the I7.

Why do you prefer it when the i7 is almost always more powerful than it. Furthermore, when gaming almost gains nothing from more CPU power, how could you tell the difference?


----------



## ChrisB17

I tell no difference with the I7 rig I had and the Phenom rig I own now. Phenom 2 rig is cheaper for the same performance for everyday things *I DO*. I will pick the PHII. The I7 was good but for the price the PHII wins.

Not to mention I found it pretty hard to max 4cores/4threads or w/e so I see no use in buying something like that for gaming or the things I do.


----------



## lardo5150

I just did a QUICK price comparison between the i5/i7, i7 920, and the amd 965. This is just for cpu, motherboard, and ram.

i5/i7 - 400 and 520

i7 920 - 600

965 - 494.

Of course the i7 920 is way more expensive. i5 being the cheapest, followed by the 965 then the i7 860.

Without a fanboy (either intel or amd) response, what is the GAMING performance for the i5/i7 860 and the 965 (the 965 being the 3.4ghz edition).
The ONLY other thing I would do with my rig besides gaming is surfing the net and once in awhile watch a movie.


----------



## Conley

Quote:



Originally Posted by *godsgift2dagame*


Gotta love the AMD/Intel warfare going on in every CPU related thread.

If you can afford it, i5/7

If just gaming, save money with AM3


There ya go. There really isn't that much difference in an average user's real life performance anyways (unless you do lots of rendering, etc.).


----------



## wickedout

Grab the i5 and save yourself some cash. The i5 is a great CPU and it overclocks great. I have it and I love it.

No regrets what so ever!!


----------



## G.E.Nauticus

Quote:



Originally Posted by *wickedout*


Grab the i5 and save yourself some cash. The i5 is a great CPU and it overclocks great. I have it and I love it.

No regrets what so ever!!


Confused







, last time I checked a high end I5 Rig costs more then a high end AMD rig.... Including AMD's 965. Also AMD's Dragon platform is pretty smooth. I have been really impressed with AMD/ATI lately.


----------



## lardo5150

Quote:



Originally Posted by *G.E.Nauticus*


Confused







, last time I checked a high end I5 Rig costs more then a high end AMD rig.... Including AMD's 965. Also AMD's Dragon platform is pretty smooth. I have been really impressed with AMD/ATI lately.


Microcenter has the i5 for $150. The rest was looking around on like newegg, tiger, etc.


----------



## dir_d

If you are just gonna game go AMD 720BE and a decent 100 to 120 dollar board.


----------



## almighty15

You're better off going with core i5/i7

On a per clock basis even you Core 2 Quad is faster then any Phenom 2 CPU....

So just get a better motherboard and overclock your existing quad or go i5/i7 as going AMD will be a performance downgrade.


----------



## lardo5150

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dir_d*


If you are just gonna game go AMD 720BE and a decent 100 to 120 dollar board.


Shows you how much I know about AMD.
I just did a search on newegg for that, didnt even know a tri core existed, LOL.


----------



## lardo5150

Quote:



Originally Posted by *almighty15*


You're better off going with core i5/i7

On a per clock basis even you Core 2 Quad is faster then any Phenom 2 CPU....

So just get a better motherboard and overclock your existing quad or go i5/i7 as going AMD will be a performance downgrade.


It will have to be an i5/i7, I just sold my quad








So I have to move forward with something new no matter what.


----------



## dir_d

Im trying to save you money and get the best performance possible you just said all you are going to do is game...all those others out there clearly know nothing if they are going to suggest an i5 or i7 for a gaming machine only.


----------



## ChrisB17

Quote:



Originally Posted by *almighty15*


You're better off going with core i5/i7

On a per clock basis even you Core 2 Quad is faster then any Phenom 2 CPU....

So just get a better motherboard and overclock your existing quad or go i5/i7 as going AMD will be a performance downgrade.


No it isnt. Atleast show proof if you are going to say something like that.


----------



## G.E.Nauticus

AMD Phenom II X3 720 2.8GHz Socket AM3 95W Triple-Core Black Processor Model HDZ720WFGIBOX - Retail
Model #:HDZ720WFGIBOX
Item #:N82E16819103649
$119.00

MSI 785GM-E65 AM3 AMD 785G HDMI Micro ATX AMD Motherboard - Retail
Model #:785GM-E65
Item #:N82E16813130233
$89.99

MSI R4890 Cyclone OC Radeon HD 4890 1GB 256-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready CrossFire Supported Video Card - Retail
Model #:R4890 Cyclone OC
Item #:N82E16814127439
$199.99

CORSAIR CMPSU-550VX 550W ATX12V V2.2 SLI Ready CrossFire Ready 80 PLUS Certified Active PFC Compatible with Core i7 Power ... - Retail
Model #:CMPSU-550VX
Item #:N82E16817139004
$89.99

Crucial Ballistix Tracer 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1333 (PC3 10600) Desktop Memory w/ LEDs Model BL2KIT25664TR1337 - Retail
Model #:BL2KIT25664TR1337
Item #:N82E16820148340
$94.99

Western Digital Caviar Black WD5001AALS 500GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive -Bare Drive
Model #:WD5001AALS
Item #:N82E16822136320
$69.99
*Subtotal:$663.95*

Can Intel person show me a I5 system for that price please. The Components provided above will run any game with exceptional performance. We don't want no crap components either.


----------



## NrGx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ChrisB17* 
No it isnt. Atleast show proof if you are going to say something like that.

The Q9550 and Q9650 are both faster clock-for-clock than the AMD processors and once they are both overclocked this difference inflates. It's due to the L2 cache on the Yorkfields vs. the L3 cache the Phenom II uses (from what I recall).


----------



## almighty15

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ChrisB17* 
No it isnt. Atleast show proof if you are going to say something like that.

http://www.xcpus.com/reviews/117-Phe...ld-Page-1.aspx

And that's just one, go and do your own reseach next time









There is a lot of articles comparing Phenom 2 to i7 and Core 2 architecture all over the internet and they all show the same thing, per clock Core 2 is *STILL* faster, Not to mension also hitting 4Ghz with out breaking a sweat while most Phenoms struggle to get to 3.8Ghz and that with massive Vcore.


----------



## exad

Quote:


Originally Posted by *almighty15* 
http://www.xcpus.com/reviews/117-Phe...ld-Page-1.aspx

And that's just one, go and do your own reseach next time









There is a lot of articles comparing Phenom 2 to i7 and Core 2 architecture all over the internet and they all show the same thing, per clock Core 2 is *STILL* faster, Not to mension also hitting 4Ghz with out breaking a sweat while most Phenoms struggle to get to 3.8Ghz and that with massive Vcore.

That review is with an AM2+ motherboard and DDR2... Nice try though. With DDR3 the performance goes beyond a core 2. And for me, selling off my motherboard, ram and CPU and switching to AM3 is still cheaper than just buying Q9550 and upgrading.

If only we could Rep- for ignorance.


----------



## NrGx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *exad* 
That review is with an AM2+ motherboard and DDR2... Nice try though. With DDR3 the performance goes beyond a core 2. And for me, selling off my motherboard, ram and CPU and switching to AM3 is still cheaper than just buying Q9550 and upgrading.

If only we could Rep- for ignorance.

Link to where any AMD CPU can beat a Core 2 Quad please (even with DDR3). Also, let's not forget that a Q6600 @ 3.6Ghz beats a X4 965 @ 3.95Ghz in Dragon Age: Origins.


----------



## Skylit

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lardo5150* 
I just did a QUICK price comparison between the i5/i7, i7 920, and the amd 965. This is just for cpu, motherboard, and ram.

i5/i7 - 400 and 520

i7 920 - 600

965 - 494.

Of course the i7 920 is way more expensive. i5 being the cheapest, followed by the 965 then the i7 860.

Without a fanboy (either intel or amd) response, what is the GAMING performance for the i5/i7 860 and the 965 (the 965 being the 3.4ghz edition).
The ONLY other thing I would do with my rig besides gaming is surfing the net and once in awhile watch a movie.

965 =494? you picked a x16/x16 motherboard, correct? kinda sucks how a 920 is only 100$ more...

In this case your better off with the i5.


----------



## almighty15

Quote:


Originally Posted by *exad* 
That review is with an AM2+ motherboard and DDR2... Nice try though. With DDR3 the performance goes beyond a core 2. And for me, selling off my motherboard, ram and CPU and switching to AM3 is still cheaper than just buying Q9550 and upgrading.

If only we could Rep- for ignorance.

They were running DDR2 on the Intel test system as well, maybe negative rep for stupidity









Proof?









And in the UK you can build a faster Core 2 Quad system then an AM3 system with a Phenom 2


----------



## ChrisB17

Quote:



Originally Posted by *NrGx*


The Q9550 and Q9650 are both faster clock-for-clock than the AMD processors and once they are both overclocked this difference inflates. It's due to the L2 cache on the Yorkfields vs. the L3 cache the Phenom II uses (from what I recall).


The OP has a Q6700. Why do you bring in the yorkfields?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *almighty15*


http://www.xcpus.com/reviews/117-Phe...ld-Page-1.aspx

And that's just one, go and do your own reseach next time









There is a lot of articles comparing Phenom 2 to i7 and Core 2 architecture all over the internet and they all show the same thing, per clock Core 2 is *STILL* faster, Not to mension also hitting 4Ghz with out breaking a sweat while most Phenoms struggle to get to 3.8Ghz and that with massive Vcore.


Good try. Next time read. You said "On a per clock basis even your Core 2 Quad is faster then any Phenom 2 CPU...." *Well the OP has a Q6700.* The phenom II competes with yorkfield as the review you posted shows. Not to mention the review you posted is a POS. Maybe next time use google to search up a better one.

Such as this. Much better then that pos.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...px?i=3551&p=14

As you can see the Phenom II is ahead of the older intel quads and up near the yorkfields and I7's

Kthx.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *exad*


That review is with an AM2+ motherboard and DDR2... Nice try though. With DDR3 the performance goes beyond a core 2. And for me, selling off my motherboard, ram and CPU and switching to AM3 is still cheaper than just buying Q9550 and upgrading.

If only we could Rep- for ignorance.


Yea he thinks he is right. But he needs to read before getting all up tight.


----------



## exad

Quote:



Originally Posted by *almighty15*


They were running DDR2 on the Intel test system as well, maybe negative rep for stupidity









Proof?









And in the UK you can build a faster Core 2 Quad system then an AM3 system with a Phenom 2










Yes they did use DDR2 in the intel test system.. but why limit yourself to ddr2 when ddr3 is faster and cheap?

I can't find any reviews pitting a complete AM3 system vs a Core2 system. Can you?


----------



## tofunater

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...ue&Order=PRICE
163.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboD...t=Combo.286521
190.99
=$355

That set up allows for quad sli and will overclock nicely. Trust me, if your not encoding or cpu folding, you will never know the difference. Take the money you've saved and throw it at a mean gpu set up as that will give you much more performance than a higher end cpu ever will.


----------



## almighty15

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ChrisB17*


Such as this. Much better then that pos.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...px?i=3551&p=14

As you can see the Phenom II is ahead of the older intel quads and up near the yorkfields and I7's

Kthx.


Your link









Phenom 2 x4 940 @ 3Ghz, *SLOWER* then a *DUAL CORE* E8200 @ 2.6Ghz - *Despite 400Mhz advantage to AMD*

Phenom 2 x4 955 @ @ 3.2Ghz, *SLOWER* then a C2Q Q9550 @ 2.8Ghz - *Despite 400Mhz advanatage to AMD*

So yes, AMD really are better per clock









Intel Chips easily reach 4Ghz and at that speed *EAT* any AMD chip, heck they even beat them at slower stock speeds as you link proves


----------



## ChrisB17

Quote:



Originally Posted by *almighty15*


Your link









Phenom 2 x4 940 @ 3Ghz, *SLOWER* then a *DUAL CORE* E8200 @ 2.6Ghz - *Despite 400Mhz advantage to AMD*

Phenom 2 x4 955 @ @ 3.2Ghz, *SLOWER* then a C2Q Q9550 @ 2.8Ghz - *Despite 400Mhz advanatage to AMD*

So yes, AMD really are better per clock









Intel Chips easily reach 4Ghz and at that speed *EAT* any AMD chip, heck they even beat them at slower stock speeds as you link proves










Damn you need to go to school for reading. Intel chips arent the best things since sliced bread we all know I7 is fast so we can put that to rest. So stop being a raging fanboy and trolling on this thread.

Direct from the conclusion of that review.

Quote:



It has taken AMD more than long enough, but the company is finally in a situation where its processors are competitive in the performance mainstream market segment. The Phenom II X4 955, 945/940 and the Phenom II X3 720 are all very competitive at their price points. Compared to the Core 2 Quad Q9550 the new X4 955 generally comes out ahead.

From a longevity standpoint, the AM3 platform is much wiser to invest in than LGA-775. Intel has already shown all of its cards there, and there aren't going to be any faster Core 2 Quads - just cheaper ones. By the end of this year Intel will begin transitioning to LGA-1156 and 775 will start fading away. By contrast, AMD's Socket-AM3 is going to be the flagship for the company for all of 2009 and it'll continue to live on into 2010. If you're choosing between Socket-AM3 and LGA-775, AMD has made that choice very easy - Phenom II is the way to go if you're concerned about a long term upgrade path, not to mention that the chips are generally cheaper than their Intel equivalents.

Where the situation gets tougher is when you look at the $245 Phenom II 955 vs. Intel's $284 Core i7-920. The i7 route costs you another ~$40 on the CPU and another $10 - $70 on the motherboard depending on what AM3 board you get for the 955. For around $100 extra you can go with an i7-920, which is anywhere from 0 - 40% faster than the Phenom II X4 955 depending on what application you're looking at. Now if you're budget constrained then the i7 isn't really an option, but as applications and workloads become more threaded the i7 could be a wiser long-term purchase.

The cheaper Phenom II parts, especially once you get down to the X3 720, don't really even touch the i7's price points so the comparison isn't really valid there. But the 955 is getting dangerously close to the cost of an entry level i7 platform, and if you don't already have an AM2+ motherboard the i7 may be worth considering. Especially now that DDR2 and DDR3 are much closer in price.


Reading FTW.












































More proof FTW.

http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Ha...pii955/13.html

Quote:



Given that the Phenom II x4 955 Black Edition is AMD's new flagship, I had high expectations about it, and I was far from being deceived. Its top of the pile performance quite amazed me. I did not imagine it could step on the Core 2 so easily. As we have seen earlier, it won the big majority of the benchmarks against it


----------



## dir_d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tofunater*


http://www.newegg.com/product/produc...ue&order=price
163.99
http://www.newegg.com/product/combod...t=combo.286521
190.99
=$355

that set up allows for quad sli and will overclock nicely. Trust me, if your not encoding or cpu folding, you will never know the difference. Take the money you've saved and throw it at a mean gpu set up as that will give you much more performance than a higher end cpu ever will.


x2


----------



## almighty15

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ChrisB17*












I prefer to base my opinion on results and not some websites conclusion and the results show lower clocked Core 2 chips beating higher clocked AMD chips at gaming









And considering you posted the gaming results from that article you must be focusing purely on game performance were the conclusion is based on the article as a 'whole'

i7/i5 >> Core 2 >> Phenom 2

Pure *FACT*!!

And stop touting DDR3!!! AM3!!!

DDR3 add's nothing to performance unless running at stupid speeds as most systems aren't bandwidth starved anyway and AM3? Well what does that add? Support for future chips and DDR3? It certainly doesn't help the chips to hit 4Ghz does it?

Phenom 2 is better then Phenom 1 but it's still behind Core 2









I'm willing to bet that my lowly E6300 will beat your Phenom 2


----------



## dir_d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *almighty15* 
I prefer to base my opinion on results and not some websites conclusion and the results show lower clocked Core 2 chips beating higher clocked AMD chips at gaming









And considering you posted the gaming results from that article you must be focusing purely on game performance were the conclusion is based on the article as a 'whole'

i7/i5 >> Core 2 >> Phenom 2

Pure *FACT*!!

And stop touting DDR3!!! AM3!!!

DDR3 add's nothing to performance unless running at stupid speeds as most systems aren't bandwidth starved anyway and AM3? Well what does that add? Support for future chips and DDR3? It certainly doesn't help the chips to hit 4Ghz does it?

Phenom 2 is better then Phenom 1 but it's still behind Core 2









I'm willing to bet that my lowly E6300 will beat your Phenom 2









Your ignorance is just gushsing out everywhere but ill bite....Even if what you said was fact it dosent change the fact that AMD will get the job done in gaming even with a mild overclock FOR CHEAPER THAN a CORE 2 or i5/i7.


----------



## NrGx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ChrisB17* 
Damn you need to go to school for reading. Intel chips arent the best things since sliced bread we all know I7 is fast so we can put that to rest. So stop being a raging fanboy and trolling on this thread.

I like how that review did not overclock either chip. The Q9550 runs *slower* than the X4 955! That is not a clock-for-clock comparison.


----------



## almighty15

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dir_d* 
Your ignorance is just gushsing out everywhere but ill bite....Even if what you said was fact it dosent change the fact that AMD will get the job done in gaming even with a mild overclock FOR CHEAPER THAN a CORE 2 or i5/i7.

Yea until it comes to running SLI/Crossfire then i7 eats Phenom 2

I remember that article that showed a core i7 running a couple of *ATI 4870's* running *and getting better frame rates* then a Phenom 2 with a pair of *ATI 4890's*


----------



## almighty15

Quote:


Originally Posted by *NrGx* 
I like how that review did not overclock either chip. The Q9550 runs *slower* than the X4 955! That is not a clock-for-clock comparison.

Yep, all he done is shown pure comparisons and not on a per clock basis which is what the argument started from!


----------



## tofunater

Quote:


Originally Posted by *almighty15* 
Yea until it comes to running SLI/Crossfire then i7 eats Phenom 2

I remember that article that showed a core i7 running a couple of *ATI 4870's* running *and getting better frame rates* then a Phenom 2 with a pair of *ATI 4890's*


Quote:


Originally Posted by *almighty15* 
Yep, all he done is shown pure comparisons and not on a per clock basis which is what the argument started from!

Double posting? really?
Any ways. All this talk of slaughtering and pwning, over a few fps here and there really has me confused. I presented a base tri-core system that will give him excellent performance for around $350. True this is a site for performance whores, but seriously guys, quit the flame wars and present the man with some builds on a budget.


----------



## almighty15

Article that compares i7, Core 2 Quad and Phenom 2 when running at the same clock speed, in this case it's 3.7Ghz.

http://translate.google.com/translat...istory_state0=

Phenom 2 *LOSES* to Core 2 Quad in every game but one ( Devil May Cry 4 )

Heck even the older 65nm Kentsfield gives Phenom 2 an ass whoopin









Then factor in that most Phenom 2 chips tend to top out at about 3.7-3.8Ghz compared to 45nm Core 2 Quads 4ghz+

So the result is that Core 2 Quad is the faster chip not only on a per clock basis but even in general










But any way, back to the OP and his question...

Put the extra and get an i7 rig or get a 45nm Core 2 Quad and overclock it to 4Ghz+


----------



## Blaze051806

to OP. id go with the AMD cpu. the 955 is a good cpu that will do gaming well for a good time to come







. ohh and to the intel diehards? i built my computer about 6 months ago.. AMD 9850 3Ghz.. AM2+ board, DDR2, and new Dual 5770s which i plan to use until ATI 6xxx cards. and i can play crysis on max settings with no problems lol. my screen is also 1920x1200. so if my " old phenom 1 thats slower than Core 2 " can do such a task a AMD 955 will excel at gaming.


----------



## ChrisB17

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dir_d* 
Your ignorance is just gushsing out everywhere but ill bite....Even if what you said was fact it dosent change the fact that AMD will get the job done in gaming even with a mild overclock FOR CHEAPER THAN a CORE 2 or i5/i7.

Agreed. The PH II is better then or equal to the newer C2Q. Its just unbelievable I posted proof and still wants to deny it.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *NrGx* 
I like how that review did not overclock either chip. The Q9550 runs *slower* than the X4 955! That is not a clock-for-clock comparison.

Doesn't matter. Overclock them both and they will be pretty equal. Post a review if you find one. I mean I am just point out the PH II isnt crap like that one nub said it is.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *almighty15* 
Yea until it comes to running SLI/Crossfire then i7 eats Phenom 2

I remember that article that showed a core i7 running a couple of *ATI 4870's* running *and getting better frame rates* then a Phenom 2 with a pair of *ATI 4890's*

Please leave. You post no proof and you make yourself look like a jerk. You troll this thread with non sense then get angry when someone proves your wrong.

PH II is better or equal to newer C2Q's and better than older ones. I7/I5 is faster but at a higher price. So get some good facts and get back to me.

Kthxbye.


----------



## almighty15

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Blaze051806* 
to OP. id go with the AMD cpu. the 955 is a good cpu that will do gaming well for a good time to come







. ohh and to the intel diehards? i built my computer about 6 months ago.. AMD 9850 3Ghz.. AM2+ board, DDR2, and new Dual 5770s which i plan to use until ATI 6xxx cards. and i can play crysis on max settings with no problems lol. my screen is also 1920x1200. so if my " old phenom 1 thats slower than Core 2 " can do such a task a AMD 955 will excel at gaming.

I bet in every game but Crysis you're so CPU limited









That's like 4870x2 performance? And a 4870x2 gets bottlenecked to hell with a Phenom 1....


----------



## ChrisB17

Now your talking Phenom 1s? Seriously.


----------



## jimibgood

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ChrisB17* 
Agreed. The PH II is better then or equal to the C2Q. Its just unbelievable I posted proof and the nub still wants to deny it.

Doesn't matter. Overclock them both and they will be pretty equal. Post a review if you find one. I mean I am just point out the PH II isnt crap like that one nub said it is.

Please leave. You post no proof and you make yourself look like a jerk. You troll this thread with non sense then get angry when someone proves your wrong.

PH II is better or equal to C2Q. I7/I5 is faster but at a higher price. So get some good facts and get back to me.

Kthxbye.

If you Einsteins look at the comparisons, its the i5 and i7 at 2.66Ghz compared to the P II at 3.4Ghz. AMD does not compare with i5 or i7 series from Intel. These comparisons are not equal but I bet we all noticed this.....

Chris the entire community knows PH II beats your mentioned Intel CPU's but they do not beat i series. That is what this post is about. i5 is not much more than PH II.


----------



## tofunater

edit: You know what, nvm. I'm sick of the fanboys on both sides being fed.


----------



## ChrisB17

Quote:


Originally Posted by *jimibgood* 
If you Einsteins look at the comparisons, its the i5 and i7 at 2.66Ghz compared to the P II at 3.4Ghz. AMD does not compare with i5 or i7 series from Intel. These comparisons are not equal but I bet we all noticed this.....

Thats what I am trying to say. PH II wasn't meant to compete with I7 or I5. People think it does tho and I am trying to prove the PH II was to compete with C2Q.


----------



## Chucklez

Quote:


Originally Posted by *almighty15* 
I prefer to base my opinion on results and not some websites conclusion and the results show lower clocked Core 2 chips beating higher clocked AMD chips at gaming









And considering you posted the gaming results from that article you must be focusing purely on game performance were the conclusion is based on the article as a 'whole'

i7/i5 >> Core 2 >> Phenom 2

Pure *FACT*!!

And stop touting DDR3!!! AM3!!!

DDR3 add's nothing to performance unless running at stupid speeds as most systems aren't bandwidth starved anyway and AM3? Well what does that add? Support for future chips and DDR3? It certainly doesn't help the chips to hit 4Ghz does it?

Phenom 2 is better then Phenom 1 but it's still behind Core 2









I'm willing to bet that my lowly E6300 will beat your Phenom 2










Quote:


Originally Posted by *almighty15* 
Article that compares i7, Core 2 Quad and Phenom 2 when running at the same clock speed, in this case it's 3.7Ghz.

http://translate.google.com/translat...istory_state0=

Phenom 2 *LOSES* to Core 2 Quad in every game but one ( Devil May Cry 4 )

Heck even the older 65nm Kentsfield gives Phenom 2 an ass whoopin









Please get out of here you big ol' "Intel is the Shiz and AMD can suck one" crap...

Proof from multible webites your *DEAD WRONG* about the Phenom II 965's gaming performance and all around performance:

http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/phenomii_965/
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1037/1/
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/288...sor/index.html
http://www.guru3d.com/article/phenom...review-test/16

P.S Read the all of the articals and get a collective view not just nit pick one that is completely wrong and biased...

Quote:


Originally Posted by *almighty15* 
Yea until it comes to running SLI/Crossfire then i7 eats Phenom 2

I remember that article that showed a core i7 running a couple of *ATI 4870's* running *and getting better frame rates* then a Phenom 2 with a pair of *ATI 4890's*









I have *NEVER* seen *ANYTHING* like that *EVER*. Proof Please!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ChrisB17* 
Thats what I am trying to say. PH II wasn't meant to compete with I7 or I5. People think it does tho and I am trying to prove the PH II was to compete with C2Q.









Totally agree, but the nice thing is we almost get the same performance as the i7/i5's for much cheaper!


----------



## quaaark

If this post helps anyone, I'm an Intel user right now and my next build is going to be an AMD build using either a PHII X2 550 or PHII X3 720.

Two reasons: 
1) I have never built an AMD machine before (that's reason enough already lol)
2) From reviews and opinions, I've read that they're extremely cost effective for gaming and such.

Try out new stuff!


----------



## Ktmrida4life

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tofunater*


edit: You know what, nvm. I'm sick of the fanboys on both sides being fed.


Agreed.. everyone who has an amd cpu (940,955,w/e) is talking about how great it is and everyone on the intel side talks about how great intel is.

lol its not getting anywhere, someone just post some benchmarks so theyll shut up


----------



## Blaze051806

lol i all i was saying is that if my " bottled necked Cpu "can run crysis with no issues on max then a AMD 955 will be fine.







some people want good cost/performance ratio not " this is the most expensive it must be the best sticker "

anyway im not going to fight about it with a diehard. to OP i gave my 2 cents. good luck with your purches you will be happy with an AMD or Intel cpu. happy gaming


----------



## almighty15

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ChrisB17*


Agreed. The PH II is better then or equal to the newer C2Q. Its just unbelievable I posted proof and the nub still wants to deny it.


What proof? That Phenom 2 chips are getting beat by lower clocked core 2 quads?

In fact he's a refresh of the link you provided : http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...px?i=3551&p=14

See how the lower clocked Core 2 quads are beating the higher clocked Phenom 2's?

Again that was *YOUR* article and *YOUR* link...

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ChrisB17*


Doesn't matter. Overclock them both and they will be pretty equal. Post a review if you find one. I mean I am just point out the PH II isnt crap like that one nub said it is.


Again and as *PROVEN* by the article *YOU* linked to and by an article I have linked to core 2 quad is faster per clock then a Phenom 2 so a 4Ghz core 2 quad will hammer a Phenom 2.

May I also remind you that core 2 quads have very very little problems hitting 4Ghz+ clock speeds with a low voltage, Phenom 2 on the other hand struggles to hit over 3.8Ghz and that is with high voltage!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ChrisB17*


Please leave. You post no proof and you make yourself look like a jerk. You troll this thread with non sense then get angry when someone proves your wrong.


Not found that exact article but here is one similar :

*Core i7 @ 3.4Ghz with SLI GTX 260's

Phenom 2 @ 3.6Ghz with Crossfire 4890's*

I7 system,* LOWER CPU SPEED AND LESS POWERFUL* graphics cards and yet the i7 kills the Phenom 2 system.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...on,2337-3.html

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ChrisB17*


PH II is better or equal to newer C2Q's and better than older ones. I7/I5 is faster but at a higher price. So get some good facts and get back to me.

Kthxbye.


*MAY I REMIND YOU NUB THAT YOU STARTED THIS, AND REMEMBER THE ARGUMENT IS ABOUT PER CLOCK PERFORMANCE!!!!*


----------



## NrGx

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ChrisB17*


Thats what I am trying to say. PH II wasn't meant to compete with I7 or I5. People think it does tho and I am trying to prove the PH II was to compete with C2Q.










Yes the Phenom II does compete with the C2Q...but that latter is still the better processor both clock-for-clock, in terms of ease of overclocking, heat and voltage.

I doubt there is an AMD processor on this site (that isn't LN2 cooled) that would compete with my Q9550 at max overclock. Most of the Phenoms don't even reach 4Ghz without huge voltages!


----------



## almighty15

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Chucklez*









I have *NEVER* seen *ANYTHING* like that *EVER*. Proof Please!

Totally agree, but the nice thing is we almost get the same performance as the i7/i5's for much cheaper!










Not found that exact article but here is one similar and it shows that you AMD guys have got no were near i7/i5 performance....

*Core i7 @ 3.4Ghz with SLI GTX 260's

Phenom 2 @ 3.6Ghz with Crossfire 4890's*

I7 system,* LOWER CPU SPEED AND LESS POWERFUL* graphics cards and yet the i7 kills the Phenom 2 system.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...on,2337-3.html


----------



## tofunater

Quote:



Originally Posted by *almighty15*


Not found that exact article but here is one similar and it shows that you AMD guys have got no were near i7/i5 performance....

*Core i7 @ 3.4Ghz with SLI GTX 260's

Phenom 2 @ 3.6Ghz with Crossfire 4890's*

I7 system,* LOWER CPU SPEED AND LESS POWERFUL* graphics cards and yet the i7 kills the Phenom 2 system.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...on,2337-3.html


Of course that set up will be slower. If you got rid of the 790x, crappy ram and slower hard drive, on the amd system, i think you'll find the scores to be closer, with the i7 still winning of course. But it will still be a matter of price/performance.


----------



## dir_d

Im not responding to almighty anymore....This is for the OP..As you can see the clear winner in Price/Performance for Gaming is AMD...the money would have spent on the C2Q i5 or i7 you can put it into 1 or 2 graphics cards.

AMD Phenom II X3 720 2.8GHz 3 x 512KB L2 Cache 6MB L3 Cache Socket AM3 95W Triple-Core Black Processor
$119.00

GIGABYTE GA-MA790GPT-UD3H AM3 AMD 790GX HDMI ATX AMD Motherboard 
Price after Rebate Card(s):$99.99

G.SKILL 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory Model F3-12800CL9D-4GBNQ
$90.99

XFX HD-577A-ZNFC Radeon HD 5770 (Juniper XT) 1GB 128-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.0 x16
$174.99 x2

$659

This system will rival any machine on the Market right now in games and since its is AM3 when the hexacore CPUs come out for AMD and you want to upgrade thats all you need to get everything else will still be fine. If anyone else says that this system i made will be crap they obviously know nothing about AMD, Intel, the games that are out and are coming out.


----------



## Blaze051806

+ rep to Dir_d


----------



## almighty15

There's no point in moving to AMD if he's already running socket 775, it's going to be better, cost less and be less hassle just to stay with 775 and get a 45nm Quad.

Why get an AM3 system which at *BEST* would give him the same performance as he would get by sticking with socket 775?

OP if you still have your motherboard then just buy a 45nm Core 2 Quad, *THAT* is the best and cheapest option









If you _*have*_ to change then moving to an i5/i7 system is the only option as moving from socket 775 to AM3 will not give a perceivable difference in performance compared to moving from socket 775 to i7/i5 would.

Sure AMD have 6 core chips planned but so does Intel


----------



## exad

Quote:



Originally Posted by *almighty15*


There's no point in moving to AMD if he's already running socket 775, it's going to be better, cost less and be less hassle just to stay with 775 and get a 45nm Quad.

Why get an AM3 system which at *BEST* would give him the same performance as he would get by sticking with socket 775?

OP if you still have your motherboard then just buy a 45nm Core 2 Quad, *THAT* is the best and cheapest option









If you _*have*_ to change then moving to an i5/i7 system is the only option as moving from socket 775 to AM3 will not give a perceivable difference in performance compared to moving from socket 775 to i7/i5 would.

Sure AMD have 6 core chips planned but so does Intel










Actually, I do remember telling you that selling off my ram mobo and cpu and buying an AM3 system IS cheaper than getting a high priced Q9 series CPU... Plus That will be it for LGA775, that's about as fast as it will get. Meanwhile, AM3 still has room to advance.

+rep to dir_d

You're one person arguing with a bunch of us and I can't see why you would want to make someone spend so much more for performance in areas he won't be using such as encoding and CPU instensive tasks. If you want to go and spend so much on an i series system, go for it. Why convince someone to spend so much more for such a low performance boost if any at all in his usage. To me, that's just crazy.


----------



## tofunater

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dir_d*


Im not responding to almighty anymore....This is for the OP..As you can see the clear winner in Price/Performance for Gaming is AMD...the money would have spent on the C2Q i5 or i7 you can put it into 1 or 2 graphics cards.

AMD Phenom II X3 720 2.8GHz 3 x 512KB L2 Cache 6MB L3 Cache Socket AM3 95W Triple-Core Black Processor
$119.00

GIGABYTE GA-MA790GPT-UD3H AM3 AMD 790GX HDMI ATX AMD Motherboard 
Price after Rebate Card(s):$99.99

G.SKILL 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory Model F3-12800CL9D-4GBNQ
$90.99

XFX HD-577A-ZNFC Radeon HD 5770 (Juniper XT) 1GB 128-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.0 x16
$174.99 x2

$659

This system will rival any machine on the Market right now in games and since its is AM3 when the hexacore CPUs come out for AMD and you want to upgrade thats all you need to get everything else will still be fine. If anyone else says that this system i made will be crap they obviously know nothing about AMD, Intel, the games that are out and are coming out.


I would argue that he should get the gd-70 just for maximum versatility, but that is a pretty darn good build.
edit: op always look for combo deals. You could prolly save about $30-40 on dir_d's build if you look hard enough.


----------



## almighty15

Quote:



Originally Posted by *exad*


Actually, I do remember telling you that selling off my ram mobo and cpu and buying an AM3 system IS cheaper than getting a high priced Q9 series CPU... Plus That will be it for LGA775, that's about as fast as it will get. Meanwhile, AM3 still has room to advance.

+rep to dir_d

You're one person arguing with a bunch of us and I can't see why you would want to make someone spend so much more for performance in areas he won't be using such as encoding and CPU instensive tasks. If you want to go and spend so much on an i series system, go for it. Why convince someone to spend so much more for such a low performance boost if any at all in his usage. To me, that's just crazy.


He say's it's for games and should he ever decide to run more then one video card then socket 775 and AM3 just aren't enough.

Especially when running more then one of the new ATI 5000 series of cards..


----------



## wickedout

IMHO the PII X4 965 BE beats out some of Intel's quad core and Intel's duo core CPU's.

But it doesn't beat any of the i5/i7 series cpu's. Besides who cares!

It's your money! Do your own research and buy something you're gonna like?


----------



## almighty15

Right :

If money is no object : i7/i5
If you're planning on running more then one video card : i7/i5
If you want cheap but future proof : AM3
If you want cheapest option while offering best performance : Socket 775

Plus you go can go either SLI or Crossfire with i7/i5


----------



## NrGx

I'm not even sure why there is a discussion on this actually. The Q6700 is already fine for gaming...unless this was for another rig or something.


----------



## Blaze051806

i say again. running 9850 ( AM2+ ) with 2 5770s no problems running any game on max haha


----------



## tofunater

Quote:


Originally Posted by *NrGx* 
I'm not even sure why there is a discussion on this actually. The Q6700 is already fine for gaming...unless this was for another rig or something.

Because he already sold it


----------



## exad

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tofunater* 
Because he already sold it









He probably already purchased parts and is playing crysis right now while we're all arguing -_-


----------



## tofunater

Quote:


Originally Posted by *exad* 
He probably already purchased parts and is playing crysis right now while we're all arguing -_-

no doubt


----------



## Chucklez

Quote:


Originally Posted by *almighty15* 
Not found that exact article but here is one similar and it shows that you AMD guys have got no were near i7/i5 performance....

*Core i7 @ 3.4Ghz with SLI GTX 260's

Phenom 2 @ 3.6Ghz with Crossfire 4890's*

I7 system, *LOWER CPU SPEED AND LESS POWERFUL* graphics cards and yet the i7 kills the Phenom 2 system.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...on,2337-3.html

Haha you do know how biased and untrue Toms has become right? Take a look at there Phenom II 965 review to any other website.. Completely different things (Toms says it cant beat a C2Q, everywhere else it easily beats em).

Quote:


Originally Posted by *almighty15* 
Right :

If money is no object : i7/i5
If you're planning on running more then one video card : i7/i5*/AM3*
If you want cheap but future proof : AM3
*If you want all around best price/performance : AM3*
If you want cheapest option while offering best performance : *AM3*

Plus you go can go either SLI or Crossfire with i7/i5









I agree with minor changes (Bold Parts).
Also dont know why you put 775 in as best and cheapest performance opition, AM3 kills almost every 775 CPU...


----------



## iandh

Quote:


Originally Posted by *almighty15* 
What proof? That Phenom 2 chips are getting beat by lower clocked core 2 quads?

In fact he's a refresh of the link you provided : http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...px?i=3551&p=14

A win on a bar graph doesn't always mean a win in the real world. BTW, I'm discussing gaming because TBH that's all I'm interested in. Things change when you look at different applications. Let's link another Anand shootout, along with a few select quotes:

http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=3506&p=1

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Anand*
During testing, the Intel systems would generate minimum frame rates at this resolutions about 23~24fps on a couple of runs and then jump to their current results on the others. We noticed this in game play also; *the Intel systems would hitch and pause at times.* We would shutdown the game, clear the prefetch folder, and reboot. The game would operate fine in the next series of testing although we still had stuttering in intensive ground scenes at times. We tried new images, different CPUs, memory changes, and the Sapphire HD 4870 cards with the same results. *The Phenom II 940 had extremely stable frame rates in each test and action was very fluid during game play*.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *Anand*
*After playing through the several levels on each platform, we thought the Phenom II 940 offered a better overall gaming experience in this title than the Intel Q9550 based on smoother game play.* It is difficult to quantify without a video capture, but player movement and weapon control just seemed to be more precise. Of course, if you have the funds, we would recommend the i7 platform for best possible performance.

IMO, 775 doesn't compete with any AMD platform in gaming, regardless of framerate, because of stuttering caused by the bus architechture and lack of IMC. I experienced it on my E2140, E4300, Q6600, E8400, E7200, and then switched to a "slower" Phenom 9950 and it magically went away, and my gaming experience improved.

Some intel owners don't experience it at all. That DOES NOT mean it doesn't exist... which is evidenced by the article linked above. In fact, it was enough that Anand even mentioned experiencing it again in a second article.

It also is not present in all game titles.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *NrGx* 
Yes the Phenom II does compete with the C2Q...but that latter is still the better processor both clock-for-clock, in terms of ease of overclocking, heat and voltage.

I doubt there is an AMD processor on this site (that isn't LN2 cooled) that would compete with my Q9550 at max overclock. Most of the Phenoms don't even reach 4Ghz without huge voltages!

That has changed with C3. C3 Phenom II's are pretty much a guaranteed 4GHz on air as long as you don't get a dud chip or suck at OC'ing.

Remeber the early 45nm intel chips on 1st revision? *People were frying their E8400's left and right* because they thought that 4Ghz was "guaranteed" and tried to force the issue. *Only after the process matured was 4Ghz a guarantee on intel 45nm, and same goes for AMD 45nm.*


----------



## Ceiron

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Chucklez* 
Haha you do know how biased and untrue Toms has become right? Take a look at there Phenom II 965 review to any other website.. Completely different things (Toms says it cant beat a C2Q, everywhere else it easily beats em).

I agree with minor changes (Bold Parts).
Also dont know why you put 775 in as best and cheapest performance opition, AM3 kills almost every 775 CPU...

So true ay. I've tested my rig against my mate's Q9550, 8GB RAM with a 9800GTX+. Mine's faster at almost everything.

As for AM3 not being able to take multi-GPU platform...Who made up those lies?
There's lots of AM3 boards that take SLI or CrossFireX.


----------



## lardo5150

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tofunater* 
no doubt









HAHAHA

Ok, that made my day.

No, I have not made any purchases. I am waiting on that for a few reasons:

1. Black Friday is coming up.
2. My wife's due date (baby) was today. Gaming is going to take a backseat for awhile, and for everyday use like internet and what not, I will use this work laptop.
3. Taking my time, trying to way all my options and learn from threads like this.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dir_d* 
Im not responding to almighty anymore....This is for the OP..As you can see the clear winner in Price/Performance for Gaming is AMD...the money would have spent on the C2Q i5 or i7 you can put it into 1 or 2 graphics cards.

AMD Phenom II X3 720 2.8GHz 3 x 512KB L2 Cache 6MB L3 Cache Socket AM3 95W Triple-Core Black Processor
$119.00

GIGABYTE GA-MA790GPT-UD3H AM3 AMD 790GX HDMI ATX AMD Motherboard
Price after Rebate Card(s):$99.99

G.SKILL 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory Model F3-12800CL9D-4GBNQ
$90.99

XFX HD-577A-ZNFC Radeon HD 5770 (Juniper XT) 1GB 128-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.0 x16
$174.99 x2

$659

This system will rival any machine on the Market right now in games and since its is AM3 when the hexacore CPUs come out for AMD and you want to upgrade thats all you need to get everything else will still be fine. If anyone else says that this system i made will be crap they obviously know nothing about AMD, Intel, the games that are out and are coming out.

dir, I will rep you when I am done with this post. And yes, according to another post, I sold my ram and cpu already. My board is dead.
I am keeping everything else in my rig (gpu, power supply, case, etc.)
The AMD chip I was talking about was the 965 at 3.4, you mentioned the 720 at 2.8, can I ask why? (like I said, I know zero about AMD).


----------



## Ceiron

If you got a good chip, you can unlock the 4th core and have a quad core for the price of 3. The 720 is also black edition, meaning unlocked multiplier and more overclock and whatnot.

I'm a tad lazy to do all that so I spent more to get the 965.


----------



## Chucklez

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lardo5150* 
HAHAHA

Ok, that made my day.

No, I have not made any purchases. I am waiting on that for a few reasons:

1. Black Friday is coming up.
2. My wife's due date (baby) was today. Gaming is going to take a backseat for awhile, and for everyday use like internet and what not, I will use this work laptop.
3. Taking my time, trying to way all my options and learn from threads like this.

dir, I will rep you when I am done with this post. And yes, according to another post, I sold my ram and cpu already. My board is dead.
I am keeping everything else in my rig (gpu, power supply, case, etc.)
The AMD chip I was talking about was the 965 at 3.4, you mentioned the 720 at 2.8, can I ask why? (like I said, I know zero about AMD).

If you have the money and want the 965 get it but make sure you get the new C3 stepping one (125W not 140W). Ocing has improved a huge margine with the C3 stepping. Also I think he says the 720 cause you can unlock its 4th core and get a really nice quad that really is a 955/965 with a locked core and is downclocked. But as I said before if you have the money get the 965 and the 125W C3 version.

EDIT: BTW Congrats on the baby







, and sorry about all this arguing. Phenom II vs i7/i5 is a VERY touchy topic


----------



## dir_d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Chucklez* 
If you have the money and want the 965 get it but make sure you get the new C3 stepping one (125W not 140W). Ocing has improved a huge margine with the C3 stepping. Also I think he says the 720 cause you can unlock its 4th core and get a really nice quad that really is a 955/965 with a locked core and is downclocked. But as I said before if you have the money get the 965 and the 125W C3 version.

EDIT: BTW Congrats on the baby







, and sorry about all this arguing. Phenom II vs i7/i5 is a VERY touchy topic

X2 Grats on the baby.....


----------



## -iceblade^

Quote:



Originally Posted by *almighty15*


What proof? That Phenom 2 chips are getting beat by lower clocked core 2 quads?

In fact he's a refresh of the link you provided : http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...px?i=3551&p=14

See how the lower clocked Core 2 quads are beating the higher clocked Phenom 2's?

Again that was *YOUR* article and *YOUR* link...

Again and as *PROVEN* by the article *YOU* linked to and by an article I have linked to core 2 quad is faster per clock then a Phenom 2 so a 4Ghz core 2 quad will hammer a Phenom 2.

May I also remind you that core 2 quads have very very little problems hitting 4Ghz+ clock speeds with a low voltage, Phenom 2 on the other hand struggles to hit over 3.8Ghz and that is with high voltage!

Not found that exact article but here is one similar :

*Core i7 @ 3.4Ghz with SLI GTX 260's

Phenom 2 @ 3.6Ghz with Crossfire 4890's*

I7 system,* LOWER CPU SPEED AND LESS POWERFUL* graphics cards and yet the i7 kills the Phenom 2 system.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...on,2337-3.html

*MAY I REMIND YOU NUB THAT YOU STARTED THIS, AND REMEMBER THE ARGUMENT IS ABOUT PER CLOCK PERFORMANCE!!!!*










why do you keep going back to i7? everyone knows i7 is the fastest on the market, and noone claimed that i7 is slower than Phenom II...

the point Chris is trying to make is that Phenom II is pretty darned close to i7 for a lot less money, in the same way that the 4890 is pretty darned close to the GTX 285, for a lot less money.

there really is no need to be getting so upset about it, not to mention your arguments keep bouncing back and forth over irrelevant places.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *almighty15*


Right :

If money is no object : i7/i5
If you're planning on running more then one video card : i7/i5
If you want cheap but future proof : AM3
If you want cheapest option while offering best performance : Socket 775

Plus you go can go either SLI or Crossfire with i7/i5










you forget that i5 has an x8/x8 limitation for multi-gpus which will be coming into play pretty soon. so for running more than one card, it's not necessarily such a great idea.

OP, gratz on the baby







. make sure to teach them how to OC when the time comes ^^


----------



## Blaze051806

- agrees with iceblade - OP what you leaning towards atm?


----------



## tofunater

Quote:



Originally Posted by *lardo5150*


HAHAHA

Ok, that made my day.

No, I have not made any purchases. I am waiting on that for a few reasons:

1. Black Friday is coming up.
2. My wife's due date (baby) was today. Gaming is going to take a backseat for awhile, and for everyday use like internet and what not, I will use this work laptop.
3. Taking my time, trying to way all my options and learn from threads like this.

dir, I will rep you when I am done with this post. And yes, according to another post, I sold my ram and cpu already. My board is dead.
I am keeping everything else in my rig (gpu, power supply, case, etc.)
The AMD chip I was talking about was the 965 at 3.4, you mentioned the 720 at 2.8, can I ask why? (like I said, I know zero about AMD).


Glad I could make somebody laugh








Congrats on your child by the way, I wish your family nothing but happiness.

As for the 720BE, even if you don't unlock it, it will perform very similar to its quad counterparts once overclocked. Its a great proc, and I'm regretting that I sold mine.


----------



## lardo5150

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Blaze051806*


- agrees with iceblade - OP what you leaning towards atm?


Honestly, dont know.
As I check on this post every so often, I am off on newegg and microcenter (since MC just opened in STL today







), getting prices and putting together a comapison. Anytime I spend over 50 bucks on something, I research the crap out of it, must be some kind of ocd thing.

I am wanting something that will beat my q6700. Nothing wrong with it, but if I am going to get new hardware, I want to get something that will beat it, not compete with it.
At the same time, I dont want to spend over 600 dollars like it is looking the i7 is going to do. But I am looking for ways to bring the cost down.

MicroCenter is running some great prices on the processors, and they said that the deals now are pretty much their black friday deals, and even if they aren't, I have 30 days to bring in my receipt if the price drops.

And thanks everyone for the wishes. Should be an interesting couple of months. Our first kid (girl).


----------



## dir_d

Heres another link to help you make your decision Lardo
http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,6...rong/Practice/
Its all about how the game is coded







Look at the frames with 4xMSAA on which im sure you will want on.


----------



## Blaze051806

glad we could help. just remember if u go AM3 now. you will save money. and when the AMD 6 Core cpus are out it will easier to upgrade to them. AM3 will likely last a good 2-3 years before AM3+ comes out and even still those cpus will work on AM3 boards.

you can do the same with the i7 socket but remember.. intels ( and new ones to boot ) are normally very high price. i doubt you could afford a i9 CPU when the come out. they will likely be in the upper $500-$600 range. AMDs 6 core line should around $300-$400. nice saving.


----------



## ThePath

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Blaze051806*


you can do the same with the i7 socket but remember.. intels ( and new ones to boot ) are normally very high price. i doubt you could afford a i9 CPU when the come out. they will likely be in the upper $500-$600 range. AMDs 6 core line should around $300-$400. nice saving.


AMD 6 core are going to be based on Istanbul which according to reviews perform worse than Nehalem based Xeon (search google for reviews)

Buying Phenom II X4 and upgrading later to 6 core would cost more money than i7. i7 can easily last you for 2-3 years without the need to upgrade.

Also, no one is asking him to buy i9 on the first day that it comes out. He can wait for for it until there is price drop thats if he plan to upgrade.


----------



## Blaze051806

hmm. i didn't know such reviews were out for 6 cores. but you never know until the are being benchmarked. im not saying he would need to upgrade once the 6 cores are out im just saying the option is open for down the road. AMD will use AM3 socket for a good while.


----------



## dzalias

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Skylit*


i5 would be a good upgrade for you. AMD doesn't really have anything able to compete with the current intel processors like others have said.(I wish they did) Oh and also, *there's no such thing as "future proof"*







. For what we know 1366 could be replaced in a year or so and AMD tries to keep there stuff backwards compatible, but a very slim amount of people actually just upgrade processors. New boards get stuff added on them making it compelling to buy a new version.


Not absolutely. But relatively there is. I'm tired of people saying this.

In absoluteness, you don't exist. So be quiet.


----------



## ThePath

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Blaze051806*


hmm. i didn't know such reviews were out for 6 cores. but you never know until the are being benchmarked. im not saying he would need to upgrade once the 6 cores are out im just saying the option is open for down the road. AMD will use AM3 socket for a good while.


Actually, the reviews for AMD Istanbul (6-core server CPU) has been out few months ago, but Istanbul is server processor, not desktop processor

The AMD 6 core Thuban (which is not out yet) is simply the desktop version of Istanbul. Thuban *might* get higher stock clock or better stepping, but that doesn't make it much different from Istanbul.


----------



## Skylit

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dzalias*


Not absolutely. But relatively there is. I'm tired of people saying this.

In absoluteness, you don't exist. So be quiet.


Sure. I'll give it 2 years from Q1 2010 before Intel plays its socket game again. I'm tired of people saying "future proof". Technology always evolves.


----------



## wickedout

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Skylit*


Sure. I'll give it 2 years from Q1 2010 before Intel plays its socket game again. I'm tired of people saying "future proof". Technology always evolves.


Agreed! Nothings future proof. Technology is always on the move and so is AMD and Intel.


----------



## Ktmrida4life

Quote:


Originally Posted by *wickedout* 
Agreed! Nothings future proof. Technology is always on the move and so is AMD and Intel.

Yea and so is ATI, and so is Nvidia, and so on and so on.

But if you want to at least try to make a system futureproof, I think the AM3 socket OR 1366 is the way to go.


----------



## DarkShooter

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Blaze051806*


glad we could help. just remember if u go AM3 now. you will save money. and when the AMD 6 Core cpus are out it will easier to upgrade to them. AM3 will likely last a good 2-3 years before AM3+ comes out and even still those cpus will work on AM3 boards.

you can do the same with the i7 socket but remember.. intels ( and new ones to boot ) are normally very high price. *i doubt you could afford a i9 CPU when the come out. they will likely be in the upper $500-$600 range*. AMDs 6 core line should around $300-$400. nice saving.


i would rather say around $800 to $1000 even, if they follow the upgrading list - price bases, the i9 is probably going to be more expensive than the i7 975 extreme, which is around 800â‚¬ atm, not sure how much in $US, so $600 is probably the price at a microcenter and not everyone is lucky to have one close by..


----------



## Blameless

Quote:



Originally Posted by *lardo5150*


I am wanting something that will beat my q6700. Nothing wrong with it, but if I am going to get new hardware, I want to get something that will beat it, not compete with it.
At the same time, I dont want to spend over 600 dollars like it is looking the i7 is going to do. But I am looking for ways to bring the cost down.


I bought an i7, RAM, and my LGA-1366 motherboard almost a year ago for less than 500 bucks, things have gotten cheaper since then.

You don't need to spend more than 200 dollars on a board, or more than 100 on memory, if you shop around. And if you catch some good deals, you can save a good bit.

I was able to build a C0 i7 920 rig for my brother and I spent less than 350 dollars on the CPU ($160 used, does 3.8Ghz with ease), Mobo (UD3R on sale for $160 shipped), and RAM 3x1GiB of Buffalo DDR3-1333 on sale for 25 bucks). It performs within 5-10% of setups that cost more than twice as much.


----------



## BounouGod

Quote:


Originally Posted by *DarkShooter* 
i would rather say around $800 to $1000 even, if they follow the upgrading list - price bases, the i9 is probably going to be more expensive than the i7 975 extreme, which is around 800â‚¬ atm, not sure how much in $US, so $600 is probably the price at a microcenter and not everyone is lucky to have one close by..


Why is microcenter so much cheaper then everyone else?


----------



## lardo5150

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Blameless* 
I bought an i7, RAM, and my LGA-1366 motherboard almost a year ago for less than 500 bucks, things have gotten cheaper since then.

You don't need to spend more than 200 dollars on a board, or more than 100 on memory, if you shop around. And if you catch some good deals, you can save a good bit.

I was able to build a C0 i7 920 rig for my brother and I spent less than 350 dollars on the CPU ($160 used, does 3.8Ghz with ease), Mobo (UD3R on sale for $160 shipped), and RAM 3x1GiB of Buffalo DDR3-1333 on sale for 25 bucks). It performs within 5-10% of setups that cost more than twice as much.

Ok, I have decided to skip the AMD. I feel I could get better performance with the i5 and i7. Lets go ahead and end the AMD vs Intel banter.

Now I am trying to decide between the i7 920 and the i5.
I was thinking i7 860, but it was only like 40 bucks less (for MB, Ram, CPU) than the 920, so why not just go and get the 920.

The cost difference is like 140 bucks.

Blameless, Is the rig in your signature what you go for under 500? The only board I can find for under 200 is the GIGABYTE GA-EX58-UD3R LGA and Foxconn FlamingBlade.
I want something that will do decent overclocking. The FlamingBlade only has 3 ram slots, but who cares. I also need something that supports sli or crossfire (in case I get another card in the future). The ram I am seeing (for the 920) is 150 bucks.
How did you find these things for under 500?

Budget is a big thing for me, but I am not wanting to buy crap. I dont mind spending an extra few dollars to get something better. But at the same time, I am not going to get the new EVGA board for $399 just because it is rated the highest.

One of the main reasons I am swaying more towards the i7 is I THOUGHT I read that the i5 is harder to clock, and it requires a lot more voltage to do so. Also with the i5, sli is ran at x8, which I also read is not that big of a deal, you will hardly notice any perfomance issues.

I am going to go through this thread tonight when I get home and rep everyone for contributing, I am learning a lot in this thread.


----------



## The Duke

A story by The Duke.

Not so long ago, AMD created the only true 32/64 bit CPU and the 754 was the stepping stone to the history making 939.
The ability of the 939 socket CPU to perform 9 OPS and it's IMC compared to Intel's then 6 OPS w/o an IMC put the CPU giant in its place. Not only did the AMD out perform Intel, but AMD's were far more economically priced. So it was a win, win for PC enthusiasm world wide.
Intel, who was then black balling Retailers like Sony, Gateway, Compaq, etc...Retail Manufacturers with threats of with holding developmental data and would provide special price consideration to those who complied. So the law suits mounted and so far 2 countries and the EU proved those claims of unfair practices.
While that was going on, AMD and Intel struck a deal so Intel could use AMD's TRUE 32/64 but tech simply because Intel was screwed as the 64 bit CPU's did poorly dealing with emulation of 32 bit programs which were plentiful. About a year later, Intel produced a true 32/64 bit CPU and figured out how to up to 12 OPS. 12 OPS trumped AMD just like the AMD 9 OPS trumped Intel's then 6 OPS.

So, no matter how you cut it for the most part AMD now is behind Intel but still produces some vary powerful CPUs!
The only thing is that the Intel fans never speak of... an Intel _Inside_ has AMD _Inside_.

It all boils down to economics and what you currently have to upgrade and whether your investment is worth up grading what you have and whether you can afford to improve on what you have to get the best bang for the buck of whether you want to start from scratch.

Call my story fact or fiction as you please, knowing the facts will determine whether you know the truth or not.

*The important true story is lardo5150 and the topic of his thread.*
1. Present fact to help him with his questions.
2. Fan boy crap is useless to him.
3. Trolling and flaming is useless to him.
4. Helping a fellow member is why were here









FYI, I have both AMD and Intel systems so any fan boy thoughts towards me are mute!


----------



## codyh

I think I am following this thread as closely as the OPer is. I too keep flip flopping back and forth and plan on ordering something this Friday. I have rocked a single gfx card for the longest time which makes me think that the i5 would be good enough. Then I think about getting the i7 or a 965 and 2 5770. Oh the decision is brutal.


----------



## lardo5150

Quote:


Originally Posted by *codyh* 
I think I am following this thread as closely as the OPer is. I too keep flip flopping back and forth and plan on ordering something this Friday. I have rocked a single gfx card for the longest time which makes me think that the i5 would be good enough. Then I think about getting the i7 or a 965 and 2 5770. Oh the decision is brutal.

hahaha, I am the exact same way.
I to need to need to get something soon. Lan Party coming up.

I hve decided to go with either the i5 or i7 960.

Someone said they build an i7 960 for under 500. I would really like to know what they got.


----------



## dir_d

Lardo since you are going intel go with the i7 920 X58 dont skimp since you decided to go for performance you might as well go all the way.


----------



## DUNC4N

Personally I'm liking the idea of a micro atx setup like this, but hey, I like SFF. (X3440 has HT, and is cheaper)

Although one of those newer revision 965's would be sweet in sff too










Good luck in your decision.


----------



## Robilar

Just a side note: Duke and I are both posting in this thread for two reasons...

First, its a potentially interesting discussion and worthy of *civilized* debate.

Second, some of the language towards other members in this thread is dangerously close to earning infractions.

There is nothing wrong with having an opinion (or expressing it) but please be civil towards other members.

There have been too many interesting threads that have devolved into flamewars and name calling lately.

Just my watchful two cents


----------



## exad

Since you decided to go i5/i7 I came up with an i7 combo that should work pretty well and not cost a fortune. Though, because of the x8/x8 limitations of i5, I wouldn't recommend i5 just in case you plan on using dual GPU sometime in the future.

If I was in the states, I would probably go i7 due to the really decent pricing but unfortunately, here in Canada, we don't have such deals. If I can find decent pricing, I would go i7 too. Would prefer AM3 over i5 though.


----------



## lardo5150

Quote:


Originally Posted by *exad* 
Since you decided to go i5/i7 I came up with an i7 combo that should work pretty well and not cost a fortune. Though, because of the x8/x8 limitations of i5, I wouldn't recommend i5 just in case you plan on using dual GPU sometime in the future.

If I was in the states, I would probably go i7 due to the really decent pricing but unfortunately, here in Canada, we don't have such deals. If I can find decent pricing, I would go i7 too. Would prefer AM3 over i5 though.











Exad, thanks man, I was actually thinking of the foxconn board. The cpu is actually only 200 bucks at micro center and it just opened up here in STL.

EDIT: I thought the GTI version of the flamingblade did not support SLI? Let me go check real quick....

EDIT2: I think I was looking at the bloodrage not the flamingblade. The reviews on the flamingblade gti are pretty iffy.


----------



## exad

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lardo5150* 
Exad, thanks man, I was actually thinking of the foxconn board. The cpu is actually only 200 bucks at micro center and it just opened up here in STL.

EDIT: I thought the GTI version of the flamingblade did not support SLI? Let me go check real quick....

EDIT2: I think I was looking at the bloodrage not the flamingblade. The reviews on the flamingblade gti are pretty iffy.

agreed, the flamingblade is not the best motherboard but it's the cheapest. A lot of x58 boards seem to be having manufacturing problems. If you want a board with rock solid reviews, your looking in the $250-400 price range.


----------



## lardo5150

Quote:


Originally Posted by *exad* 
agreed, the flamingblade is not the best motherboard but it's the cheapest. A lot of x58 boards seem to be having manufacturing problems. If you want a board with rock solid reviews, your looking in the $250-400 price range.

Another place to save money with the i7 is on memory, by going dual channel.
(Ignore my ignance in this post I am going to reference







)

I started a thread about dual channel on an x58 board.
http://www.overclock.net/intel-mothe...l-channel.html

If running dual channel is just fine on x58, then you can get RAM for only 90 bucks:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820145260

Quote:



Quote:

Dual-channel architecture requires a dual-channel-capable motherboard and two or more DDR, DDR2 SDRAM, or DDR3 SDRAM memory modules. The memory modules are installed into matching banks, which are usually color coded on the motherboard. These separate channels allow each memory module access to the memory controller, increasing throughput bandwidth. It is not required that identical modules be used, but this is often recommended for best compatibility for dual channel operation. It is possible to use a single-sided module of 512 MB[1] and a double-sided module of 512 MB in dual-channel configuration, but how fast and stable it is depends on the memory controller.

If the motherboard has two pairs of differently colored DIMM sockets (the colors indicate which bank they belong to, bank 0 or bank 1), then one can place a matched pair of memory modules in bank 0, but a different-capacity pair of modules in bank 1, as long as they are of the same speed. Using this scheme, a pair of 1 GB memory modules in bank 0 and a pair of matched 512 MB modules in bank 1 would be acceptable for dual-channel operation.[2]

I found that.
I know this seems dumb but...
The actual channels are the different colored slots on the board.
So I am assuming in a triple channel board, you will have at least three of the same colored slots, while in a dual you will have at least two of the same colored slots.
To do dual or triple, the memory has to be the same speed correct?

I also just found this which says that dual memory is just fine.

http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/16...it/index7.html

Quote:

Our moral to this story is if youâ€™re planning on a Core i7 system, donâ€™t just go out and buy triple channel memory straight away. If your budget allows for it, then by all means more memory will help, especially in Vista. However, with todayâ€™s results you can see that dual channel memory is more than capable of keeping up with the Core i7.


----------



## lardo5150

Also, in another thread a started awhile back (i5 vs i7) crocodiledundee recommended this:

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Clockadile Dundee*


Build an i5 rig, and put any savings toward the best single or 2-way video card solution you can afford (I would get a 5870). You can't go wrong with i7, but you would see more difference in gaming, with a i5 + 5870 (or 2)combo, as opposed to i7 with a lesser card. I would not be hesitant to go for that combo, unless you want tri-sli or something.


I need to research how much this would cost compared to the i7 build with my current 260 C216 (that is overclocked by the way)

EDIT: Prices doing it that way are crazy. you are tacking on another 300 at least.


----------



## Cavi

Lardo,

I am in your exact situation. I mostly use my machine for gaming, and will be upgrading soon. Here is what I KNOW I will be doing. 
Because my primary use for the machine is gaming, I have come to the conclusion that the i5 750 is my best option.

I do not even come close to needing more than 4GB of ram. Because of this, the 6GB triple channel offered by socket 1366 just seems overkill. 4 GB is more than enough for even the most demanding games out right now. Why spend money on more RAM in this case?

Games don't use hyper-threading. So, why spend the extra money on anything more that offers that? Just doesn't make sense to me!

The big stickler people will mention is the x8/x8 crossfire/sli that is the limit on socket 1156. This difference is practically non-existent, and the end-user will NEVER notice the difference in 99.9% of real world practical applications.

With all of this in mind, I will be going i5 750 (only $149 at Micro Center!), and the plan is eventually 2x 5770s in crossfire. 4GB of dual channel DDR3, and a gigabyte motherboard (looking at the UD4P at present, unless I keep with mATX like I have now).

Maybe this will help you with your decisions, but seeing as how our situations are identical, I'm hoping it will be more than helpful









Of course, if you simply want more e-peen, go bigger and badder! But the i5 750 is such a good chip, and OCs so well, that it is certainly the chip for me.


----------



## lardo5150

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Cavi* 
Lardo,

I am in your exact situation. I mostly use my machine for gaming, and will be upgrading soon. Here is what I KNOW I will be doing.
Because my primary use for the machine is gaming, I have come to the conclusion that the i5 750 is my best option.

I do not even come close to needing more than 4GB of ram. Because of this, the 6GB triple channel offered by socket 1366 just seems overkill. 4 GB is more than enough for even the most demanding games out right now. Why spend money on more RAM in this case?

Games don't use hyper-threading. So, why spend the extra money on anything more that offers that? Just doesn't make sense to me!

The big stickler people will mention is the x8/x8 crossfire/sli that is the limit on socket 1156. This difference is practically non-existent, and the end-user will NEVER notice the difference in 99.9% of real world practical applications.

With all of this in mind, I will be going i5 750 (only $149 at Micro Center!), and the plan is eventually 2x 5770s in crossfire. 4GB of dual channel DDR3, and a gigabyte motherboard (looking at the UD4P at present, unless I keep with mATX like I have now).

Maybe this will help you with your decisions, but seeing as how our situations are identical, I'm hoping it will be more than helpful









Of course, if you simply want more e-peen, go bigger and badder! But the i5 750 is such a good chip, and OCs so well, that it is certainly the chip for me.

Ya, it is almost like a big weiner contest









That does put in a perspective actually. You know, earlier in the thread I had decided to go i7.
Then at work today a guy had me convinced to look over the AMD again.

Then, of course, here we are looking at the i5.

I think my main concern was I had read it is harder to overclock and takes way more voltage, which to me is risky.
I was able to overclock my 9700 to 3ghz with no voltage increase.


----------



## -iceblade^

Quote:


Originally Posted by *exad* 
agreed, the flamingblade is not the best motherboard but it's the cheapest. A lot of x58 boards seem to be having manufacturing problems. If you want a board with rock solid reviews, your looking in the $250-400 price range.

if i was going i7 for sure i'd get a Rampage II GENE. the $80 saved from the microcenter i7 920 over newegg would yeild a fantastic board, and not one person i've asked to here who owns a GENE has any issues with it. that, or another option is the eVGA X58 micro-atx. great board from the reviews i have seen, and you also have 3 months to save cash, and step up to something like an X58 LE or a Classified if you find yourself really needing the extra ports.

and newegg has deals on the rampage II gene open box from time to time pulling the cost to $160.

they may be microatx, but when was the last time you used Tri-SLI? just something to consider







.


----------



## Skylit

Quote:



Originally Posted by *lardo5150*


Ya, it is almost like a big weiner contest









That does put in a perspective actually. You know, earlier in the thread I had decided to go i7.
Then at work today a guy had me convinced to look over the AMD again.

Then, of course, here we are looking at the i5.

I think my main concern was I had read it is harder to overclock and takes way more voltage, which to me is risky. 
I was able to overclock my 9700 to 3ghz with no voltage increase.


Just remember that technology always changes over the years. It's not really wise to buy the biggest and baddest computer on the block when its just going to be considered obsolete and old in a couple years. AMD and intel both make great processors, hope you make the best choice that fits you!









EDIT: I read in a earlier post your main concern with this rig is gaming? If that's the case, go with whatever is cheaper in the CPU+Mobo area and buy a better graphics card. Games are more GPU based then anything!


----------



## lardo5150

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Skylit*


Just remember that technology always changes over the years. It's not really wise to buy the biggest and baddest computer on the block when its just going to be considered obsolete and old in a couple year. AMD and intel both make great processors, hope you make the best choice that fits you!









EDIT: I read in a earlier post your main concern with this rig is gaming? If that's the case, go with whatever is cheaper in the CPU+Mobo area and buy a better graphics card. Games are more GPU based then anything!


Cavi I think made me realize that I dont need to fork over an extra 150 for the i7. I can use that money for another card when I sell mine.

I have FINALLY decided to go with i5.

I need to decide which board though now.
ASUS P7P55D EVO
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813131407
ASUS Sabertooth (sexy board)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813131601


----------



## exad

Quote:



Originally Posted by *lardo5150*


Cavi I think made me realize that I dont need to fork over an extra 150 for the i7. I can use that money for another card when I sell mine.

I have FINALLY decided to go with i5.

I need to decide which board though now.
ASUS P7P55D EVO
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813131407
ASUS Sabertooth (sexy board)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813131601


Gotta be honest, can't see much difference between the two. Choose the one you prefer or the cheaper one if saving money's your thing or flip a coin if it's all the same to you.


----------



## lardo5150

Quote:


Originally Posted by *exad* 
Gotta be honest, can't see much difference between the two. Choose the one you prefer or the cheaper one if saving money's your thing or flip a coin if it's all the same to you.

Ya, the i5 is the better choice for me.

This thread was about 965 vs i5 vs i7 based on performance and budget.

The i5 is really more of what I am looking for.

The i7 is like the hot rich chick


----------



## hitman1985

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lardo5150* 
Ya, the i5 is the better choice for me.

This thread was about 965 vs i5 vs i7 based on performance and budget.

The i5 is really more of what I am looking for.

The i7 is like the hot rich chick









well honestly, if you get good deals on a i7 rig like i did, then the i7 is a logic choice.

i paid ~$600 for cpu (i7 920) ram (6gb Corsair dominator 1600) and board (bloodrage), while my friend paid ~$530 for his amd 965, gd70 and 4 gb ram. i haven't really benched 1 v 1 as he is only running a 4890 so far, but we may set something up down the road to bench with my gpu









good luck in the decission


----------



## lardo5150

Quote:


Originally Posted by *hitman1985* 
well honestly, if you get good deals on a i7 rig like i did, then the i7 is a logic choice.

i paid ~$600 for cpu (i7 920) ram (6gb Corsair dominator 1600) and board (bloodrage), while my friend paid ~$530 for his amd 965, gd70 and 4 gb ram. i haven't really benched 1 v 1 as he is only running a 4890 so far, but we may set something up down the road to bench with my gpu









good luck in the decission









I agree, but the way I am putting it together, the i7 will cost around $580, while the i5 will cost around $440.


----------



## exad

I was referring to the two motherboards you were choosing from.. not your choice of platform....


----------



## lardo5150

Quote:


Originally Posted by *exad* 
I was referring to the two motherboards you were choosing from.. not your choice of platform....









I gotcha, my mistake


----------



## lardo5150

Something I would like to throw in since I started this thread about the 3 different processors.
I am rethinking my i5 now because of the socket burn issue.
http://www.overclock.net/intel-gener...t-warning.html
That is the warning thread that I have contributed.

Also, wickedout posted this link:
http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=624489

When considering the i5 (I only learned of this last night AFTER I made my decision for an i5) take into consideration the socket burn.
Most feel it is because of the foxconn socket AND for extreme overclockers.
But others are stating that it could be more than just the socket, it could be how the 1156 power is setup. They are seeing other parts of the board being fried now as well.

One thing I think of is if they are blowing these things up by overclocking so high, how will the chip handle in the long run, running 25/7 at a modest overclock of between 3ghz and 3.5ghz? Is this chip going to burn out over time?

Making me rethink my purchase.


----------



## ChrisB17

If you dont want it to burn get a mobo with a LOTES socket. The burn issue happens with Foxconn sockets.


----------



## Cavi

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ChrisB17*


If you dont want it to burn get a mobo with a LOTES socket. The burn issue happens with Foxconn sockets.










yep!

I am well aware of the burn issue, but STILL plan on buying the i5 at some point. Then again, by the time I buy, new motherboard revisions might be out with a socket fix.


----------



## ChrisB17

I actually have a I5 gigabyte mobo with lotes sockets. Most of the companys are switching from foxconn sockets to lotes etc...


----------



## Cavi

Yeah, my motherboard will be the Gigabyte revision with Lotes socket, the P55A UD4P


----------



## ChrisB17

Lol thats the one I got.


----------



## lardo5150

But check out that link that wickedout provided, they have socket burn on an evga board with a lotes socket.


----------



## Cavi

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lardo5150* 
But check out that link that wickedout provided, they have socket burn on an evga board with a lotes socket.

Ok, but look at the voltages he was trying to run the thing at:

Quote:

Good find, though I cant get it to translate at all. First Lotes socket I have seen cooked! Though it appears its up at 1.57 - 1.64v as well...extreme cooling.

EDIT: But later in the thread AFTER it was 'burned' he was running 4.99Ghz at 1.599v.....and 5Ghz+ at 1.64v????
Do you plan on running it at over 1.5v? I certainly don't!


----------



## lardo5150

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Cavi* 
Ok, but look at the voltages he was trying to run the thing at:

Do you plan on running it at over 1.5v? I certainly don't!

LOL!! No way I am doing that









But the point I was wanting to make is this:
These guys are burning them out in record time, but using high voltage and what not.
Will these chips OVER TIME burn out with just a moderate overclock? So for example, I run this thing at 3.0 or 3.5, it is my 24/7 machine. Some time next year this thing dies and I look at the chip and it is burned up.
Now, I understand the rules of OCing and it can reduce the life of the chip, I know that and we dont need to get into that. But a chip should last even with a moderate OC. Will these burn out after some time?

I wish I was like you Cavi and did not have to buy till next year


----------



## Cavi

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lardo5150* 
LOL!! No way I am doing that









But the point I was wanting to make is this:
These guys are burning them out in record time, but using high voltage and what not.
Will these chips OVER TIME burn out with just a moderate overclock? So for example, I run this thing at 3.0 or 3.5, it is my 24/7 machine. Some time next year this thing dies and I look at the chip and it is burned up.
Now, I understand the rules of OCing and it can reduce the life of the chip, I know that and we dont need to get into that. But a chip should last even with a moderate OC. Will these burn out after some time?

I wish I was like you Cavi and did not have to buy till next year









Even if you buy now, you have options! Ok, so we found a Lotes socket that was burned out. But let's face it, 1.64 volts?! Are you kidding me? The socket is designed to only handle so much, THAT is why it's burning out. If you keep your voltages reasonable, I wouldn't ever think about it.

Slap a good cooler on it and you're good to go!


----------



## TripleC

CPU power.. well it's previously stated that in games there isn't too much of difference, even if there is, both party are doing more then good anyways.

besides that, there's platform, ease of options, which a lot of options are unlocked for you to tweak with, no multi lock, can handle high voltage on CPU, choices on DDR2 or DDR3 CPU Boards (like i had a 785G mobo that does DDR2 when it's meant to be a chipset for AM3 platform)

and of course , there' s concern about graphic cards.

i say a good balance is always a good thing.
something that performs well, minimum hassle , easy install, and cost efficient.


----------



## lardo5150

This thread makes me want to get the i5

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Perry* 
Source

There was a fairly recent chart floating around somewhere but I can't seem to find it.

http://www.overclock.net/hardware-ne...s-january.html


----------



## me_dont_know_much

Interesting read from both sides. I have had many systems over the last 20 years - some Intel and some AMD - have liked them both.

I ordered a system this week myself before reading this thread. I started out with a set budget in mind and was fully intending to buy an I7-920 since my friends have them and love them. My current system is 4 years old technology-wise. When I priced out the X4-955 the savings was about $225-250 (cpu, motherboard, memory, etc.). Then I went to tomshardware.com and looked at all his CPU charts, and noticed that the x4-955 has about 85-90% of the power/performance of the I7-920.

I've always trusted tomshardware. I opt'd to use the $225-250 in savings to order an Intel X-25M 80gig solid state drive as part of the system (as the primary).

Since I orderd a Radeon 5850 card to go complete the rig, I'm guessing that the X4-955 system will be more than enough for any games I throw at it and the fact that the CPU is running at 85-90% of what an I7-920 probably won't even be noticeable to me.

But, I think that the 80 gig SSD probably WILL BE noticeable. From what I've read, your system flies with one of these.

Will be sure to post a follow-up once the system arrives and I can fully test it. Just wanted to add my 2 cents to this fantastic thread, and give others a chance to think about a different way to allocated your budget when buying a new rig.

By the way, I'm mostly a gamer/desktop user. That's about it.


----------



## mtbiker033

Quote:


Originally Posted by *almighty15* 
Right :

If money is no object : i7/i5
If you're planning on running more then one video card : i7/i5
If you want cheap but future proof : AM3
If you want cheapest option while offering best performance : Socket 775

Plus you go can go either SLI or Crossfire with i7/i5









I agree with this. I have been looking into possible AM3/i5/i7 upgrade and the one thing I notice is there are very few SLI boards with AM3. I only saw two AM3 SLI boards (MSI). Why do the i5/i7 support both SLI and CF and the AM3's only CF?


----------



## Armi

Quote:


Originally Posted by *almighty15* 
Right :

If money is no object : i7/i5
*If you're planning on running more then one video card : i7/i5*
If you want cheap but future proof : AM3
If you want cheapest option while offering best performance : Socket 775

Plus you go can go either SLI or Crossfire with i7/i5









Eh ? i7 only. Who wants 8x/8x


----------



## dham

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Armi* 
Eh ? i7 only. Who wants 8x/8x









You mean 1366. i7 is on both sockets.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lardo5150* 
LOL!! No way I am doing that









But the point I was wanting to make is this:
*These guys are burning them out in record time, but using high voltage and what not.
Will these chips OVER TIME burn out with just a moderate overclock? So for example, I run this thing at 3.0 or 3.5, it is my 24/7 machine.* Some time next year this thing dies and I look at the chip and it is burned up.
Now, I understand the rules of OCing and it can reduce the life of the chip, I know that and we dont need to get into that. But a chip should last even with a moderate OC. Will these burn out after some time?

I wish I was like you Cavi and did not have to buy till next year









Electricity doesn't work like that man. I'm sorry. That's like saying if you attach a 2.5 watt fan to a 1 watt fan controller and it burns out and then you attach a fan that pulls half a watt over 3 years it will burn the fan controller out.

If your pulling more amps then the socket or specs can handle then your pulling more amps than the socket can handle. If your not, your not. If your pulling less for 6 months your not going to be pulling more in 1 year.

Also look at this
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...splay.php?f=56

There are tons of people doing high voltage overclocks with p55 boards. If this was really a major issue you would have heard more than 5 cases on the entire internet about it.


----------



## [VoDkA]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *-iceblade^;7597875*
> are you kidding me?
> 
> nah?
> 
> nah what? he's right. please, post more constructive comments than just 'nah', unless you're trolling, in which case we'll all be happy to report you


Shut up kid


----------



## yuksel911

graphic card is better than cpu


----------



## knoxy_14

ah necrophiliacs!


----------



## GameBoy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[VoDkA]*


Shut up kid


You revive a thread from 2009 to say that?...

What is wrong with you?


----------



## EvoBeardy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[VoDkA]*


Shut up kid


I actually thought this was a new topic.

Way to show your 'apparent' maturity there mate, after calling him a kid too...


----------

