i7 or i5, which would you recommend?

R

Ruskin

n00b
Joined
Apr 3, 2005
Messages
43
Been out of the market for a while, but recently purchased Far Cry 2, only to find it doesn't work on my current rig, so am now looking at upgrading. A mate of mine, bought the i7 920 (Nehalem) a little while ago, so was thinking about getting something similar. But had a look at some benchmarks (and in particular, power and heat issues) and now am more confused than ever.

Basically we have;
i5 Lynnfield (LGA1156)
i7 Lynnfield (LGA1156)
i7 Nehalem (LGA1366) - a bit more pricey than the others and draws more power and heat

Am tending towards the i7 860 (Lynnfield 2.80GHz LGA1156) on an ASUS P7P55D Deluxe P55 MOBO.

The impression I get, is that the i5 750 is very similar in performance to the i7 920 (but price and power, on the 920 is much higher). The i7 860 is only a little higher priced than the 920, but the benchmarks and power are much better. Either way, it looks like the Lynnfield is the way to go. Not sure what they mean, by the different memory management between i5/i7, nor do I know why the i5 is cheaper when it is supposed to have a PCI-e controller. So what does i7 give you, that i5 doesn't?
 
The i5 does not have hyper threading... Probably the only major difference Between the 1156 i7 and i5.
 
Core i7 900 series processors have three memory channels and all of them have Hyperthreading. The Core i5 doesn't have Hyperthreading but only has two memory channels. The Core i7 800 series is dual channel only just like the Core i5 but it has Hyperthreading. The only reason why the Core i5/i7 800 series benchmarks better than the Core i7 920 is because they are usually comparing the Core i7 920 at stock clock speeds with those of the Core i7 860. The Core i7 860 has a higher default clock frequency. Overclocked they'll have similar ceilings but the Core i7 920 will be faster at the same clock speeds in some applications but it will never be worse than the Core i5 or i7 800 series chips in applications that don't take advantage of the extra memory bandwidth.

Simply put, the Core i7 900 series has about 33% more memory bandwidth than Core i5/i7 800 series does. It is pin comptible with the Xeon CPUs (which are essentially the same thing.) The Core i7 900 series also uses the X58 chipset which has more PCI-Express lanes than Lynnfield based systems do. 36 PCI-Express lanes on X58 and 20 total in a P55/Lynnfield based system. If you do ultra high resolution gaming with multiple GPUs then the choice is clear. The Core i7 900 series in any form will deliver better performance.

All Nahelem processors get hot and draw lots of power when overclocked. Don't think for a second that Core i5 or Core i7 800 series processors are THAT much better in this regard. I've not measured the actual difference in power consumption but I have been watching the temperatures while overclocking them. Using the same cooling hardware you get similar temperature results when overclocking. At stock speeds the Core i5 750 at least runs much cooler than the Core i7 920 does. Overclock that Core i5 or Core i7 800 series CPU and their temperatures catch up to those of the overclocked Core i7 900 series chips real quick.

I hope that helps clear things up.
 
Atl530i said:
The i5 does not have hyper threading... Probably the only major difference Between the 1156 i7 and i5.
Click to expand...

Not quite. The die looks very different. They are derrived from the same technology but the PCI-Express controller is integrated into the Lynnfield core and it doesn't have the QPI interface the LGA1366 processors do.
 
Dan_D said:
Not quite. The die looks very different. They are derrived from the same technology but the PCI-Express controller is integrated into the Lynnfield core and it doesn't have the QPI interface the LGA1366 processors do.
Click to expand...

He said the 1156 i5 and i7.
 
Mark Larson said:
He said the 1156 i5 and i7.
Click to expand...

Damnit. Whenever anyone says "Core i7" I always think of the LGA1366 CPUs. I wish Intel named all LGA1156 processors "Core i5" and all their LGA1366 parts not intended for the workstation / server markets "Core i7".
 
Dan_D said:
Not quite. The die looks very different. They are derrived from the same technology but the PCI-Express controller is integrated into the Lynnfield core and it doesn't have the QPI interface the LGA1366 processors do.
Click to expand...

Dan_D said:
Damnit. Whenever anyone says "Core i7" I always think of the LGA1366 CPUs. I wish Intel named all LGA1156 processors "Core i5" and all their LGA1366 parts not intended for the workstation / server markets "Core i7".
Click to expand...

It's all good. Since Intel moved the PCIe controller to the CPU, there was no need for a QPI interface on the LGA 1156 CPUs anyway.
 
I'll go with Core i5 for 1156. 16x/16x and Tri-Channel is not supported for 1156. Spending the extra money for a i7 860 to get HT alone is a waste!

Keep it cheap!
 
Dan_D said:
Core i7 900 series processors have three memory channels and all of them have Hyperthreading. The Core i5 doesn't have Hyperthreading but only has two memory channels. The Core i7 800 series is dual channel only just like the Core i5 but it has Hyperthreading. The only reason why the Core i5/i7 800 series benchmarks better than the Core i7 920 is because they are usually comparing the Core i7 920 at stock clock speeds with those of the Core i7 860. .....
Click to expand...


Thanks heaps, that clears it up much more...
 
WorldExclusive said:
I'll go with Core i5 for 1156. 16x/16x and Tri-Channel is not supported for 1156. Spending the extra money for a i7 860 to get HT alone is a waste!

Keep it cheap!
Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback. Would you recommend the i5 over the i7 920 (or other i7 LGA1366) or just the i5 over the i7 LGA1156?
 
First of all I'd wait to see how the i5 compares when more mother boards support them. Also need more i5 user performance data to make a good decision.

Too early to jump on the i5 IMO.

However if the i5 fits your budget then go for it. Seems like a great CPU. Better than i7??? I'm not sure.
 
Last edited:
A i7 920 oced to 4.0ghz will beat a i5 860 oced at 4.0 in every single test. It is a little misleading because people do not take turbo into consideration when both cpus are compared.
 
Ruskin said:
Thanks for the feedback. Would you recommend the i5 over the i7 920 (or other i7 LGA1366) or just the i5 over the i7 LGA1156?
Click to expand...

I'll choose i5 750 over i7 860 because of motherboard limitations. I think giving i7 on a 1156 board is a gimmick or they are just preparing for Sandy Bridge.

I'll choose i7 1366 over i5/i7 1156 becuase the X58 motherboards are the best in the industry now.

Hope this helps.

You can find a 920 i7 for $200 and a $200 X58 board that will equal the cost of i5/i7 1156 and beat it hands down. Remember six cores for 1366 next year. 1156 will never support six cores, only Sandy Bridge will in 2011.
 
WorldExclusive said:
I'll go with Core i5 for 1156. 16x/16x and Tri-Channel is not supported for 1156. Spending the extra money for a i7 860 to get HT alone is a waste!

Keep it cheap!
Click to expand...

I just priced an upgrade (from LGA775) to LGA1156/i5. As long as you have a decent case, you can do the entire upgrade in just four items, and for under $600USD, and one of the four items is a new power supply. If you have a dual-core motherboard that can't swallow a Yorkfield, i5-750 makes tons of sense if you have no need for HT (but want VT and quad-core). If you have something older, then LGA1156 and that same i5 is still the smartest choice, especially if you have no interest in high-end Tri-SLI (while P55 can actually do Tri-SLI, it doesn't have as much bandwidth as an i7/X58 solution).

However, if you have a motherboard that can take a Yorkfield, then a Q9550 is the smarter choice, but only because it's a drop-in upgrade that supports VT and usually doesn't require tall overclocks.

In any case, if you have a low-end graphics card, I would recommend upgrading there before looking at processor upgrades, no matter which way you go, taking into consideration moving it to the new setup (that means going with PCIe X16 Gen2 at minimum; HD4670/4850 for AMD, and GTS250 for nV).
 
SonDa5 said:
First of all I'd wait to see how the i5 compares when more mother boards support them. Also need more i5 user performance data to make a good decision.

Too early to jump on the i5 IMO.

However if the i5 fits your budget then go for it. Seems like a great CPU. Better than i7??? I'm not sure.
Click to expand...

I am not saying that i5 is better than i7.

Far from it.

I'm saying that, depending on where you are, i5 may make better computing/financial sense than i7.

Case examples:

Dual-core CPU with motherboard that can't swallow a quad-core - i5/LGA1156 is the lowest-price upgrade compared to any LGA1366 setup.

Single-core CPU with no upgrade path (includes not only early LGA775 pre-Core microarchitecture CPUs, but S939/S478 as well) - i5's only problem is that it does, in a sense, compete with Celeron DC and Pentium DC. However, if Office 2010 x64 is on your radar (and if you run Office 2007 today, it should be), then i5 trumps even Celeron DC and Pentium DC. Also, i5 makes for a decent placeholder while waiting for Sandy Bridge in 2011. (Additional Data - MSI has a P5 mobo that, unlike most other P55 boards, is quite happy with 24 + 4 ATX power-supply hookups, as opposed to 24+8 EPS, which most 1156/1366 boards require. It also has three PCI slots, in addition to three PCIe x1 slots. However, it has but a single PCIe x16 Gen2 slot (so no SLI or CrossFireX); however, since 1156 has bandwidth issues with either option, I'd recommend 1366 if SLI or CrossFire is in the plans.

http://www.msicomputer.com/index.php?func=proddesc&maincat_no=1&cat2_no=170&prod_no=1882

http://www.microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=0317952

Why overspend now, especially with Sandy Bridge and Gulftown in the next two years?)


Dual--core CPU with quad-core-ready motherboard - upgrade your graphics card first (at minimum, to HD4670/4850 for AMD, or GTS250 for nV) then go with a Q9550 (instead of either i5 or i7). HD4850 and Q9550 together can be had for about $400USD, which is $100 less than a bare-minimum i5 upgrade.

Quad-core CPU and motherboard - Sit tight. (Yes, I'm serious.) Until 2010, there won't be a single non-niche multicore application (in fact, Office 2010 x64 is the only one on the horizon for Windows). If you get the upgrade itch, look at graphics and storage upgrades, not any change that requires a motherboard swap.
 
Last edited:
PGHammer said:
I'm saying that, depending on where you are, i5 may make better computing/financial sense than i7.
Click to expand...
true, but that's assuming people have common sense. after a few days posting on here, it seems to me that a lot of people on these forums are just going to recommend the most balls-out high performing rig possible without regard to utility, expense or what a person needs. some will even take the very notion that someone could derive a good computing experience from a cheaper (ie. "inferior") piece of hardware as an affront to their purchasing decisions. a real slap in the face that must be defended at all costs. with malice. and : rolleyes : :rolleyes:

oh wait, i've been posting in the video card forum too much. this thread actually seems pretty tame. and as usual dan_d seems to know what he's talking about! :p

OP, i've seen some benchmarks that place the 920 ahead of the 1156 socket chips specifically in Far Cry 2... however, your gaming experience with any of these nehalem CPUs is going to be great no matter how you slice it. you could save $100, go for the i5 and have a great time all the same. what else are you going to be doing with that box? you could probably save a bit of cash and just go with the 860, least that's what i'd do if i weren't broke all the time
 
WorldExclusive said:
I'll choose i5 750 over i7 860 because of motherboard limitations. I think giving i7 on a 1156 board is a gimmick or they are just preparing for Sandy Bridge.

You can find a 920 i7 for $200 and a $200 X58 board that will equal the cost of i5/i7 1156 and beat it hands down. Remember six cores for 1366 next year. 1156 will never support six cores, only Sandy Bridge will in 2011.
Click to expand...

While I wouldn't take 6-core into account thanks to "Extreme" $$$, you're right on the money - i7 + X58, i5 + P55.
 
WorldExclusive said:
I'll go with Core i5 for 1156. 16x/16x and Tri-Channel is not supported for 1156. Spending the extra money for a i7 860 to get HT alone is a waste!

Keep it cheap!
Click to expand...

Meh, at Micro Center (if you have one close by), it is an extra $50 to upgrade from an i5 to an i7 860.

WorldExclusive said:
I'll choose i5 750 over i7 860 because of motherboard limitations. I think giving i7 on a 1156 board is a gimmick or they are just preparing for Sandy Bridge.

I'll choose i7 1366 over i5/i7 1156 becuase the X58 motherboards are the best in the industry now.

Hope this helps.

You can find a 920 i7 for $200 and a $200 X58 board that will equal the cost of i5/i7 1156 and beat it hands down. Remember six cores for 1366 next year. 1156 will never support six cores, only Sandy Bridge will in 2011.
Click to expand...

While I can see your logic behind this statement, what if the OP does not need tri-channel memory or an x58 board. Having the best in the industry does no good when all you do is play solitaire and surf the web. Just sayin'.

I've been reading that the new Gulftown CPUs are going to be extreme versions which means $1000 for just the CPU. All I can say is I'd rather spend that money on something that is actually worth it. While the 1156 sockets may not support 6 cores, you'd really have to ask yourself if you really need that and have the funds avail to purchase that.
 
I was reading somewhere that the p55 boards dont have 16x on both sli slots when running more than one GPU in sli.

I t drops it to 8x per slot, however im not sure on the performance decrease or not. I dont think its much if you do....same goes with 3-way SLi.
 
Simply put, if your rig is for gaming and and not for profesional uses, buy i5. You don't need ht, and it's cheaper.
 
Dan_D said:
Wow, at $159.99 the Core i5 750 becomes just about the best buy out there right now.
Click to expand...

Team it up with the MSI P55 board and OCZ 4 GB DDR3 dual-channel pack and you have four cores and VT for barely four Bens (before rebates; the MSI mobo has a $20 MIR). The fact that it takes standard ATX power and has three full-length PCI slots is frosting.
 
Lol $159 for a Lynnfield quad. I can see what Intel/MC did there:

1) Raised Q9550 from $159 to $169 - of course they don't announce that, nobody announces a price increase.
2) i7 920's sell-out or are rare. They had plenty of i7 920's just a few weeks ago. Now they're gone, same with the 2nd nearest (VA).

3) Gee, what do you know, instead of last weeks $179.99 price for the i5, they reduced it further to $159.99.

Hilarity ensues. And by hilarity I mean sales.
 
Mav451 said:
Lol $159 for a Lynnfield quad. I can see what Intel/MC did there:

1) Raised Q9550 from $159 to $169 - of course they don't announce that, nobody announces a price increase.
2) i7 920's sell-out or are rare. They had plenty of i7 920's just a few weeks ago. Now they're gone, same with the 2nd nearest (VA).

3) Gee, what do you know, instead of last weeks $179.99 price for the i5, they reduced it further to $159.99.

Hilarity ensues. And by hilarity I mean sales.
Click to expand...

Yeah Detroit is out too all of a sudden . I guess they'd rather they a $40 loss on i5s than a $100 loss on i7s.

lolntmicrocenter.png
 
Kellygtp said:
I was reading somewhere that the p55 boards dont have 16x on both sli slots when running more than one GPU in sli.

I t drops it to 8x per slot, however im not sure on the performance decrease or not. I dont think its much if you do....same goes with 3-way SLi.
Click to expand...

There is no performance difference between SLI running in a 16x16, 16x8, or even 8x8 lane configuration. For 3-Way SLI there is no difference between running in a 16x16x16, 16x16x8, or 8x8x8 lane configuration. Modern video cards simply do not require enough bandwidth to max out a PCI-Express 2.0 x8 (x16 form factor, x8 electrical) slot.This may change within a generation or two. It is more likely to happen with dual GPU video cards first and then it may become a problem for regular single high end GPUs a short time later. However I have a feeling that we'll be running PCI-Express 3.0 compatible motherboards before the issue gets all that bad.
 
Mav451 said:
Lol $159 for a Lynnfield quad. I can see what Intel/MC did there:

1) Raised Q9550 from $159 to $169 - of course they don't announce that, nobody announces a price increase.
2) i7 920's sell-out or are rare. They had plenty of i7 920's just a few weeks ago. Now they're gone, same with the 2nd nearest (VA).

3) Gee, what do you know, instead of last weeks $179.99 price for the i5, they reduced it further to $159.99.

Hilarity ensues. And by hilarity I mean sales.
Click to expand...

I bought my Core i7 920 from Microcenter last Friday. They only had two left. An older C0/C1 chip and a D0. I took the D0.
 
Mav451 said:
Lol $159 for a Lynnfield quad. I can see what Intel/MC did there:

1) Raised Q9550 from $159 to $169 - of course they don't announce that, nobody announces a price increase.
2) i7 920's sell-out or are rare. They had plenty of i7 920's just a few weeks ago. Now they're gone, same with the 2nd nearest (VA).

3) Gee, what do you know, instead of last weeks $179.99 price for the i5, they reduced it further to $159.99.

Hilarity ensues. And by hilarity I mean sales.
Click to expand...

And pretty much at the expense of LGA775 (for those that haven't gone there yet).

If you have a decent power supply and case (400W ATX or better, and ATX minitower or larger) you can upgrade to i5/1156 for $500 at MC today.

http://www.microcenter.com/shopping_bag/shopping_bag.phtml?addsku=037838

It's not just LGA775 quads that are in trouble, but LGA775 in its entirety that's in trouble.

The $10 increase in Q9550 is no real minus, even for MC (these will likely be aimed squarely at folks like me looking for drop-in upgrades for existing 775 setups; we wouldn't be looking at i5 in any case).

The prospective i5 upgrader is likely coming from early LGA775 (if coming from 775 at all) or something older; more likely than not, the upgrader's ewxisting RAM is DDR and graphics is onboard or AGP (or even PCI).
 
With Intel switching to integrated memory controllers we knew LGA775's days were numbered.
 
Dan_D said:
There is no performance difference between SLI running in a 16x16, 16x8, or even 8x8 lane configuration. For 3-Way SLI there is no difference between running in a 16x16x16, 16x16x8, or 8x8x8 lane configuration. Modern video cards simply do not require enough bandwidth to max out a PCI-Express 2.0 x8 (x16 form factor, x8 electrical) slot.
Click to expand...

Apparently something like two GTX295s or two 4870x2s already gets limited by 8x8 at some point. But then that's of course those are indeed 2x2 GPU setups. For me I'm planning to stay at the single GPU level, so I should be quite fine with a P55.
 
Dan_D said:
Wow, at $159.99 the Core i5 750 becomes just about the best buy out there right now.
Click to expand...

Excatly, I won't even consider an i7 860 for 1156. If some wants HT, 1366 platform will cost the same with better performance.

As for Gulftown, the first version will be Extreme but eventually non-extreme versions will be released, may still be $500 though :^P

Sandy Bridge will be the new LGA 775 in 2011. So everyone should keep their chipset upgrades to a minimum because 1366 and 1156 production will be cut/reduced at the end of 2010.
 
Last edited:
Hmm. The Q9550 isn't showing on MC's website. This sucks. Was going to buy one tomorrow.
 
WorldExclusive said:
Excatly, I won't even consider an i7 860 for 1156. If some wants HT, 1366 platform will cost the same with better performance.

As for Gulftown, the first version will be Extreme but eventually non-extreme versions will be released, may still be $500 though :^P

Sandy Bridge will be the new LGA 775 in 2011. So everyone should keep their chipset upgrades to a minimum because 1366 and 1156 production will be cut/reduced at the end of 2010.
Click to expand...

What?? Show me a source that confirms that what you just said is true. Right now, I think that that is complete BS.
 
RubbingAlcoholic said:
isn't intel planning to do on-chip integrated video as well sometime soon? i doubt that would run on lga775.
Click to expand...

They are. Apparently that's supposed to be LGA1156 as well, but it will require a new chipset to use the integrated video functionality.
 
Dan_D said:
They are. Apparently that's supposed to be LGA1156 as well, but it will require a new chipset to use the integrated video functionality.
Click to expand...

I'm just wondering how that would work. Is Intel or the mobo manufacturers putting a separate graphics chip on the motherboard or is Intel integrating that into the chipset?

But I guess that really does not apply to many of us since we do not use integrated graphics :)
 
Atl530i said:
I'm just wondering how that would work. Is Intel or the mobo manufacturers putting a separate graphics chip on the motherboard or is Intel integrating that into the chipset?

But I guess that really does not apply to many of us since we do not use integrated graphics :)
Click to expand...

It should tie into the chipset and then like any other integrated device it will have a video port attached to it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top