i5 760 vs i7 930

[guoinc]

my dad has an i5 750, when we connect 6 wifi cameras around house, the videos lag really bad. the videos show 1 minute before somthing happens and while u see people teleporting arcoss the room. i then tried it on my i7 930 and amazingly it didnt lag whatsoever. and because of that, i know the i 7 is faster by miles

if u have the money i7 is the way to go

 

[Bankie]

I know a lot of people turn Turbo off when overclocking but I find it beneficial for my needs because I don't run a lot of massively multithreaded software, and it gives me a good balance between single and multithreaded performance. With my i5 750, my base overclock in the BIOS is 175 x 20 (3.5GHz), and it turbos to x21 (3.67GHz) with 4 cores loaded, x23 (4GHz) with 2 cores loaded and x24 (4.2GHz) with 1 core loaded. This is all at stock volts as well (1.156V in BIOS, dynamically adjusts to ~1.25V when only 1 or 2 cores are loaded). You don't get this sort of flexibility on the i7 platform.

My I7-870 says otherwise.

I could have easily gotten by on the I5 but the brag factor of the I7 was only $60 more (Thank you MicroCenter!). Honestly there's hardly any difference between the stock clocked I7 and my 'antique' Q6600 @ 3.6. In a blind test I doubt I would know which was which unless I was encoding video. I don't think anyone would be disappointed with either the I5 or I7.

 

[Jon55]

my dad has an i5 750, when we connect 6 wifi cameras around house, the videos lag really bad. the videos show 1 minute before somthing happens and while u see people teleporting arcoss the room. i then tried it on my i7 930 and amazingly it didnt lag whatsoever. and because of that, i know the i 7 is faster by miles

if u have the money i7 is the way to go

I feel like there's more to this story other than "it lags, lol".

My I7-870 says otherwise.

I could have easily gotten by on the I5 but the brag factor of the I7 was only $60 more (Thank you MicroCenter!). Honestly there's hardly any difference between the stock clocked I7 and my 'antique' Q6600 @ 3.6. In a blind test I doubt I would know which was which unless I was encoding video. I don't think anyone would be disappointed with either the I5 or I7.

You're the second person to claim that the i7 route is only $60 more than the i5 route, so I'll ask you too since I've yet to get a decent response. What exact parts are you comparing? List out both the i5 and i7 setups (meaning at least CPU and Mobo) that show the i7 setup being only $60 more.

 

[mrbigshot]

i7-875k

 

[Bankie]

You're the second person to claim that the i7 route is only $60 more than the i5 route, so I'll ask you too since I've yet to get a decent response. What exact parts are you comparing? List out both the i5 and i7 setups (meaning at least CPU and Mobo) that show the i7 setup being only $60 more.

If you're going with an I7-8xx then the only difference will be the CPU. Hence $60 if you have a nearby Micro Center. About $85 through Newegg if you're choosing between the I5-750 and I7-860.

 

[guoinc]

I feel like there's more to this story other than "it lags, lol".

What do you mean?

 

[harpoon]

My I7-870 says otherwise.

I could have easily gotten by on the I5 but the brag factor of the I7 was only $60 more (Thank you MicroCenter!). Honestly there's hardly any difference between the stock clocked I7 and my 'antique' Q6600 @ 3.6. In a blind test I doubt I would know which was which unless I was encoding video. I don't think anyone would be disappointed with either the I5 or I7.

I was comparing it to the LGA1366 platform, notice the thread title .

Of course, on the LGA1156 platform it comes down to whether HT is worth it for you or not.

The most CPU intensive thing I do (besides running Linx for stability testing ) is gaming, so HT is of no benefit to me. I'd rather put that $60 towards a more powerful graphics card, which would be more beneficial to me...

 

[Makaveli@BETA]

I found it interesting that no one mentioned given the same overclock frequency the i5 solution generally always requires more voltage then the i7 cpu. Yes the i7 will still pull more power at load but once they are both overclocked that gap should get abit smaller not larger.

I had to choose between this in Oct 09 when I was building my rig and I went the i7 route.

Why I want the option of going up to 12GB of ram.

And even tho i'm on a single GPU setup currently I want the extra PCIE bandwidth available to me for add on cards.

The i7 boards just felt more solid to me and didn't look as cheap as the i5 models.

At that time there was much better choices in coolers available than for the P55 chipset.

Also at the time you had alot of socket burn issues with the p55 chipset so I just stayed clear of them in 2009. Haven't heard of this since so probably a moot point now.

Also can I ask what the heck you were doing in your office on the machine that it was generating so much heat that it was unbearable? I don't see how going with the i5 doing the same thing will magically produce way less heat. The difference at load is like 60Watts.

You really can go either way on this build money will be the most important factor.

However at the end of the day the i7 route is the highend system for a reason and i5 is mid range for a reason its up to you if those reasons match up with your needs.

 

[harpoon]

I found it interesting that no one mentioned given the same overclock frequency the i5 solution generally always requires more voltage then the i7 cpu. Yes the i7 will still pull more power at load but once they are both overclocked that gap should get abit smaller not larger.

Hmm... that's interesting. What kind of voltages do i7s typically need for say, 4GHz? My i5 750 is stable at 4GHz with 1.23V and 3.7GHz at stock voltage (1.156V), and thats on a low end Gigabyte P55-UD3 mobo. If I used a UD4/UD5 with more VRMs I might need even less voltage as the power delivery is cleaner.

I realise my chip is probably an above average overclocker though, most i5s need 1.3 - 1.4V for 4GHz.

 

[Mr. K6]

I found it interesting that no one mentioned given the same overclock frequency the i5 solution generally always requires more voltage then the i7 cpu. Yes the i7 will still pull more power at load but once they are both overclocked that gap should get abit smaller not larger.

Nope:
i5 - http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i5-750-overclock,2438-11.html
i7 - http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/overclock-core-i7,2268-10.html

 

[Makaveli@BETA]

Thanks for the links but I went thru all this in 2009 before my build I've seen that already.

And what i've said is based on user experience and people i've talked to.

Also you should never based a judgement on one single review!

And as harpoon has shown there are exceptions to the rule.

 

[Mr. K6]

Thanks for the links but I went thru all this in 2009 before my build I've seen that already.

And what i've said is based on user experience and people i've talked to.

Also you should never based a judgement on one single review!

And as harpoon has shown there are exceptions to the rule.

This is something that isn't proven by subjective "user experience" - it's pretty simple physics. Even though the i5 750 requires a higher voltage to get to 4.0GHz, it still does not consume more power than the i7 platform, and proportionally actually consumes less than when both were compared at stock. If you have a review or some proof that shows otherwise, please post it.

 

[Bankie]

I was comparing it to the LGA1366 platform, notice the thread title .

Of course, on the LGA1156 platform it comes down to whether HT is worth it for you or not.

The most CPU intensive thing I do (besides running Linx for stability testing ) is gaming, so HT is of no benefit to me. I'd rather put that $60 towards a more powerful graphics card, which would be more beneficial to me...

Well my post was in response to the guy saying you don't get the high turbo modes and low power usage with an I7 platform. I was just pointing out that that's not the case since the I7 is also available on 1156.

And you didn't list purchasing a video card in your build so I assumed you had one you wanted to use. In my house that extra money needs to be spent at build time because the wife ain't going to let me drop another $200 3 months down the line when I just spent $500 upgrading everything else.

 

[Makaveli@BETA]

This is something that isn't proven by subjective "user experience" - it's pretty simple physics. Even though the i5 750 requires a higher voltage to get to 4.0GHz, it still does not consume more power than the i7 platform, and proportionally actually consumes less than when both were compared at stock. If you have a review or some proof that shows otherwise, please post it.

If you read my post I clearly said the i7 will still consume more power but the i5 requires more voltage to get there which from what i've seen is correct. And it will slowly close the gap between them at full load, but not erase it.

I never said the overclocked i5 will consume more power so there is no point for me to search for reviews of this.

And are you trying to tell me the subjective "user experience" of overclocking i7 chips from users on this forum and others means nothing?

 

[Tudz]

I found it interesting that no one mentioned given the same overclock frequency the i5 solution generally always requires more voltage then the i7 cpu. Yes the i7 will still pull more power at load but once they are both overclocked that gap should get abit smaller not larger.

I had to choose between this in Oct 09 when I was building my rig and I went the i7 route.

Why I want the option of going up to 12GB of ram.

...

The i7 boards just felt more solid to me and didn't look as cheap as the i5 models.

My i5 750 gets to about 3.9GHz with similar voltage to the i7 930s I've tested. To get to 4+ GHZ the i5 750 does require a bit more, but that might just be my particular i5. Also, aren't the 1156 CPUs rated to a higher voltage anyway? So if its rated higher, do you really care if its higher in the end? Even with a higher voltage the i5 750 runs a lot cooler than a 1366 i7.

Regarding the boards "feeling more solid"... I dont really agree. I've set up 5 i7 930s on X58A-UD3R they all struggled to get above a BCLK above 180-190 when using 12gb ram without bucketloads of VTT, whilst my i5 750 on a P55A-UD3 easily reaches 200 BCLK with barely any modification of voltage even though its using 4 sticks of 2gb for a total of 8gb.

That's given the P55A-UD3 cost me around $150AUD while the X58A-UD3R was more like $260AUD.

And even tho i'm on a single GPU setup currently I want the extra PCIE bandwidth available to me for add on cards.

Hardocp in their recent review of PCIE bandwidth have shown that even with the highest end cards available at this time, 8x/8x is basically identical to 16x/16x and really even 4x/4x isn't all that bad.

If you're going something like triple SLI than yeah sure go the 1366... but if you're going triple SLI you probably dont care about money, practicality or heat.

I still think you're better off spending the extra money on a better GPU or an SSD. If you're already buying the best GPU you want and have more money to spend, then you go for the i7 Or if you do tasks where the HT and triple channel will help you out of course.

 

[ex0du5]

I've got 3 questions floating around in my head right now.

1. Can I tolerate the heat/power of an i7?
2. Will the features of an i7 benefit me now...in the future?
3. Are those features worth another GTX 460 or an SSD?

Thanks for all the votes guys/gals. I'm leaning towards a chiquita i7?

If going the i7 means you not getting an SSD, then I say dump it right away. You'll see far more benefit from an SSD than you will an i7. For 99% of gaming, the i5 is just as fast as the i7. Of course, you also want to keep it in line with the rest of the system.

 

[Hulk]

just wait for the next generation CPUs, they are supposed to hit 5Ghz ON AIR, they will totally blow away i7s.

 

[ex0du5]

my dad has an i5 750, when we connect 6 wifi cameras around house, the videos lag really bad. the videos show 1 minute before somthing happens and while u see people teleporting arcoss the room. i then tried it on my i7 930 and amazingly it didnt lag whatsoever. and because of that, i know the i 7 is faster by miles

if u have the money i7 is the way to go

This has to be a joke, right?

just wait for the next generation CPUs, they are supposed to hit 5Ghz ON AIR, they will totally blow away i7s.

Got a source for that?

 

[Makaveli@BETA]

My i5 750 gets to about 3.9GHz with similar voltage to the i7 930s I've tested. To get to 4+ GHZ the i5 750 does require a bit more, but that might just be my particular i5. Also, aren't the 1156 CPUs rated to a higher voltage anyway? So if its rated higher, do you really care if its higher in the end? Even with a higher voltage the i5 750 runs a lot cooler than a 1366 i7.

Regarding the boards "feeling more solid"... I dont really agree. I've set up 5 i7 930s on X58A-UD3R they all struggled to get above a BCLK above 180-190 when using 12gb ram without bucketloads of VTT, whilst my i5 750 on a P55A-UD3 easily reaches 200 BCLK with barely any modification of voltage even though its using 4 sticks of 2gb for a total of 8gb.

That's given the P55A-UD3 cost me around $150AUD while the X58A-UD3R was more like $260AUD.



Hardocp in their recent review of PCIE bandwidth have shown that even with the highest end cards available at this time, 8x/8x is basically identical to 16x/16x and really even 4x/4x isn't all that bad.

If you're going something like triple SLI than yeah sure go the 1366... but if you're going triple SLI you probably dont care about money, practicality or heat.

I still think you're better off spending the extra money on a better GPU or an SSD. If you're already buying the best GPU you want and have more money to spend, then you go for the i7 Or if you do tasks where the HT and triple channel will help you out of course.

I'm not sure if the 1156 are rated for a higher voltage but that is an interesting question.

As the 12GB's point you bring up more memory will always stress the system and reduces overclocks. The next question is if you had dropped the i7 rig down to 8GB's of ram would you have noticed the same limitation or would it have been equal? However this is kinda of an apple vs orange situation as we are comparing tripple channel to Dual channel and i'm sure the IMC on either cpu will be slightly different because of this fact.

Next point... When I said add on cards I meant add on cards not videocards! I agree with the 8x 8x configuration doesn't really cause a drop in performance but i'm referring to PCIE SATA raid cards etc.

And for the feel of the board that is very subjective and kind of each to his own because what we like in boards and how we rate them will be different for each person based on experience and other factors.


I think the more post we have from users using either config will provide good information for the OP and anyone else visiting so lets keep it coming with the different user experiences.

 

[Jon55]

If you're going with an I7-8xx then the only difference will be the CPU. Hence $60 if you have a nearby Micro Center. About $85 through Newegg if you're choosing between the I5-750 and I7-860.

Ah true I forgot the i7 8xx series uses the same socket as the i5. Anyone recommend a good i7 8xx CPU?

 

[Jodiuh]

If going the i7 means you not getting an SSD, then I say dump it right away.

I'll be waiting for the new Intel's either way. But I was just giving examples of what another $150 could be used for. We all know an i5 SSD or i5 SLI 460's would be quite a bit more fun to work or play with than an i7 HDD, single 460.

Thanks for all the extra comments guys. My 760 gets here sometime today and I'm hoping it's a good ocer on low volts. Still gotta pick up a GPU from Fry's, so I might wait til tomorrow's ad comes out. A pair of 1GB 460's would be nice, but only if they have a great deal on them. Fat chance, I know.

Also can I ask what the heck you were doing in your office on the machine that it was generating so much heat that it was unbearable?

Minesweeper. Sometimes a little browsing if I can handle it. You don't live in Phoenix, do you?

 

[tlbig10]

Also can I ask what the heck you were doing in your office on the machine that it was generating so much heat that it was unbearable? I don't see how going with the i5 doing the same thing will magically produce way less heat. The difference at load is like 60Watts.

You obviously don't live in Arizona... while it may be a 60W difference, if you have to drop your thermostat down two degrees to compensate for the extra heat, that's where you're going to see it hit your pocketbook.

 

[vengence]

Got a source for that?

I don't have the link handy, but I've seen that forum post. It seems legit.

 

[vengence]

You obviously don't live in Arizona... while it may be a 60W difference, if you have to drop your thermostat down two degrees to compensate for the extra heat, that's where you're going to see it hit your pocketbook.

I live in North Texas and I don't have to adjust the AC depending on if I have my whole computer on or not, we get 20-30 days a year of 100+ and that's ~400W loaded.

 

[tlbig10]

I live in North Texas and I don't have to adjust the AC depending on if I have my whole computer on or not, we get 20-30 days a year of 100+ and that's ~400W loaded.

We should stop throwing around watts and talk about actual temperatures. (Hypothetical) If a loaded i7 runs at 90C and an i5 runs at 60C, you're going to feel a difference in the room.

 

[unhap]

what socket will be the future of intel?

 

[Jodiuh]

...North Texas...we get 20-30 days a year of 100+

Exactly, North Texas isn't Phoenix. We get about 4~5 months of 100+ here. Sometimes 2 months of 110+.

 

[DaNotoriousDOM]

We should stop throwing around watts and talk about actual temperatures. (Hypothetical) If a loaded i7 runs at 90C and an i5 runs at 60C, you're going to feel a difference in the room.

That means it's cheaper to run a i7 up north. My PC often doubles as a room heater. I don't have to run my heat as much. I save a boat load in the winter.

 

[Mr. K6]

If you read my post I clearly said the i7 will still consume more power but the i5 requires more voltage to get there which from what i've seen is correct. And it will slowly close the gap between them at full load, but not erase it.

I just provided a link that show that this isn't true, and that the gap actually widens as you overclock the chips further. Look over the review again.

And are you trying to tell me the subjective "user experience" of overclocking i7 chips from users on this forum and others means nothing?

If they keep saying things that are incorrect, yes .

We should stop throwing around watts and talk about actual temperatures. (Hypothetical) If a loaded i7 runs at 90C and an i5 runs at 60C, you're going to feel a difference in the room.

That's a basic thermodynamics misconception. Watts is what matters as it's the actual amount of heat you're putting in the room. The temperature the processor runs at means little.

That means it's cheaper to run a i7 up north. My PC often doubles as a room heater. I don't have to run my heat as much. I save a boat load in the winter.

Unless you're confined to your office and use the PC as a spot heater (which I do) or you have a very flexible HVAC system, you aren't saving money. Electrical heating is one of the most inefficient heating methods available.

 

[Jon55]

Thanks for all the extra comments guys. My 760 gets here sometime today and I'm hoping it's a good ocer on low volts.

Let us know how it goes and how the CPU works out.

 

[Koko56]

Let us know how it goes and how the CPU works out.

I also would like some pic pls.

 

[Bankie]

Ah true I forgot the i7 8xx series uses the same socket as the i5. Anyone recommend a good i7 8xx CPU?

Just like the I5-7xx and the I7-9xx, the I7-8xx are all good CPUs.

The main difference between the processors in the same family is only going to be a couple hundred mhz at most anyway.

 

[Jodiuh]

That means it's cheaper to run a i7 up north. My PC often doubles as a room heater. I don't have to run my heat as much. I save a boat load in the winter.

Lol...you have a good point though. A long night of gaming doesn't upset your thermal balance. Kick ass!

Let us know how it goes and how the CPU works out.

Will do!

I also would like some pic pls.

Here's some of the Venomous next to the old TRUE. TR has come a LONNNNNG way in packaging. It looks like it's got ~5 less plates, but more surface area per plate. It's also got more space between the plates so lower RPM fans, maybe even the Slipstream will do ok on this sink. I definitely like the looks better, it seems more menacing.

Venomous X - Picasa Album - 17 pics

 

[Makaveli@BETA]

I'll be waiting for the new Intel's either way. But I was just giving examples of what another $150 could be used for. We all know an i5 SSD or i5 SLI 460's would be quite a bit more fun to work or play with than an i7 HDD, single 460.

Thanks for all the extra comments guys. My 760 gets here sometime today and I'm hoping it's a good ocer on low volts. Still gotta pick up a GPU from Fry's, so I might wait til tomorrow's ad comes out. A pair of 1GB 460's would be nice, but only if they have a great deal on them. Fat chance, I know.


Minesweeper. Sometimes a little browsing if I can handle it. You don't live in Phoenix, do you?

You obviously don't live in Arizona... while it may be a 60W difference, if you have to drop your thermostat down two degrees to compensate for the extra heat, that's where you're going to see it hit your pocketbook.

Nope I live in Southern Ontario Canada so heat is not too much of an issue for me except in the summer months and even then I have a good cooler on the processor and plenty of case fans so when the temp does go up in the summer computers heat increase up to 5-10c and it you won't notice it in the room unless i'm folding with the windows shut and the door shut.

But that will happen to any thing that produces heat in a small room with no air coming in or air going out.

 

[Makaveli@BETA]

I just provided a link that show that this isn't true, and that the gap actually widens as you overclock the chips further. Look over the review again.

If they keep saying things that are incorrect, yes .

Yes you did post a link and I read it

I don't normally use Tomshardware but lets begin.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i5-750-overclock,2438-4.html

This review here they need 1.32v to hit 3.8 and 1.45 to reach 4.0.

This review here done on a few boards

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2009/09/21/overclocking-intel-s-core-i5-750/1

"CPU Voltage: This is often given as either an offset or absolute voltages, depending on the motherboard. Personally we prefer absolute voltages for a heavy overclock, but for a "light" mid-3GHz overclock an offset of up to +300mV will do. Even stock voltages will go quite far with a good CPU. For a heavy 4GHz overclock ~1.38 to 1.425V is normal, and above 4GHz usually the recommendation from motherboard vendors is anything from 1.45V-1.5V. That is certainly getting dangerous for long term use rather than just benchmarking, and it's very difficult to keep cool. Of course, your mileage will vary mostly on this factor so as a rule of thumb start aim for the least voltage you can get away with."

This review

http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.p...k=view&id=361&Itemid=63&limit=1&limitstart=11

great overlock but 1.488 to get there.


Power Consumption

http://www.trustedreviews.com/cpu-memory/review/2009/09/08/Intel-Core-i7-870---Core-i5-750/p12

http://www.anandtech.com/show/2832/17

This anandtech review also show 1.4 vcore to hit 3.9 on the i5 750.

I provided a few different links to a better overall look at it instead of one site.

Another problem is there are so many variables every cpu is different some overclock better than others some require more voltage others don't. Each tester might be using something different to get load power, some are testing from the wall socket for power consumption some are not.

And I agree with you maybe the gap doesn't shrink as much as I thought but I certainly won't take one review from tomshardware as a final answer.

 

[Mr. K6]

Yes you did post a link and I read it

Then you didn't understand it.

I don't normally use Tomshardware but lets begin.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i5-750-overclock,2438-4.html

This review here they need 1.32v to hit 3.8 and 1.45 to reach 4.0.

This review here done on a few boards

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2009/09/21/overclocking-intel-s-core-i5-750/1

"CPU Voltage: This is often given as either an offset or absolute voltages, depending on the motherboard. Personally we prefer absolute voltages for a heavy overclock, but for a "light" mid-3GHz overclock an offset of up to +300mV will do. Even stock voltages will go quite far with a good CPU. For a heavy 4GHz overclock ~1.38 to 1.425V is normal, and above 4GHz usually the recommendation from motherboard vendors is anything from 1.45V-1.5V. That is certainly getting dangerous for long term use rather than just benchmarking, and it's very difficult to keep cool. Of course, your mileage will vary mostly on this factor so as a rule of thumb start aim for the least voltage you can get away with."

This review

http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.p...k=view&id=361&Itemid=63&limit=1&limitstart=11

great overlock but 1.488 to get there.


Power Consumption

http://www.trustedreviews.com/cpu-memory/review/2009/09/08/Intel-Core-i7-870---Core-i5-750/p12

http://www.anandtech.com/show/2832/17

This anandtech review also show 1.4 vcore to hit 3.9 on the i5 750.

I provided a few different links to a better overall look at it instead of one site.

Another problem is there are so many variables every cpu is different some overclock better than others some require more voltage others don't. Each tester might be using something different to get load power, some are testing from the wall socket for power consumption some are not.

And I agree with you maybe the gap doesn't shrink as much as I thought but I certainly won't take one review from tomshardware as a final answer.

None of those links proved anything you said or challenged any of my points. I posted an article as an example of a simple concept that I was (apparently) not getting across. It seems I still haven't gotten it across. The i5 750 is a 95W TDP part while the i7 920/930 is a 130W TDP part. Overclocking increases power consumption linearly with clock speed and quadratically with voltage (approximately). You can't magically make a part more efficient by overclocking it - on the contrary, you will always make it less efficient as far as performance/watt is concerned. Therefore, as you an overclock an i5 750 and an i7 930, the power consumption gap between the two will actually increase as you increase clockspeed and voltage. That said, it is well known that the i7 9xx parts can overclock higher because they can better tolerate high VTT voltage, and sure, if an i5 750 hitting a voltage wall is compared to a similarly clocked i7 9xx that hasn't well yes, it's possible that the gap between them may close in that short range. Kind of a moot point in my book, and you said so yourself as well.

 

[Makaveli@BETA]

You can't magically make a part more efficient by overclocking it.

I agree with what you are saying and aware of the TDP differences 130 > 95 !!

I posted the links because my first point was in general the 1156 chips require more vcore to meet the same overclock as the 1366 models.

I never said total power consumption was going to be less that would be impossible.

 

[Mr. K6]

I agree with what you are saying and aware of the TDP differences 130 > 95 !!

I posted the links because my first point was in general the 1156 chips require more vcore to meet the same overclock as the 1366 models.

I never said total power consumption was going to be less that would be impossible.

I agree. I think we may be saying the same thing but coming at it from different angles .

 

[Makaveli@BETA]

Indeed



Question for you actually i'm looking to upgrade my case possibly to the one you have can pick it up for around 79.99 on sale did you enjoy the build process in it?

I got a 6 knob fan controller so thinking of replacing the stock fans also with some Scythe ones.

How is the air flow?

 

[Jodiuh]

Canada...hot...lol.

Well, stuff just got here w/ typical crap packaging from the egg...only the cardboard of the box supported the boards PCB on its journey. I remember when they used to pad all the way around everything...several times.

I shed a little tear upon opening the box and discovering a foxconn socket. One of the reasons I went with this over the gigabyte was because it didnt have the foxconn socket. Oh well, the board says rev 1. 01g, so that's good. One of the stickers was peeled off and it looks kinda used too. Im going on faith that everything will be ok tho, such a hassle to return and I've got 30 days anyway.

The 1156 socket is uber ghetto compared to the 1366's that's for sure. It does not inspire confidence. When delatching the lever, I've got about 1mm of clearance to protect me from scraping the traces on the board. Super lame stuff. Despite being the same price as the gigabyte x58a-ud3r, it certainly does NOT match the quality or have solid connector placements. For example, the EPS 12V's moved over to the right, which means I'm going to need an extension. And the cpu fan header's located below the socket towards the first PCIe instead of up top where I can easily hide the wires. There's no cmos reset on the back...it's tucked away in the far left bottom of the board...the very worst possible place to be in my case. But it doesn't look ridiculous with a baby blue color scheme and turquoise PCB like the gigabyte either. And of course the BIOS doesn't look like it was laid out by a drunk blind crackhead. Can't have it all I suppose.

The RAM looks ridiculously awesome. So much so that everything else sort of falls by the wayside. That it'll run at 1. 35 just adds to the package. Great skill through memory!! Seriously dos that company ever do anything wrong? I've had nothing but grade a product from them.

The chip was born on the 3rd of September and the heatsink's no taller than a dime, hah! It's even smaller than the old wolfdales if you can believe that. Does anyone know why Intel always shoots for the bare minimum cooler?

Core i5 build - Picasa Web Album - 4 pics

ninja EDIT:

How is the air flow?

Not what you wanna hear, but I tried moving from a Stacker 810 to this for ease of moving to LAN's w/ no success. It's small, tight, cramped, louder, and doesn't cool as well either. Sucks carrying a big ridiculous case around, but I'll be damned if I sacrifice cooling, noise, and ease of working inside the case. You might even find a used one for $80. It has wheels man...wheels. It's def pricer, but IMO, a setup as fast as yours deserves a HAF X.