i5 discussion thread

K

Kendrak

[H]ard|DCer of the Year 2009
Joined
Aug 29, 2001
Messages
21,141
After reading Kyles report and a bit of talking in the related thread it seems that the ppd preformance of an i5 should be similar to an i7 with HT turned off.

Does anyone with an i7 have thoes numbers? It might be very helpful to the community planning upgrades.

Also are there other questions that perspective i5 owners have?
 
Except a 920 is $280 at least, unless you're buying it used. The platform adds quite a bit of cost too. The most interesting chips are the lGA1156 i7s, their performance is just as good as their 1366 cousins (probably slightly better stock because of more aggressive turbo modes). My Q6600 powered Linux desktop took a dive recently, lost the motherboard. I'm seriously thinking about building an LGA1156/Core i7 860 box in it's place.
 
nitrobass24 said:
Seems to me that an i5 isnt really much cheaper than an i7.

$200 for a 920 isnt bad at all.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking that the i5 cost at launch are high compared to what you get with an i7. However a month or two later with lower prices, and a Bing cash back deal, i5 might be a sweet spot for price.

I also want to see what the power draw is. I have a feeling that i5 pulls a fair bit less power (and I could very wrong) and if that is the case might be better for a main rig/folding rig.
 
Yeah, I bought both my i7s at MicroCenter for $199.99. It's in-store only, though, so you need to have one nearby.

The problem with the i7 has never really been the cost of the proc. It's that there are no good cheap mobos or DDR3 RAM, so you have to add $100 or more to the total system cost. It's getting better, though.
 
SazanEyes said:
Yeah, I bought both my i7s at MicroCenter for $199.99. It's in-store only, though, so you need to have one nearby.

The problem with the i7 has never really been the cost of the proc. It's that there are no good cheap mobos or DDR3 RAM, so you have to add $100 or more to the total system cost. It's getting better, though.
Click to expand...

i5s are still DDR3 so no real savings there
 
Lots of people seem down on the i5. After launch when prices settle seems to me it will be a nice upgrade for c2d users.
Posted via [H] Mobile Device
 
I couldn't get the 4.0Ghz with HT on due to heat problems. It is 80F outside and I've got the windows open.
My power bill is high enough without me running the AC all the time :)


3.7Ghz with HT on
two notfred's with -smp 4 @ 4582 and 4582 for 9164 PPD

24yxtlj.jpg


3.7Ghz without HT
one notfred's with -smp 4 @ 5967 PPD

208wahh.jpg


4.0Ghz without HT
one notfred's with -smp 4 @ 7438 PPD

21owvf5.jpg
 
Wow, 1500 ppd jump with a .3ghz move in CPU clock.

In any case it looks like one might expect an i5 to do 6k ppd with a good OC.

If that is the case, it doesn't even come close to justifying the extra cost over building a q6600 rig for 1/3 the cost and getting 5k ppd.
 
Yeah, my upgrade cost $485 for the cpu/mobo/ram. I wouldnt have gotten it if the money had come out of my pocket.
 
I think the 800 sequence i7s are going to be where it's at. There is absolutely no reason at all that they'll be any slower when it comes to FAH (or anything else really) than the 900 sequence chips.
 
nitrobass24 said:
Seems to me that an i5 isnt really much cheaper than an i7.

$200 for a 920 isnt bad at all.
Click to expand...

the i5 cost will be pretty much cut in half within a couple months.. it has to compete with the i7 and the phenom II.. which i figure the phenom II 965 and the current i5's on the market will be neck and neck in performance..
 
natermeister said:
I think the 800 sequence i7s are going to be where it's at. There is absolutely no reason at all that they'll be any slower when it comes to FAH (or anything else really) than the 900 sequence chips.
Click to expand...
We'll have to see how prices turn out though. The 800 chips will probably be in the mid-$200s range, which means that it won't be that much cheaper to go that route compared to an LGA1366 build with a 920.
sirmonkey1985 said:
the i5 cost will be pretty much cut in half within a couple months.. it has to compete with the i7 and the phenom II.. which i figure the phenom II 965 and the current i5's on the market will be neck and neck in performance..
Click to expand...
The current C2Qs have better clock for clock performance than the Phenom II chips. The i5 CPUs by all accounts will have better performance per clock and better overclocking potential than C2Qs, so what gives you the impression that they'll be neck and neck with Phenom IIs?
 
Zero82z said:
We'll have to see how prices turn out though. The 800 chips will probably be in the mid-$200s range, which means that it won't be that much cheaper to go that route compared to an LGA1366 build with a 920.

The current C2Qs have better clock for clock performance than the Phenom II chips. The i5 CPUs by all accounts will have better performance per clock and better overclocking potential than C2Qs, so what gives you the impression that they'll be neck and neck with Phenom IIs?
Click to expand...


the only c2q that has better clock for clock performance over the phenom II's is the q9770.. and thats still a thousand dollar chip.. and the q9650 only beats the phenom II's when using ddr3 memory.. but i havent read up on the reviews for the 965 so i dont know what improvements that chip has over the 940 and 955.. though i doubt there is really anything since its a 140w chip.. which would mean its just an overclocked 955..

id say the biggest impression they would be neck and neck is the fact that the i5 went back to the standard dual channel ddr3.. though memory wise it will murder the phenom II's but thats due to the phenom II's using a DDR2 and DDR3 IMC.. also im not sure if they neutered the QPI or anything for the i5 or if they used the same settings the i7 has.. though im waiting for hardocp's review before i make a hard set determination since their reviews tend to never match anyone elses..


i still think intel shot them selves in the foot with the pricing of the i7 trying to make it competitive with the phenom II.. which leaves the i5 having to be priced way to low..


*reading the reviews right now.. hadnt checked the front page til just now..


hmmm quite interesting that the i7 hyperthreading has almost little to no benefit over the i5... well then i guess the phenom II and i5 wont be as close in performance as i was hoping..
 
Last edited:
sirmonkey1985 said:
the only c2q that has better clock for clock performance over the phenom II's is the q9770.. and thats still a thousand dollar chip.. and the q9650 only beats the phenom II's when using ddr3 memory.. but i havent read up on the reviews for the 965 so i dont know what improvements that chip has over the 940 and 955.. though i doubt there is really anything since its a 140w chip.. which would mean its just an overclocked 955..
Click to expand...
C2Qs are all architecturally identical, so if the Q9770 is clock-for-clock faster than a Phenom II, that means all 45nm C2Qs are as well (which is indeed the case). And the 965 is just a higher-clocked Phenom II. AMD will not be making any architectural changes until their Bulldozer architecture.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top