It has to be asked....

caw2007

caw2007

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 8, 2008
Messages
1,970
Sorry if this has been addressed or asked in another thread, I couldn't find one.

Ok, so...now we know more about i7/Nehalem's architecture and how it relates to gaming according to some recent articles, specifically the latest at anandtech.com.

The questions: Do you guys really think it's worth going from 3.0GHz (and much higher) C2D's to i7/Nehalem? If so why?
 
If purely for games and single/dual threaded apps, I wouldn't say so. Games will be GPU limited if you're running your setup correctly (unless you can tell the difference between 160 FPS and 200 FPS at 800×600).

Really, this question needs to include what applications you use and what you do with your computer, or whoever this hypothetical question is regarding.
 
caw2007 said:
The questions: Do you guys really think it's worth going from 3.0GHz (and much higher) C2D's to i7/Nehalem? If so why?
Click to expand...

For gaming? No.

For everything else, it depends, if you're into media encoding or 3D rendering (or anything heaviliy multithreaded basically) Nehalem is probably worth the upgrade.
 
I was asking in relation to gaming. I am curious because I see many posters saying that they are waiting for i7 to build a new gaming rig, when it seems C2D based systems will be even cheaper than they are now and more than powerful enough.

I know rendering/encoding/db folks will have a reason to upgrade but I really wonder why there seems to be some many people waiting to build gaming rigs for i7/Nehalem
 
Do you already have a C2D/C2Q? Do they already play your games in an acceptable manner? If so, don't expect them to stop doing this when i7 comes out.
 
caw2007 said:
I was asking in relation to gaming. I am curious because I see many posters saying that they are waiting for i7 to build a new gaming rig, when it seems C2D based systems will be even cheaper than they are now and more than powerful enough.

I know rendering/encoding/db folks will have a reason to upgrade but I really wonder why there seems to be some many people waiting to build gaming rigs for i7/Nehalem
Click to expand...

Because people want the latest and greatest, no matter if it's actually a good value or not.
 
Most of the people who get one right away will do it becase:
A: they dont know any better
B: they think think they are futureproofing
C: they run some app where they think a few % is worth the dough
D: they want a new toy to play with
 
E. They dont have a Core system yet
F. They DO run some app where they KNOW a lot of % is worth the dough
G. It IS future proofing
H. They are the same people that realized dual was better single when people on their singles kept on running off at the mouth and once again during the, still pointlessly ongoing, dual vs. quad discussions
 
I'll keep my 4.4GHz E8600 and cheap DDR2 thanks. I don't use multithreaded apps, so I think my gaming rig will be good to go for quite a while...

Now at work, with my 20 or so VMWare ESX server beasts...I'll be looking at i7 very soon.
 
If you application is not CPU limited now, how is a more powerful processor truly going to help you out? That is the question we all need to be starting with. If you are NOT CPU limited currently, then there might very well be value in moving to Nehalem. If your CPU or its memory subsystem is not your bottleneck, then it is highly unlikely that a faster or wider CPU is going to solve your issues.
 
Hmm I'm really unsure what to do after this new info. I am running on an AMD FX-53, I built 4 years ago. Skipped right over the whole C2 Intel chips. Not sure if I should just pick up a really good C2Q or wait the few months and get the i7.

Hopefully more reviews keep popping up in the next month or so.
 
I don't think Nehalem will be "affordable" this year.....that is just my guess. But if you already waited this long why not stick it out. A good video card is still likely to get you were you need to be in terms of gaming. If you do a lot of content creation, probably worth the wait as well. Hell who knows, if Core 2 gets a lot cheaper, that would be some great deals.
 
Yeah, I think Kyle got turned around there in his statement.

@ Zero82z: I wasn't asking the question for myself personally, and I'm not running "older" systems by any stretch of the imagination. I just thought it's be nice to get some perspectives on what the real benefits (if any) for gamers could be with the i7 chips. We tend to be the early adopters and I'm thinking this won't be the "game-changing" performance gain we saw when things went from K8 to C2D.
 
DemonDiablo said:
G. It IS future proofing
Click to expand...

If you happen to need a new system after Core i7 launches (ie, your current system is too slow), then getting Core i7 rather than, say, an E8400 would indeed be future-proofing (well, future-resisting). But upgrading from a perfectly decent system just because Core i7 is the latest and greatest isn't future-proofing at all. The same applied to people who decided they really needed to buy DDR3 because it was available, even though they had fine DDR2. You just end up paying early-adopter prices and missing out on better prices and improved components later.

It's surprising just how many threads there are about "should I upgrade x?", when the answer is always "only if what you have isn't good enough". I personally think that very few Core 2 owners should consider upgrading to Core i7 as soon as it becomes available, and those who will benefit from its improved multithreading will already know who they are.
 
DemonDiablo said:
E. They dont have a Core system yet
Click to expand...

It's getting better for a Core system using an existing LGA775 setup than ever before. Prices are dropping, 45nm processors are poppin! For games, ironically the newer penryn procs will actually outpeform the first gen of Core i7 setups.

F. They DO run some app where they KNOW a lot of % is worth the dough
Click to expand...

Depends on the "some apps". Again the perfomance of the Penryn 65 and 45nm procs are no slouch. In addition, several software companies are releasing video applications, like transcoding, that utilize CUDA like technology to let our highly parallized streaming architectures of DX10 GPUs to do the work and reduce the Core 2/Core i7 impact on the result. Sure this is a new market, but I expect it to take hold and grow quickly in terms of video transcoding and editing.

G. It IS future proofing
Click to expand...

To go with the very first chipset for a new CPU? When taking into play the new CPU and MOBO's that will be released and the learning curve of the impact on board layout, you sure this is future proofing? Might be that it'll work fine, but the second set of chipsets and whatnot have one going, DOH! Let the reviews speak for themselves for a couple months before pulling the trigger at least. And I mean on shipping product, not prerelease samples Intel sends out before the official launch for the reviewers to play with.

Remember the Winchester version of the AMD Athlon 64? The integrated memory controller wasn't all that and required slower performance when all four slots were populated. Overclockers were better pleased with the Venice and other releases when this integrated memory controller issue was addressed.

This is the first time that Intel is playing with integration of the memory controller on their CPU for consumer based PC's. What's the chance that there'll be significant improvements in the next stepping of the i7 for example? There were a number of improvements in each stepping from the competition when they delt with integrated memory controllers.

H. They are the same people that realized dual was better single when people on their singles kept on running off at the mouth and once again during the, still pointlessly ongoing, dual vs. quad discussions
Click to expand...


Totally different discussion and not an apples to apples comparison in the least. Core 2 Quad is going to have the same number of cores as the i7 initially. It's more a discussion of DDR3/tripple channel memory and the IMC features taking i7 into the lead in the future. As they ramp them up in performance. The intially released procs are still in the range of the penryns. Intel is just transitioning to the new platform and it will be all that in a couple more releases.

Trust me, I'll be Core i7 eventually, but I'll let all the early adapters work out the issues that then get corrected and improved upon in the next processor stepping or die shrink.
 
I don't see myself needing a CPU upgrade for quite some time. Though I am going to upgrade my tried and true 19" LCD to a 24" so GPU upgrades are going to happen often.
 
caw2007 said:
@ Zero82z: I wasn't asking the question for myself personally, and I'm not running "older" systems by any stretch of the imagination. I just thought it's be nice to get some perspectives on what the real benefits (if any) for gamers could be with the i7 chips. We tend to be the early adopters and I'm thinking this won't be the "game-changing" performance gain we saw when things went from K8 to C2D.
Click to expand...

Whoops, for some reason I thought the guy who chimed in with the FX-53 was you. Sorry about that :D.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top