Only $180 difference between i7 & i5 correct?

X

xeddex

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 14, 2005
Messages
147
Like a lot of folks I'm trying to decide to go either i7 or i5. I was 100% sold on i5 but then I started breaking down the pricing and now I'm not so sure. Here's my thinking.

GPU/monitor/psu/case/... - you'll use the same no matter which one you pick so don't figure them in.

mobo: x58 vs p55 = It looks like around +$50 for a x58 with the same features as a p55

cpu: i7-920 vs i5-720 = +$80 for the i7 if you can't get to a B&M for a deal and have to order online otherwise it's a wash.

memory: 3x2GB vs 2x2GB = +$50 for the 1 extra stick

So the i7 vs i5 looks to add up to around a ballpark $180 difference. For that $180 you get 2 things... significant memory bandwidth increase for apps where it matters and a socket that allows a possible upgrade path to the 6cores when they come out.

So if ~$200 is a deal breaker for you then you'll be going the i5 route. If ~$200 is doable for you then the 2GB memory bump + bandwidth + socket upgrade looks like it's worth it to me since it would translate into an additional 1.5 years of use out of the system (for me at least).

thoughts? (All this goes out the window if/when the i7-920 disappears. Anyone know when that's supposed to happen? I may need to buy now and build later.)
 
After comparing i5 750 and i7 920 gaming benchmarks... that $180 looks nice in my pocket for the 1-2% gain you get going i7. i7 just means spending more later because everything cost more. People went q6600 for 'future proofing' and look where those dolts are now? Spending more now doesn't always translate to savings later. It also depends on your needs.
 
bigdogchris said:
After comparing i5 750 and i7 920 gaming benchmarks... that $180 looks nice in my pocket for the 1-2% gain you get going i7. i7 just means spending more later because everything cost more. People went q6600 for 'future proofing' and look where those dolts are now? Spending more now doesn't always translate to savings later. It also depends on your needs.
Click to expand...

My Q6600 has lasted me almost 2.5 years. Truth be told, I'm still very happy with performance and there's no game or app that I've played/used where I have been disappointed with the performance. That said, I am getting ready to upgrade to an i7. Not because I need to, but because I want to.
 
Colt___45 said:
My Q6600 has lasted me almost 2.5 years. Truth be told, I'm still very happy with performance and there's no game or app that I've played/used where I have been disappointed with the performance. That said, I am getting ready to upgrade to an i7. Not because I need to, but because I want to.
Click to expand...

QFT. I'm int he same boat. @ q6600 for a while and not upgrading for a while :)
 
bigdogchris said:
After comparing i5 750 and i7 920 gaming benchmarks... that $180 looks nice in my pocket for the 1-2% gain you get going i7. i7 just means spending more later because everything cost more. People went q6600 for 'future proofing' and look where those dolts are now? Spending more now doesn't always translate to savings later. It also depends on your needs.
Click to expand...

You'd be better off with a Q9XX0 save you more money :rolleyes: people do more than just gaming may be you only game but there are people who use the computer for other things.
 
bigdogchris said:
People went q6600 for 'future proofing' and look where those dolts are now? Spending more now doesn't always translate to savings later. It also depends on your needs.
Click to expand...

i just checked my newegg order, and i've been running my q6600 since oct 2007!!! two years for a cpu mb and ram. i would say that it was worth it.
 
bigdogchris said:
After comparing i5 750 and i7 920 gaming benchmarks... that $180 looks nice in my pocket for the 1-2% gain you get going i7. i7 just means spending more later because everything cost more. People went q6600 for 'future proofing' and look where those dolts are now? Spending more now doesn't always translate to savings later. It also depends on your needs.
Click to expand...

Like you said, depends on your needs. i7 with HyperThreading destroys i5 handily in heavily threaded functions. Not 1-2%, outright destruction. But yes, most people won't need HT and will only see 5% gain from i7 because of the higher base clock.
 
This is my personal opinion,

I myself upgrade every upgrade every 2-3 years...i take that into account when im going to upgrade...
I upgraded to a core2duo E6400 in Dec2006, almost 3 years ago,the only thing i can upgrade to is a Q9XXX series, so i could get a Q9550 (close to the price of a i5 750, but worse performance) and extend the life of my current pc, but why spend money on something that is about to get the axe? Same thing will happen to me If right now up upgrade to a i7 and want to upgrade 2-3 years down the line....something better will be out, and i doubt it will work with a x58 board.

so what i WILL do is Upgrade to a i5 and use the money to get myself a better GPU. Since the main use for my pc in to play games

But like i said, i dont get the upgrade bug often. Someone who upgrades more often will be better off with the i7
 
I seriously doubt you need either i5 or i7 to run games. But it's new tech and boys like new tech. If you want to brag to your friends while downing a beer how you got ht, go for i7, but i seriously doubt your chances with the ladies will be any higher. I'm getting a xeon w3520, but on asrock x58 extreme to save on money. Also kingmax mars memory works as well as the higher priced chips. Point is, if you want to brake 3d mark record, you need the best. With i7 you will also feel good about yourself for awhile and that's priceless.
 
I personally think buying a computer that you think is future proof should not factor into any buying decision at all. Most people will get 2-3 years out of their cpu, motherboard, and memory and then it will be time to purchase all 3 of these items again. Only once have I ever upgraded a CPU without upgrading the motherboard, and that was dropping in a dual core opteron into a socket 939 system that used a single core cpu for about two years before then.

Right now I have a i7 920 that I bought in May and I will consider the 6 core chips when they come out next year, but since 2011 will probably bring mainstream 8 core chips I will probably decide to save my money for another year as I'm sure the i7 920 won't be showing its age until at least 2011.

For people who are currently rocking the 6xxx series of core 2 duo processors or anything older or less powerful than they are probably ready for an upgrade and socket 1366 i7 does offer the best performance period. The increased performance over the socket 1156 processors may not be enough to justify the increased cost, and for most users the benefits of socket 1366 may not benefit them. No matter which way a person goes if they buy a system today it is going to get them 2-3 years and be a major upgrade over any system purchased 2-3 years ago. I don't think the core 2 quads have nothing left, but I certainly wouldn't recommend getting one today over the i5 or i7.
 
How can you future proof without knowing what the future has in store?

On another note, I bought my i5 setup because the initial cost was what I could afford. I spent $320 on a mobo and processor (already had DDR3 memory). And performance wise, this thing is head-and-shoulders faster then I expected, not to mention its considerably faster then upgrading my previous system to a PII 965.
 
weuntouchable said:
\ I don't think the core 2 quads have nothing left, but I certainly wouldn't recommend getting one today over the i5 or i7.
Click to expand...

I just wanted to highlight this. I think for people looking for an upgrade to the Exxxx or Qxxxx cores should forget about it., Its a short term patch that will maybe last you a a year or so for the same money you could spend for a GPU or SSD or a new CPU which would last you much longer.
 
deff said:
How can you future proof without knowing what the future has in store?.
Click to expand...

The intel 6cores are already confirmed to be x58 board compatible with just a bios update. So I think the only thing a 1366 socket board would have at the time of the 6core launch over what is available now would be working 6G SATA and current x58 board folks could always just buy an add in card if needed. I plan to run a single SSD so 6G SATA is not a concern since it won't saturate. With the Intel roadmap and 1366 socket I think we have a pretty clear idea of around the next 3 years which is about as "future proof" as one could hope for so $100-$180 is worth the gamble on being able to drop in a 6core a year and a half from now in order to extend system life for an additional year and a half in my opinion.
 
At this moment Im torn. I still think gulftown is the way to go, but the more I think about it gulftown won't be out too long before sandy hits, and sandy will be a bigger upgrade (clock v clock) than gulftown. I care about gulftown more for 32nm than for hex-core, and sandy will do that at a cheaper price.

So right now Id say go cheap, unless you really ARE going to use 6 cores (to the point of buying immediately, regardless of the price), just grab a 750 (or clarkdale) and upgrade when sandy hits, end of next year (instead of beginning of next year for gulftown.)
 
xeddex said:
The intel 6cores are already confirmed to be x58 board compatible with just a bios update. So I think the only thing a 1366 socket board would have at the time of the 6core launch over what is available now would be working 6G SATA and current x58 board folks could always just buy an add in card if needed. I plan to run a single SSD so 6G SATA is not a concern since it won't saturate. With the Intel roadmap and 1366 socket I think we have a pretty clear idea of around the next 3 years which is about as "future proof" as one could hope for so $100-$180 is worth the gamble on being able to drop in a 6core a year and a half from now in order to extend system life for an additional year and a half in my opinion.
Click to expand...
That is assuming that a 6 core CPU will offer real world benefits over a 4 core CPU. That is also assuming that there will be reasonably priced 6 core CPUs. The leaked Intel roadmap only shows an EE 6 core chip for the desktop. There very well could be lower binned Xeons that fall into the reachable price realm, but then again there may not. If we never see a 1366 hexa-core CPU for under $500 there is no upgrade path for any user who doesn't have money to burn.
 
Only $180???

You know, people don't shit money. That's a lot of money. I can pay a few bills with $180.
 
hungryJonJon said:
Like you said, depends on your needs. i7 with HyperThreading destroys i5 handily in heavily threaded functions. Not 1-2%, outright destruction. But yes, most people won't need HT and will only see 5% gain from i7 because of the higher base clock.
Click to expand...

In my humble opinion, the use of such strong hyperbole is really not necessary when discussing high-end performance hardware. No i5 or i7 "destroys" any other i5 or i7, no matter how hardcore you consider yourself. Honestly, 20 seconds in a video encoding benchmark? 5-10 frames in a 100+ fps gaming benchmark? What kind of "destruction" are we talking about in the real world, here? And realistically, if you are lucky enough to find one of these almost-mythical "heavily-threaded functions", much less use one on a daily basis, you certainly need not be comparing pros and cons here.

I think performance gains could be considered "noticeable," based on all of the reviews I've read, and it seems to me that for the "average" high-end user, the two processors trade blows depending on the type of application being benched. And certainly some niche users will see good gains for their purposes, but throwing around this kind of language really does get out of hand, in my opinion.

There are far too many variables (regarding the user, and the purpose of his/her system) to say that one processor is significantly better/faster than the other. A stock i5 matches or surpasses a stock i7 in a significant number of real world tests (those which do not employ HT), and especially shines in those tests which allow its Turbo mode to properly kick in (those which employ 1 or 2 cores).

But i7 owners will of course decry this statement as misleading. "Because," they argue, "What self-respecting i7 owner doesn't overclock to +/- 3.5 GHz, anyway!?" To which i5 owners will respond that the i5 is equally capable of being overclocked above 4 GHz, and at a lower TDP. At which time i7 owners lash out with their ready retort regarding QPI.

Triple channel and dual channel.
Triple SLI.
Chipsets.
Motherboard features.
Price/performance.
Blah. Blah. Blah.

This debate is absolutely useless, to me. I plan to go i5, but the reasons are really very personal, subjective, and weak, speaking honestly. Heck, maybe I just like the name i5 better than i7. The i5 is currently $160 at Microcenter, to go along with a CF/SLI-capable GIGABYTE motherboard for $130 (from another online vendor). Add another $100 for RAM. That puts you at $390. Whoopee.

A 1366 system could probably be constructed within striking distance of that price. But I don't want 1366 . . . and that should be the bottom line, for most buyers. If someone believes their price or performance is superior, give them a freaking cookie. Why argue about it?

My last point is a philosophical one, which has been touched on already. The "upgrade path" argument has been made time and again (regarding Gulftown on 1366), and honestly, it seems unlikely to me that it will be a real factor. As one user has posted already . . . the i7's will not begin to show anything close to age by the time Gufltown is released. The smartest 1366 owners will recognize this, and probably pass on a (likely $600-$800+) Gulftown until a bit later.

When they do finally decide to bite (if this ever happens), they will most likely be greeted with a "smorgasboard" of new chipsets, features, options, and cool new tech. This means new motherboards. Will people really want to put a new 6-core processor in their 2-3 year-old X58 board . . . ? That remains to be seen, but I certainly have my doubts.

To me, buying into 1366 right now (with upgrade aspirations) is like stepping onto the lot at a Ferrari dealership. According to most accounts (going along with idea that 920 is being eventually phased out), it is said to be a platform of super-high-end "Extreme Edition"-style processors the likes of the i7 975. For users with such tastes and pocketbooks, great. The 1156 socket is decidedly more Lexus/BMW, as evidenced by the upcoming i3 release. I believe that the 920/750/860 price-point-collision will be the last for Lynnfield and Bloomfield for some time. The two sockets are definitely headed in opposite directions, price-wise.

But again, with "drop-in" upgrades looking to be a thing of pipe dreams, most likely, anyone interested in Gulftown (1156-owner or 1366-owner) will be in nearly the same boat when the time comes - looking for new motherboards, new video cards, and new memory.

So let's all just get the system that best suits our fancy (or with the name we like best), have some S'mores and sing camp songs. :cool:
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I'm poor too (a student), so $180 is hardly "only", that's nearly two months of food purchases for me ;)

It's true about the drop-in upgrades though. I haven't done any drop-in upgrades since the Socket A days I think. Even then it was mostly minor stuff. As I figured that the trend probably will continue - especially as I plan to keep this CPU for some time, and such the next system will probably require another new socket with Sandy Bridge or whatever is suitable at the time - I bought a cheaper rather than a more expensive P55 board. Still does all I need it do. X58 would be way overkill, and way too pricey.

Even while I'm a geek/nerd/whatever, I never fully understood or embraced the "gotta stay on the bleeding edge even if I don't really need it" thing. It seems like a rampant attitude these days - well, I suppose it always has been. For me it's usually something other than raw performance that hooks me. Like a small ION HTPC is oh-god-so-tempting, even when I don't really need one (especially now that my main PC has BD drive)! In general the lure of SFF systems is what caused me to sell my previous system more than any real need to upgrade (although I in fact downgraded temporarily).
 
I'm really torn too.

I feel really burned that my Nvidia 650i chipset can't handle Penryn quad cores. It can take Penryn dual cores, and 65nm quad cores, but no 45nm quad cores, which are the only reasonable upgrade to my Core2 processor. So now that I'm in the market to upgrade again, I'm looking at one thing; longevity.

All I play is WoW mostly, but being an MMO, it's very taxing on a system. I hate walking through an expansion and waiting for the damn game to load. My roommate has a Core i7 920 w/ 6GB DDR3 setup and it just burns through anything like a hot knife through butter. Busy Dalaran? Nnnooo problem. The system doesn't even flinch.

So now I'm torn between three options. There are PII setups, which are the cheapest (though not much cheaper than Intel-1156s), and there are the socket Intel-1366 . While technically slower, the Phenom II platforms still aren't slouches by any means, and given AMD's recent track record of Phenom II motherboard support, socket AM3 still doesn't seem too bad of a platform option. Even despite Phenom II inferiority, I can definitely seen hexacore Phenoms being support on an AM3 platform. I can't, however, really see Intel pushing hexacores on their socket 1156 platform anytime soon. That territory is reserved for socket 1366.

So do you see my dilemma here? The new Core i5 is *awesome*, don't get me wrong, but if you're going to go Intel, you might as well go 1366, which is more expensive. I'd love to just plop a new CPU into this system and call it a day, but now I'm forced to upgrade my entire system just to avoid the recent system debilitating lag WoW has gotten itself into.

(And if you're curious what I'm referring to, ever since Blizzard released patch 3.2, I often experience 20-30 second load times where WoW just freezes up, my screen goes white, and I often get disconnected back to the login screen. This is a brand new fresh reinstall, and I'm not the only person experiencing it.)
 
Superhuman said:
Only $180???

You know, people don't shit money. That's a lot of money. I can pay a few bills with $180.
Click to expand...

I mean "Only" as in... "I build a new system every 3 years, not every 1-2 like many folks. Either way $180 spread over the life they expect out of their system really doesn't amount to much at all in my opinion."

That being said, I can see how $180 might put someone back a couple of months from when they could put their system together and a couple of months is a long time to wait when you've spent your time drooling and planning your new computer.
 
xeddex said:
I mean "Only" as in... "I build a new system every 3 years, not every 1-2 like many folks. Either way $180 spread over the life they expect out of their system really doesn't amount to much at all in my opinion."

That being said, I can see how $180 might put someone back a couple of months from when they could put their system together and a couple of months is a long time to wait when you've spent your time drooling and planning your new computer.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's pretty understandable, I think. Heck, some people don't see the discrepancy between the 920 and 940 as troublesome at all. So it really comes down to how budget-conscious the buyer is. I do not begrudge any wealthier builders the joy of their component choices. ;)
 
I think it wont be long before there are some great deals on the i5. For the money it seems like a good deal with potential for great performance.


If it were out last year I would have bought i5 instead of Q9550.
 
Yep, spending the money on a GO stepping Q6600 was the ticket to not have to upgrade for 3-4 years.It was bought in 2007, so i've got a couple more years.
 
there isnt much difference in price between i5 and i7. you could get a tri sli x58 board for the price of a decent (not great) p55. x58 leaves you greater upgrade options for video, and possibly for 6 core. the guys who are buying i5 seem like they just want to be the first kids on the block, and are hoping it will be a great overclocker. but it doesnt seem to be much better than i7.
 
vanilla_guerilla said:
there isnt much difference in price between i5 and i7. you could get a tri sli x58 board for the price of a decent (not great) p55. x58 leaves you greater upgrade options for video, and possibly for 6 core. the guys who are buying i5 seem like they just want to be the first kids on the block, and are hoping it will be a great overclocker. but it doesnt seem to be much better than i7.
Click to expand...

Most of this has already been refuted in this very thread.
 
vanilla_guerilla said:
there isnt much difference in price between i5 and i7. you could get a tri sli x58 board for the price of a decent (not great) p55. x58 leaves you greater upgrade options for video, and possibly for 6 core. the guys who are buying i5 seem like they just want to be the first kids on the block, and are hoping it will be a great overclocker. but it doesnt seem to be much better than i7.
Click to expand...

I personally don't have the need to be the "first" at anything, but budget had a lot to with my purchase.
 
TheQuestian said:
In my humble opinion, the use of such strong hyperbole is really not necessary when discussing high-end performance hardware. No i5 or i7 "destroys" any other i5 or i7, no matter how hardcore you consider yourself. Honestly, 20 seconds in a video encoding benchmark? 5-10 frames in a 100+ fps gaming benchmark? What kind of "destruction" are we talking about in the real world, here? And realistically, if you are lucky enough to find one of these almost-mythical "heavily-threaded functions", much less use one on a daily basis, you certainly need not be comparing pros and cons here.
Click to expand...

The guy I quoted said "1-2%" for HT, I was just using the other end of the spectrum.

Lots of good info in your post :) Though your point about Turbo mode on i5 beating the i7 makes no sense, the 1156 i7's Turbo mode is just as good as the i5's, yet also have a higher base clock to begin with and the same TDP.

I fully agree with the Gulftown shenanigans. I couldn't careless about them, when I build a new system in 2-3 years I will be getting a new mobo. Planning to use the same mobo in 2-3 years is something I've never done in 10 years of building computers. And in 2-3 years, we probably will have 1156 cheap 6-core CPUs because 8-10 cores are on the newest platform (Be it 1336 or whatever).
 
hungryJonJon said:
The guy I quoted said "1-2%" for HT, I was just using the other end of the spectrum.

Lots of good info in your post :)
Click to expand...

Glad something I wrote was coherent!

Though your point about Turbo mode on i5 beating the i7 makes no sense, the 1156 i7's Turbo mode is just as good as the i5's, yet also have a higher base clock to begin with and the same TDP.
Click to expand...

Sorry for the blurry explanation, there, I always (wrongly) differentiate between Lynnfield and Bloomfield using i5 and i7. I only meant that all of the 1366 processors have a 130W TDP, while the 1156 parts have 95W TDP . . . a major selling point for some, as I understand it.

I fully agree with the Gulftown shenanigans. I couldn't careless about them, when I build a new system in 2-3 years I will be getting a new mobo. Planning to use the same mobo in 2-3 years is something I've never done in 10 years of building computers. And in 2-3 years, we probably will have 1156 cheap 6-core CPUs because 8-10 cores are on the newest platform (Be it 1336 or whatever).
Click to expand...

Yeah, Gulftown will be an interesting (and possibly anticlimactic) release, won't it? I guess we'll have to wait and see.
 
vanilla_guerilla said:
pricewise, i meant. if you have a good 45nm quad and decent x48, p45 or 780i board i5 doesnt seem like much of an upgrade.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I got that. Just having a little fun with the text editor. Although your post was a little ambiguous (as i7 is on the older Bloomfield socket and the new Lynnfield socket), I was simply making the point that arguing the "benefits" of 1366 or 1156 is getting very tired. The two sockets have been thoroughly discussed and debated.

When it comes down to it, it's just a matter of chocolate and vanilla. One is well-suited for triple SLI, the other is not. The rest is a wash.
 
Megalomaniac said:
I just wanted to highlight this. I think for people looking for an upgrade to the Exxxx or Qxxxx cores should forget about it., Its a short term patch that will maybe last you a a year or so for the same money you could spend for a GPU or SSD or a new CPU which would last you much longer.
Click to expand...
Suggesting an upgrade to a ridiculously expensive, new tech, such as SSD, or a GPU which is refreshed damn near every six months, in place of a Qxxxx, with a qualifier of getting more (longevity) for your money, especially when only a few specialized tasks take any kind of advantage of multi-cores, is misleading at best, and almost malevolent.

And I will qualify this: I just upgraded my Q6700 to a Q9550 (barely an upgrade, I know - but it OCs much better) at a net cost of ~$40.
 
TheQuestian said:
I believe that the 920/750/860 price-point-collision will be the last for Lynnfield and Bloomfield for some time. The two sockets are definitely headed in opposite directions, price-wise.
Click to expand...

This really matches up with how I feel. The X58/920 was a great deal for a lot of people. Yes, the boards were/are pretty expensive, but you got a lot of performance for the overall price. They overclock like crazy - 2.66GHz -> 4GHz is the same 50% overclock that the Cel300A's were famous for.

1156 is designed to be the budget segment, and 1366 the enthusiast segment. I think Intel will be avoiding the great values on 1366 (only EE, etc.) and avoiding high performance (SLI, etc.) on 1156. My fear with 1366 is that even if upgrades are available, I won't be able to afford them. My fear with 1156 is that it will be limited below the level of performance I want.

However, I know I'll have the hexacore option on 1366, plus the higher initial specs should in theory mean I won't have to upgrade quite as soon. Hopefully Intel realizes that not all enthusiasts have tons of cash to throw away and they do keep something affordable on 1366. As a fairly early adopter, I realize that even if upgrades are available in the future, they might not work specifically on my board. Similar to some people who can't use the LGA775 quads and such, my early SocketA board didn't support the higher multipliers of the faster CPUs and my AM2 board didn't support AM2+/AM3 CPUs.

I can definitely see a lot of people being completely satisfied with 1156 systems. I can also see quite a few who really will want the extra features of 1366. In the end, go with whatever works out for your own needs.

One interesting thing - 1366 prices haven't dropped all that much since the early part of this year. I built my i7 in February. I got the EVGA board and 6GB of 1.5v DDR3-1866 in a combo for $340 AR and the 920 at Microcenter for $230. I also managed to get the Mwave GTX285 substitution for $260. The board is still the same $300, the CPU is down to $200, I've heard that DDR3 prices are actually going up now, and all the GTX285s still seem to be well over $300. There are more options available now, but I think you'd being doing ok to get about that same total on the same items right now. I'm glad that I'm going on 8 months without my PC depreciating any.
 
I just ordered my 920 parts.

Upgrading from a dual core E8500/8gb ram, so prices for me:
920/12gb ram - $828
860/8gb ram - $739
920/6gb ram - $692

I went with 920/6gb, but the extra 4gb ram and 1366 features definitely would have been worth the $90 vs the 860 system.
 
adi said:
I just ordered my 920 parts.

Upgrading from a dual core E8500/8gb ram, so prices for me:
920/12gb ram - $828
860/8gb ram - $739
920/6gb ram - $692

I went with 920/6gb, but the extra 4gb ram and 1366 features definitely would have been worth the $90 vs the 860 system.
Click to expand...

I think there is some merit in your statement. I think moving back to 4GB from the typical 6GB of a 920 system is not smart. Therefore, a i5 system really needs to be @ 8GB. Thus, the price difference is a lot narrower than expected.
 
Colt___45 said:
My Q6600 has lasted me almost 2.5 years. Truth be told, I'm still very happy with performance and there's no game or app that I've played/used where I have been disappointed with the performance. That said, I am getting ready to upgrade to an i7. Not because I need to, but because I want to.
Click to expand...

QFMFT .. my Q6600 is still going strong. Nothing I can throw at it that it won't chew up and spit out. I don't encode video very often so upgrading would be a waste of money. It running at 3.6 suits me just fine. Can't really justify upgrading until the processor becomes a bottleneck, which just isn't happening any time soon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top