1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Best Multi tasking CPU?

Discussion in 'System Builder's Advice' started by kciaccio, Nov 20, 2011.

  1. kciaccio New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2009
    Messages:
    366 (0.18/day)
    Thanks Received:
    46
    I am building a new computer and was waiting to see how the new bulldozer performs before deciding on Intel or AMD. Now that it is out and there has been some testing out what do you think?

    I do a lot of encoding and burning, file joining and uncompress files and watching videos all at the same time on my quad monitor set up. I do not really play video games on my computer.

    What CPU would you go with?
     
  2. pantherx12

    pantherx12 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Messages:
    9,714 (4.63/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,699
    Location:
    ENGLAND-LAND-LAND
    Depends on how much you want to spend really, bulldozer does pretty well in the tasks you'll be doing but intels cpus will do better at the same clock speeds.

    2600k for Example.
     
  3. Darkleoco

    Darkleoco

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2011
    Messages:
    1,598 (1.44/day)
    Thanks Received:
    247
    Location:
    Cullowhee, North Carolina
    Have to recommend 2600K as well, I can have upwards of 7-8 youtube videos as well as browser based games open with no noticeable detriments to performance.
     
  4. Inceptor

    Inceptor

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2011
    Messages:
    497 (0.45/day)
    Thanks Received:
    119
    You could pick anything really, if you don't do any gaming.
    If you have the money, an SB-E system with an i7-3960X or i7-3930K.
    If you're on a budget, either SB (i7-2600*), Bulldozer (FX-8xxx), or Piledriver (4 or 5 module). Depending on your buying preferences.
     
  5. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (8.32/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,778
    Either 2600k or a socket 2011 SB-E setup.
     
  6. kciaccio New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2009
    Messages:
    366 (0.18/day)
    Thanks Received:
    46
    Thanks for the input. I was trying to stay with AMD but it looks like Intel is the way to go. Why is there a $1,000 Intel chip Intel Core i7 Extreme Edition 3.33 GHz Processor? Why is it so expensive?
     
  7. Jstn7477

    Jstn7477

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2009
    Messages:
    3,859 (2.08/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,547
    Location:
    Sarasota, Florida, USA
    2600K is awesome if you are building in the ~$1000 range. Granted, encoding or multi-core workloads are the only thing Bulldozer does "well," but BD falls in between 2500K and 2600K pretty much, and both Intel chips use much less power, have better single thread performance, and you get all the tasty Intel goodness (some programs really like Intel).

    Got wads of cash? Get an LGA 2011 setup with the 6 core CPU and 16-32GB of RAM.
    Got ~$1000? Go for 2600K + a Z68 board like my ASRock Extreme4 Gen3 with 8-16GB of RAM.

    As far as RAM goes, a DDR3-1866 kit with good latency is the way to go for LGA 1155. It seems like most chips including mine can't do 2133 on the RAM.

    By the way, Intel always has a $1000 Extreme CPU. You can save a ton of money by going with the base 6 core model and overclocking it.
     
    Crunching for Team TPU More than 25k PPD
  8. pantherx12

    pantherx12 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Messages:
    9,714 (4.63/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,699
    Location:
    ENGLAND-LAND-LAND
    Unfortunately no competition.

    If bulldozer matched what the slides said it would than the price would of been lowered I reckon.

    But bulldozer turned out to have lower IPC than phenom (10%-20% less intels latest cpus are something like +35% over phenom))that combined with windows not understanding how a module works and various other wee bugs kinda crippled it.
     
  9. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (8.32/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,778
    Nope. AMD would have also just charged $1000 for their flagship model.
     
  10. pantherx12

    pantherx12 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Messages:
    9,714 (4.63/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,699
    Location:
    ENGLAND-LAND-LAND
    Naw man, it would of matched the 6 core i7 not beat it. (cept in specific tasks)
     
  11. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (8.32/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,778
    That doesn't make any difference. The top end prices will never change. The most we'll get is more to choose from. If AMD had a chip that matched Intel's flagship, they would also charge $1000, because the high end market will happily bear the burden of $1000 cpus.

    This has already been proven in the past with AMD. They charge $1000 when they are able to.
     
  12. kciaccio New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2009
    Messages:
    366 (0.18/day)
    Thanks Received:
    46
    Based on my system specs I have in my signature, what kind of gains do you think I should see going with the i7 2600k? I will also be upgrading the Video card to drive 4 monitors. Right now my card drives 3 and a usb video adapter by Tritton drives the 4th monitor.
     

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page