New I5 Maybe

[crazyeyesreaper]

Jr's & Crazyeyes' benchmark thread

so your saying that hes unlikely to hit said overclock even tho its completely possible with shitty 1066mhz ram and on a stock cooler without even so much as hitting the thermal barrier'

besides its already been confirmed the chip the guy has is an i5 the lowest end i5 650 beats a Q6600 handily if its an i5 quad aka the 750 its obviously superior so this argument is still moot its still an upgrade even with the overclock option removed

 

[NdMk2o1o]

got 2x2Gb of these http://www.geil.com.tw/products/showGallery/id/125 they're the 1333 kit though they will run at 1600 or 1333 with tighter timings, lemme know if your interested at £40 shipped RM recorded and I will list them in the FS section with pics etc

 

[Dent1]

Jr's & Crazyeyes' benchmark thread

so your saying that hes unlikely to hit said overclock even tho its completely possible with shitty 1066mhz ram and on a stock cooler without even so much as hitting the thermal barrier'

I'm not doubting that 4.5GHz can be achieved. But its still a gamble, if the OP is unfortunate enough to inherit a dual core i5 and is also unfortunate enough not to achieve 4.5GHz he will have egg on his face. Its a gamble. I'm just letting the OP know all the possibilities.

I'm sure at one point the OP thought his Q6600 would surpass 3.2GHz upon purchase.

if its an i5 quad aka the 750 its obviously superior so this argument is still moot its still an upgrade even with the overclock option removed

Which is why I told the OP "If your mate happens to have a quad core i5, it’s a good deal and I would jump on it!"

Evidence

 

[Steve-007UK]

I'm sure at one point the OP thought his Q6600 would surpass 3.2GHz upon purchase.

No i traded my E6550 for this quad core mainly to see if i could get my ram to run at the proper speed but there is something not right with this motherboard, Runs fine with ram at 800mhz so i can't moan realy. And trust me when i say i have tryed everything to get the ram to run at 1066mhz lol.

I first tryed OCZ ram but when set to 1066mhz 2.1v the pc just beeped so i sent the ram back and it tunred out to be faulty, I then changed the ocz for the ram i have now but had the same problem so sent it back, This is the 3rd lot of ram i have tryed corsair xms2 pc8500 5/5/5/15 2.1v. < i think it lies on teh sticker for the timings cause on teh profile at 1066mhz it says 5/6/6/18 or something.

 

[NdMk2o1o]

Just to chime in, any i5 will hit 4ghz on most boards with just raising the bclk and maybe adding a touch of vcore, anything over 4ghz generally requires a lot more voltage 1.4+ and tweaking which may not be doable on low end boards, however even an i5 dual at 4ghz is a hell of a lot better than his Q6600 at 3.2ghz which is all he can get out of it if I read correctly.

 

[Steve-007UK]

Q6600 at 3.2ghz which is all he can get out of it if I read correctly.

That is correct 3.2 is all i can get.

 

[Dent1]

So what is the verdict, its 14:25pm now, has your mate confirmed the CPU yet?

 

[Steve-007UK]

So what is the verdict, its 14:25pm now, has your mate confirmed the CPU yet?

Not yet lol looks like im going to have to go over his and look at it myself, He's a lazy git and a bit rough when it comes to taking pc's apart.

The mobo will be a futer upgrade if i get the cpu, ill be trading for an almost working mini tower my the sounds of it

 

[Dent1]

Not yet lol looks like im going to have to go over his and look at it myself, He's a lazy git and a bit rough when it comes to taking pc's apart.

The mobo will be a futer upgrade.

I think that is your best bet. Go over to his and end this speculation.

Also, I'm 99.9% sure that your current components on Ebay + £80 of your own money will net you a nice Phenom II X6 1055T build. 4GHz can be reached too.

Again this is opposed to the dual core i5 variant.

 

[cdawall]

Well you don't have to take it apart if your trying to see if its just a dual core hit windows properties and see what chip it is


@dent the i5 is here selling all his parts for an amd is stupid

 

[Steve-007UK]

Well you don't have to take it apart if your trying to see if its just a dual core hit windows properties and see what chip it is. @dent the i5 is here selling all his parts for an amd is stupid

No DDR3 to use it in, my mate already took it out and sold it ages ago.

I have used AMD most my life and in a way there my fav CPU's but i think i will stick to intel for a while as its nice to have a change.

 

[cdawall]

No DDR3 to use it in, my mate already took it out and sold it ages ago.

Ahh ok to bad your uk I have some old sticks I could sell you for cheap

 

[Dent1]

@dent the i5 is here selling all his parts for an amd is stupid

Why is it stupid, the OP is potentially lacking a decent motherboard and he is missing DDR3.

With the lack of memory he can not get the rig up immediately anyways. It will take a week to source and deliver the memory and motherboard. In which time he could of sold his rig on Ebay and benefited from a superior 1055T rig.

 

[crazyeyesreaper]

because in almost every damn task the OP will do the 1055t will stil lbe inferior

fact 99% of users dont run Cinebench all the time or do 3d rendering
fact even a lowly i3 in gaming and day to day tasks will keep pace with a 1055t

slapping 2 extra cores on phenom II quad with a slighting better IMC does not make a universally better chip i say this again while sitting here using a 965be.

Considering i do alot of the above tasks id rather have in i5 750 then a 965 be or hell even a 1090T the 2 extra cores just dont offer enough performance when there slower in most tasks besides a select few.

now im not saying the Phenom II chips are bad far from it but while there good chips there showing there age and there toes get stepped on in alot of situations by lowly i3 and i5 dual cores

 

[Dent1]

fact even a lowly i3 in gaming and day to day tasks will keep pace with a 1055t

Other than single threaded gaming and single threaded application in general (which I might add that multi-threaded apps are becoming the norn) the Phenom II X6 is vastly superior than the i3 or i5 dual core variants overall, to suggest otherwise is misleading.

Whilst 99% of users don’t run Cinebench all the time or do 3d rendering, 99% of users do want not want to upgrade every 5mins, the X6 gives the user longevity and security as they know that in 2-3 years those guys with "dual core i3s/i5" are forced to upgrade whilst the guys whom thought ahead and acquired the Phenom II X6 are sitting happy.

I'm not saying the OP should get the Phenom II X6, I'm just letting him know that his money could stretch to it if he wishes.

With that logic, even a lowly Athlon II X3 can keep up with gaming and day to day tasks. The OP could probably buy a Athlon II X3, AM3 board and DDR3 with just the money from the Ebay sale of his current equipment alone. He will benefit from a CPU that can "keep pace" and yet not spend any additional money.

To further add to the insanity, the i3/i5 dual cores could probably keep up with the i7 920 in most single threaded applications and gaming tasks, but common sense will tell you to buy the i7 920 right? especially if it was priced the same. Why doesnt common sense say to buy the Phenom II X6 under the same conditions? Seems like a bias here.

 

[crazyeyesreaper]

because the price for a 1055t you can get a i5 750 and in games that use multi cores example Dragon Age Origins the intel cpu is still 30% faster with the same damn gpu. sad to say AMD is good enough for its price point but an intel CPU is faster ask anyone whos switched id switch myself if i had the cash but i dont.

 

[cdawall]

the cool thing about most games is 2 fast cores is better than 6 slow ones

 

[Dent1]

the cool thing about most games is 2 fast cores is better than 6 slow ones

I totally agree. But will that be the same once the wave of multi-threaded games continue to pile through.

I'd rather have 6 core CPU that perform 20% slower than 2 cores CPU in 2011, in games.

If it means that in 2012, 2013, and 2014, my 6 cores are 50% faster than the 2 core core CPU in games.

 

[Dent1]

I feel that nobody even READS what I'm saying. Or if they are reading it, its only being half comprehended.

 

[crazyeyesreaper]

ah yes but you seem to think games are gonna use those 6 cores its been 4 fucking years since quadcores came to be and guess what only 2-3 games actually use 4 cores effectively and effciently so if its been 4 years and were still not there that 6 core isnt gonna see any love any time soon either it will be long past its prime and outdated before 6 cores are used properly in any game.

and the main reason for that is 360 / PS3 which will remain as the mainstream console system untill 2014-2015 before there replaced with all new systems so we still have 3-4 years of console ports.

 

[Dent1]

because the price for a 1055t you can get a i5 750 and in games that use multi cores example Dragon Age Origins the intel cpu is still 30% faster with the same damn gpu. sad to say AMD is good enough for its price point but an intel CPU is faster ask anyone whos switched id switch myself if i had the cash but i dont.

This proves nobody reads whats I'm saying:

Yes for near the same price you could buy the i5 750. And it would be a good purchase. I have nothing against the i5 750 as the jump to a i5 750 from a Q6600 is arguably justifiable. My argument is that the jump from a Q6600 to the dual core i3 or dual core i5 is dubious. The i5 750 is not dual core and hence its in my list of recommended processors. The OP should consider the i5 750 too.

 

[silkstone]

I totally agree. But will that be the same once the wave of multi-threaded games continue to pile through.

I'd rather have 6 core CPU that perform 20% slower than 2 cores CPU in 2011, in games.

If it means that in 2012, 2013, and 2014, my 6 cores are 50% faster than the 2 core core CPU in games.

So you are planning on keeping your setup for 2+ years and expecting your cpu to be able to still be able to play the latest games adequately?

Following that logic, why not get the i5 now, then 2yrs down the line shell out $30 or however little for a 3 year old 6 core AMD?

 

[crazyeyesreaper]

still the i5 is still faster even in multi threaded situations it pulls ahead of the Q6600 but were talking a 4 year old CPU at this point its expected due to improvements in the architecture itself thats why a Phenom II x6 isnt really that great it does oc better then the quads and its NB is better but in general its not worth the price premium due to the very few times it comes out on top compared to a similar i5 quad not even counting anything with HT which tends to be worse for gaming. In general the i5 650 is worth while upgrade if he overclocks it otherwise not a big enough increase. i5 750 at stock is a worthwhile change overclocked more so.

 

[Dent1]

ah yes but you seem to think games are gonna use those 6 cores its been 4 fucking years since quadcores came to be and guess what only 2-3 games actually use 4 cores effectively and effciently so if its been 4 years and were still not there that 6 core isnt gonna see any love any time soon either it will be long past its prime and outdated before 6 cores are used properly in any game.

and the main reason for that is 360 / PS3 which will remain as the mainstream console system untill 2014-2015 before there replaced with all new systems so we still have 3-4 years of console ports.

Then with that logic, if quad cores not being utilised correctly shouldnt the OP hang onto his current Q6600 knowing that is in the safe zone? Like the OP said, he might have to buy a new motherboard and RAM if he goes for the i5. But according to you quad core is overkill because only "2-3 games" use it anyways, so saving money and keeping his overpowered Q6600 is in his bet interest, right?

So you are planning on keeping your setup for 2+ years and expecting your cpu to be able to still be able to play the latest games adequately?

Personally, I've had my CPU for over 1 year already, its showing no signs of slowing down. I could probably go another 2 years easily, same with my video card.

Following that logic, why not get the i5 now, then 2yrs down the line shell out $30 or however little for a 3 year old 6 core AMD?

He could buy the i5 now and sell his rig for a 6 core AMD or whatever is "good" at the time. Its a possibility. However, following my logic "getting the i5 now" if its a dual core version makes no sense coming from a Q6600 from a convenience, financial or performance stand point, especially if its costing the OP money to do so.

still the i5 is still faster even in multi threaded situations it pulls ahead of the Q6600 but were talking a 4 year old CPU at this point its expected due to improvements in the architecture itself

The TechPowerUp reviews clearly show that the i3 and i5 dual cores are slower overall than the Q8xxx. The Q8xxx being slower than the Q6600 would suggest that the Q6600 would also be faster than all the above mentioned processors.

In general the i5 650 is worth while upgrade if he overclocks it otherwise not a big enough increase. i5 750 at stock is a worthwhile change overclocked more so.

I would say all the i5 quad cores are worth the upgrade, not from gaming performance alone, but from a overall performance. Saying that any upgrade he does do will cost him in the pocket for the ram and potentially a motherboard, so I'm on the fence because i'm unsure if the overall performance justifies the associated cost.

 

[Deleted member 74752]

http://hwbot.org/browseHardwareProcessors.do?cpuSubFamilyId=129

http://hwbot.org/browseHardwareProcessors.do?cpuSubFamilyId=177

http://hwbot.org/browseHardwareProcessors.do?cpuSubFamilyId=176

With the cheapest Gigabyte mb's I have been able to easily overclock the i3/15 chips to 4.5GHz even on air...and I own nearly every one of them.