Just been playing with the I7

[XD-3]

might I ask what the stock voltage is please.

XD-3

 

[jak731]

I've read that on the non-extreme versions the power draw is automatically capped at 130W, ie it will throttle down the multiplier whatever setting you choose in the bios if the power drain goes over this. From what i have read i think this is intel trying to get more enthusiasts to get extreme editions. On the plus side you probably won't be able to damage your cpu due to heat if you have a decent cooler.

 

[AWPC]

I7 are not going to beat Quad Cores with single GPUs unless the game supports multicore and scales well. Crysis & Crysis Warhead, Left 4 Dead, Lost Planet, Devil May Cry4, Fallout3 & Assassins Creed should in theory all have higher FPS vs Quad Core with the same single GPU. According to Intel Lost Planet + I7-965 is 40% quicker than Quad Core. I will test this in a few days when I have fully configured mine.

 

[J1nxy]

This one seems a pretty good review

http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews.php?reviewid=656&pageid=13

 

[gurusan]

I've read that on the non-extreme versions the power draw is automatically capped at 130W, ie it will throttle down the multiplier whatever setting you choose in the bios if the power drain goes over this. From what i have read i think this is intel trying to get more enthusiasts to get extreme editions. On the plus side you probably won't be able to damage your cpu due to heat if you have a decent cooler.

not true. bad rumour that started. It does cap it at 130W but you can just disable this feature in the bios

 

[danielanthony]

Think I'm going to hold off until the 8 core 32nm chips start to appear. All that extra memory bandwidth is going to waste with only 4 cores.

Besides, next year SSD prices should also be coming down so I should be able to build an 8 core, SSD equiped upgrade for £1000

 

[jonneymendoza]

its unfair to expect a cpu of any kind to make a difference in games. pc games are GPU bound and always have been. i remembered when core 2 first came out, it made little to no difference in games alongside the cpu that was faster before.

When will people realize that pc games get most of their resources from the GPU. you only need a core 2 clocked at 2ghz either dual or quad to make full use of ANY single GPU card out their ie 280's

 

[wolvers]

you only need a core 2 clocked at 2ghz either dual or quad to make full use of ANY single GPU card out their ie 280's

I'm sorry but that's a load of tosh.

 

[WesleyBurns]

lol!

 

[PaulyD]

Umm no

Quick example from last night. Helped my mate overclock his quad from stock to 3ghz. Gained 80fps in the source video test...

 

[jonneymendoza]

Umm no

Quick example from last night. Helped my mate overclock his quad from stock to 3ghz. Gained 80fps in the source video test...

umm yes its been proven in a lot of sites that games are GPU bound especialy at res from 1080p.

check here http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTU4MCwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA== at lower res u see the difference because at low res, cpu takes control of the game more but at higher res, it doesnt matter what cpu u have as long as u have a any form of a core 2 cpu, you will get the same fps

 

[Stimpy_7]

fail

 

[MooMoo444]

Funny thing is intel are probably well on their way already to "i8" whatever it will be.

 

[wolvers]

it doesnt matter what cpu u have as long as u have a any form of a core 2 cpu, you will get the same fps

This is where your argument falls on it's face. An E2180 at stock will bottleneck a GTX280 but an E8500 (used in your link) possibly wont, but only at 2560x1600. 1920x1440 is still a pretty high res and the E8500 loses 30% there to the i7 and the QX9770.

FPS only becomes purely gpu dependant where a cpu is present that doesn't provide a bottleneck.

 

[pegasus1]

its unfair to expect a cpu of any kind to make a difference in games. pc games are GPU bound and always have been. i remembered when core 2 first came out, it made little to no difference in games alongside the cpu that was faster before.

When will people realize that pc games get most of their resources from the GPU. you only need a core 2 clocked at 2ghz either dual or quad to make full use of ANY single GPU card out their ie 280's

Try playing as flight sim at any Res at 2ghz then 4ghz. The difference is huuuuuuge.

 

[Crashgate3]

Given that I'm upgrading from a socket 939 system and have to upgrade everything at once anyway, and looking at how the 920 overclocks, Deneb I think is going to have to be pretty special to stop me getting an i7 system now.

 

[jonneymendoza]

Try playing as flight sim at any Res at 2ghz then 4ghz. The difference is huuuuuuge.

what else? most games are GPU bound. flight sim is cpu bound just like sop com

 

[pegasus1]

what else? most games are GPU bound. flight sim is cpu bound just like sop com

All games at a low res, all RTS at a medium res and a few games at high res.

And, not all of us have systems purely for gaming.

 

[wolvers]

All games at a low res, all RTS at a medium res and a few games at high res.

And, not all of us have systems purely for gaming.

................and he's already posted a link that disproves his own statements........genius

 

[magpie1966]

The real truth as some have stated is bottlenecking.

The monitor and native res you use in gaming should depict what hardware your gonna use. ( of course and your wallet).

Its about striking a balance, If your at lo res the improvements you'll gain from a good
CPU , is big because a half decent GPU will throw frames down the bus at an alarming rate.

If you have even the best GPU money can buy and your at your highest res, you will probably be throwing less frames out , so in this instance the CPU is still important , but less so.

So the answer as I said is Monitor, then GPU and CPU depending on Native res you will be using.