You cant tell me know, i game a lot, i can clearly see the difference in FPS, i7 is much more consistant. You can offer your opinion, but if its a question of which is better in my case, the i7 is, while i was only running my E6600 at 3.4, it still is quite a bit away from my i7.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
i7: worth it for a gamer?
- Thread starter TJM
- Start date
Then its a driver issue.
Because there isn't a game out thats cpu limited with a C2D [email protected]
Period
Purchase justification reflex
OK, let me put in another way, a game like counterstrike source, i would run 4 AA and 4 AF on my C2D setup, about 60% i would hit 100 FPS and the rest would drop, below, when i upgraded to i7 using the same drivers i would never go below 100FPS and still dont, perhaps the drivers back in December wernt as good for nvidia cards, but i can honestly say it was better, initially as well i was running stock clocks with turbo mode on the i7. I know a lot of people dont look at the average frame, just the max, but in Far Cry 2 and CSS my average frames are a lot higher as are overall frames.
I don't see this thread going anywhere useful at a rate of knots! 
I'd love to bench a good Core 2 set-up next to a good Core i7 set-up, I mean that's the only way to be sure right?
On a finite budget I am thinking the Core 2 set-up would be better for a gamer because there would be more money for the GPU
I'd love to bench a good Core 2 set-up next to a good Core i7 set-up, I mean that's the only way to be sure right?
On a finite budget I am thinking the Core 2 set-up would be better for a gamer because there would be more money for the GPU
don't see the point tbh, there's no difference or i certainly saw zero difference i should say, which is pretty much what i was expecting.
i went from a well sorted Abit IX138GT, Q9550 @ 3.8, 4GB ( 2x2 ) 6400 Geil BD, Zotac GTX285. to a well sorted Asus P6T SE. i7 920 @ 3.8, 6GB ( 3x2 ) 12800 Patriot Viper, Zotac GTX285. and if i didn't allready know what was in the case i wouldn't be able to tell the difference.
and i did it cos i wanted to
i sold off all my spare & current LGA775 kit ( 2 mobo's, 2 cpus, 3 lots of DDR2 & a tv card ) & switched to i7 for the princely sum of £50. sorted.
and just to reiterate, i really can't tell the difference.
Associate
- Joined
- 13 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 119
It's well known that GTA4 runs much better on a quad.
More games are coming in the future that will work optimally on a quad e.g. the new ghostbusters game with the hardcore physics engine, that alan wake title etc
For most games though I don't think there's much difference? Maybe an RTS game with tons going on will run smoother on a quad?
I'm getting my quad system tomorrow
More games are coming in the future that will work optimally on a quad e.g. the new ghostbusters game with the hardcore physics engine, that alan wake title etc
For most games though I don't think there's much difference? Maybe an RTS game with tons going on will run smoother on a quad?
I'm getting my quad system tomorrow
Im not sure exactly what is more surprising, that you are unwilling to accept that maybe this CPU is better, or that you have an unrelenting passion to disprove me with nothing but words, or acronyms. While i didnt have quite such a good system as VoG, and so i understand why he didnt see such a difference, i do see the difference.
It's well known that GTA4 runs much better on a quad.
More games are coming in the future that will work optimally on a quad e.g. the new ghostbusters game with the hardcore physics engine, that alan wake title etc
For most games though I don't think there's much difference? Maybe an RTS game with tons going on will run smoother on a quad?
I'm getting my quad system tomorrow
I agree.
The best Cpu out now is the Q6600 (if you can get one)
Cpu perfection.
I7 brings nothing to the table in gaming (even the D0 4.5ghz versions
)Games ar GPU limited not CPU
So all the people spouting i7 this and i7 that stop it right now.
I for one love new tech and will quite happily state truth.
You punks with i7 stating you see bigger gains in gaming with i7 backup your claims with easyrider.
Cause its BS i'm afriaid
Yes, gaming was 1 of the reasons for the upgrade, if your asking was i looking for a reason to upgrade and actually believed i would 10 times better FPS, then no, i knew from the get go compared to the similarly priced Core2 range that there would at best 10% better performance or less, but i didnt have one of those being compared, so i was to either upgrade my motherboard and CPU as my motherboard at the time didnt support 45nm CPUs, so i thought the jump was worthwhile.
Lost Planet Extreme Colonies and uses all cores this is important as Capcoms upcoming games all use their own MT Framework engine (MT stands for multithreaded). So Resident Evil5 & Dead Rising2 will both be strong I7 titles as should their many other in development games which use MT Framework. According to Intel I7-965 is much faster than a QX9770 in this game.
http://www.intel.com/performance/desktop/consumer.htm
http://www.intel.com/performance/desktop/extreme.htm?iid=perf_desktop_lhn+i7_extreme-performance
GTA4 lot faster/smoother with an I7 only uses around 35% CPU.
Left 4 Dead around 20% faster.
Assassins Creed lot smoother minimal stuttering.
Gears Of War minimal stuttering.
This is a quote from Intels website:
"Exceptional on highly threaded games
Experience smoother and more realistic gaming by distributing AI, physics, and rendering across 8 software threads. Intel® Core™ i7-940 processor and Intel® Core™ i7-920 processor are exceptional choices for today's highly threaded games.
Also, no game feels any slower in real world useage vs Dual or Quad at the same clock speed either new games or older. If you need a new system I7 is the way to go but otherwise no PC component is worth upgrading right now as PC gaming is not exactly state of the art and few games need a quad. This is not likely to change for several years as the software development is a long way behind hardware now probably more than ever. I bought mine because I do not expect to upgrade for another 2 years so it has enough power in reserve for if they even bother using it (which I doubt is going to happen now). PC will probably decline as a gaming platform even more and urgently needs something to make it attractive for publishers & developers to support otherwise its not going anywhere positive.
At the end of the day if your a hardcore PC gamer or power user I7 its a no brainer if you want the best as its the best performance wise. The CPU power is staggering. You can rip a CD to MP3, encode and still game on many titles with no noticeable FPS difference!!!
Obviously it costs more but if you use that argument then all current games need are a cheap CPU + mid range gfx card for a reasonable experience with low to mid detail when you game @ 1920x1200 or higher and want max everything I7 is your only choice.
At the end of the day if your a hardcore PC gamer or power user I7 its a no brainer
I think Intel® need to get someone new to *pimp* their products!
I play a game that is very CPU reliant, since switching to I7 from Q6600 I have seen roughly 20% increase in frame rates in highly populated areas. The game only uses 2 cores, so turning off hyperthreading gave a part of that big increase surprisingly (so it uses 2 cores properly, not 1 core and hyperthread). Both were running at 3.4ghz, I intend to take the I7 higher now that I have my watercooling reinstalled. (both times the game was running with a GTX295).
Have to say I’m enjoying this thread As stated previously it depends on what you’re upgrading from. For the OP I would imagine that it might be more beneficial to spend his ££ on a better graphics card and perhaps a bigger monitor. As most games are not CPU limited at 3.2Ghz it would be better to wait until something comes out that actually requires a CPU upgrade. At that point you could upgrade you CPU, Mobo and RAM while still being able to use your previously brought monitor etc.
My 2p - flame away
As stated previously it depends on what you’re upgrading from. For the OP I would imagine that it might be more beneficial to spend his ££ on a better graphics card and perhaps a bigger monitor. As most games are not CPU limited at 3.2Ghz it would be better to wait until something comes out that actually requires a CPU upgrade. At that point you could upgrade you CPU, Mobo and RAM while still being able to use your previously brought monitor etc.My 2p - flame away
Not pointing any fingers but I think a lot of people are just trying to protect/justify their outlay on i7 core when they are really only gamers.
Now here is the daft thing, I just basically play games, one GTX 295 on a 24" TFT - some people buy hardware because they enjoy having the latest tech.
Yes it costs a considerable amount more but does it really? thats all down to each indivudual - some people have better jobs than others, some people blow £50 to £150+ going out etc, so sometimes the enjoyment of having something new to play with is more important than actual cost v performance.
If everyone did the same thing in life, it would be pretty boring woudnt it.
So all in all anyone saying blah blah it's a waste of money, it maybe to you, but not to others who have more money than you or don't mind the expenditure.
My personal feeling is no, 3 main benefits I can see with i7 core as opposed to P45 Chipset.TJM said:
- SLI can be used on X58, cannot on any other Intel Chipset.
- The use of Hyperthreading on X58, if not using then their is virtually no difference to P45 chipset.
- Triple Channel, with current 12GB (could double when new ram) available on X58, 8GB on P45 Chipset.
Now here is the daft thing, I just basically play games, one GTX 295 on a 24" TFT - some people buy hardware because they enjoy having the latest tech.
Yes it costs a considerable amount more but does it really? thats all down to each indivudual - some people have better jobs than others, some people blow £50 to £150+ going out etc, so sometimes the enjoyment of having something new to play with is more important than actual cost v performance.
If everyone did the same thing in life, it would be pretty boring woudnt it.
So all in all anyone saying blah blah it's a waste of money, it maybe to you, but not to others who have more money than you or don't mind the expenditure.
Not pointing any fingers but I think a lot of people are just trying to protect/justify their outlay on i7 core when they are really only gamers.My personal feeling is no, 3 main benefits I can see with i7 core as opposed to P45 Chipset.
- SLI can be used on X58, cannot on any other Intel Chipset.
- The use of Hyperthreading on X58, if not using then their is virtually no difference to P45 chipset.
- Triple Channel, with current 12GB (could double when new ram) available on X58, 8GB on P45 Chipset.
Now here is the daft thing, I just basically play games, one GTX 295 on a 24" TFT - some people buy hardware because they enjoy having the latest tech.
Yes it costs a considerable amount more but does it really? thats all down to each indivudual - some people have better jobs than others, some people blow £50 to £150+ going out etc, so sometimes the enjoyment of having something new to play with is more important than actual cost v performance.
If everyone did the same thing in life, it would be pretty boring woudnt it.
So all in all anyone saying blah blah it's a waste of money, it maybe to you, but not to others who have more money than you or don't mind the expenditure.
Well said Nelly