4p

[PermaBanned]

Some interesting results there, i didn't think there would be that much of a difference in frames in games though. After all, surely all the CPU has to do is draw a wireframe then hand it over to the GPU? And i was under the impression that something like an E5200 wouldn't bottleneck a 295.

 

[Big.Wayne]

Some interesting results there

What do you reckon!

Still not enough results though . . .

• INTEL® Core™ i7 920
• AMD® Athlon™ II X4 620

 

[easyrider]

Still not enough results though . . .

• INTEL® Core™ i7 920
• AMD® Athlon™ II X4 620

Post them in Fritz.

My i7 920 is running tonight

 

[Temi_D]

I think people are missing the main point of this thread. We all know that intel makes the fastest cpus! Its a fact. What Big.Wayne is talking about is bang for buck. Why pay 2x more for only a ~25% increase in performance and it won't be used at 100% most of the time - its common sence? If you are loaded then maybe but it would be silly if you are on a budget. I agree with him on this.

Bragging rights aren't everything. Everybody buys hardware to suit their needs/budgets

P.S. easyrider your home cinema is AWESOME!

 

[easyrider]

P.S. easyrider your home cinema is AWESOME!

Thanks m8

 

[Big.Wayne]

I think people are missing the main point of this thread

Many thanks Temi_D

This didn't work out as I wanted but I am suprised by the *extent* it didn't work out, many people are talking of price points and equal comparisons but failed to grasp what I was saying . . I'm shocked that some people think you need to compare like for like!

I was hoping to get as much subject analysis as possible and help shifting through all the different results (from reviews that no one linked except CAT-THE-FITH) but instead I just got a big fat headache and half a dozen Intel fanboys scrambling the thread up as much as possible to protect their flagship from logical attack!

 

[JonJ678]

Not so much that you have to compare like for like, it's just if you compare wildly different things you don't get any useful conclusions.

Yes, the i7 is faster. Yes, the amd is cheaper. That was established in the first post and we haven't made any progress beyond this, because no non-trivial comparison can be drawn between the high end and the mid range. I still don't follow what you hoped this thread would unvei.

To partake in reductio ad absurdum briefly, a car will get you to work much more quickly than a bicycle, in almost any circumstances. A car normally costs more than a bicycle. Should we then conclude that we should always cycle to work?

 

[JeffyB]

AMD Athlon II X4 620 vs Intel Core i7 920

AnandTech Bench (beta)

Fixed graphic . . .

I think this clearly sums it up. Yes both cpu's can do everything thrown at them, how quickly is another thing. I believe that time is very important as we only have a finite amount of it and the quicker tasks can be done the better. I can always earn more money, i cannot earn more time.

 

[saitrix]

I know I am coming in very late here, whilst I respect the Athlon X4 620, one thing for me which would sway me is the difference in TDP between the i3-530 and it. The i3 will produce less heat for the same/better performance, which when you want a quiet pc is important! The i3-530 is 73W (X4 620 is 95W) but this also includes the inbuilt gpu, which if you're not using will mean even less heat produced.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I know I am coming in very late here, whilst I respect the Athlon X4 620, one thing for me which would sway me is the difference in TDP between the i3-530 and it. The i3 will produce less heat for the same/better performance, which when you want a quiet pc is important! The i3-530 is 73W (X4 620 is 95W) but this also includes the inbuilt gpu, which if you're not using will mean even less heat produced.

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18095073

 

[saitrix]

All I can see for the details on the fans is the rear case fan is running at 1300rpm, which is fast if you want silence. I would still be willing to bet the i3 would allow for a quieter system.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

All I can see for the details on the fans is the rear case fan is running at 1300rpm, which is fast if you want silence. I would still be willing to bet the i3 would allow for a quieter system.

The last post uses an X4 620 with unlocked L3 cache essentially making it a Phenom. Early X4 620 processors were based on the much larger Deneb core found in the Phenom. Newer X4 620 processors are based on the much smaller Propus core which has no L3 cache. Without the L3 cache activated the chip would run even cooler or need a lower fan speed. The computer is also using an HD3850X2 too. Perhaps it is worth asking some of the people in the thread to see how the Athlon II processors fare with passive cooling and lower speed case fans.

 

[saitrix]

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2010/01/04/intel-core-i5-661-core-i3-530-cpu-review/8

Have a look at the power consumption, I realise the X4 620 isn't there but the X4 630 is, which lets be honest is going to be near identical for results as all it is is the multi increased by 1. So as you can see from there, when the i3 is stock and so is the X4 630, the idle power usage is 11W lower on the i3. And under load the difference increases to 63W.

Now I know this isn't showing temperatures but power consumption is directly related to temperatures, as heat is produced from the waste electrical energy going into the device. Plus there is another direct knock on effect, if it pulls less watts then the psu will keep cooler, and thus run the fan on it slowely or even negate the need for a fan. In my opinion the i3 has really good power use thinking that there is a HD5870 aswell in there! Actually thinking about it I wonder if you could get away with a pico psu there...

 

[JonJ678]

Now I know this isn't showing temperatures but power consumption is directly related to temperatures

The man has a point here, it's difficult to argue the amd option will be cooler if it's drawing more power.

Off topic/
I'm pretty sure you can run an i3 using a pico psu. There's a Dell ac adapter which offers 6A @ 12V on three lines, from mains ac. Some people on spcr have wired two of the lines up to a 150W pico psu, and the third to a 4 pin atx adapter. I'm pretty certain this will work excellently with an i3 system (does anyone know offhand how much current an i3 draws from the 4/8 pin lead?). Sadly, no mini-itx H55 boards available yet.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Off topic to the extent it is in the Delta quadrant:

I have seen 18.4" notebooks with only 65W to 90W power blocks and for general usage they cannot be beaten for power consumption as it includes the monitor too.

Also have a look at PSUs like the Seasonic X650 which run semi-passively and are more or less silent at low loads. At 300W it was the quietest PSU SPCR ever reviewed.

I assume you have also looked at the various Nexus PSUs too like the Nexus Value 430.

OTH,you even get combinations like the PW-200-M DC-DC power supply and the 200W Dell DA-2 power adaptor.

Even Intel and AMD have various 45W and 65W quads available and with even one of the newer ones a system with an HD5870 and a motherboard with integrated graphics was drawing under 150W under load at the plug(it was a Legit Reviews article BTW).

OTH,if the Athlon II was undervolted power consumption would drop too especially with the newer Propus cores. Even TechPowerUp and SPCR managed to save around 30 watts off the load power consumption of an X4 620 too. Many of the X4 620 processors at launch were Deneb core processors as Propus was delayed.

In SFF systems the graphics card can be a big source of heat and also comprise a large percentage of the power draw at the plug.

Try passively cooling an HD5870 at load which is probably the biggest source of power draw in the system unless you have a 125W,130W or 140W TDP quad core. Even an HD5770 is probably drawing at least 60 to 70 watts at load.

If an SFF PC is not your area of interest then a larger case will have better soundproofing abilities in the first place.

Someone even runs an overclocked Core i7 920 passively cooled:

http://www.hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1034430325

http://www.silentpcreview.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=51218

 

[eyetrip]

I'm shocked that some people think you need to compare like for like!

Anything else just isn't a sensible comparison...

People look in a particular price bracket, then look at features and performance offered in the bracket. Then some will look at longevity of what they are buying. Then some will look at power consumption.

If someone wants to spend X on a system, and have it last as long as possible, are you really going to push them towards an AMD system which is cheaper, but also offers less performance, simply because it's cheaper?

Sure, cheaper is good, but not always better.

 

[Big.Wayne]

Off Topic:

I know I am coming in very late here
Off Topic stuff . . . .

Off Topic stuff . . . .

Off Topic stuff . . .

Hello saitrix,

sorry to be a nag and I realise you came in late to this thread but please can you stick to the topic . . . I don't want anything to do with the Intel® Core™ i3 in this thread, this has been made abundantly clear many, many times and I don't want to keep bothering the Don's . . .

Thanks for your co-operation and sorry if this comes across a bit barking lol!

Stay on topic

 

[Big.Wayne]

Off Topic:

Off topic to the extent it is in the Delta quadrant

CAT-THE-FIFTH, I think your great but please respect my personal space here, I'm trying to collate info on the two systems in the O.P and I'm not getting the help or support I need!

I think it's time for you to make a thread!

 

[Big.Wayne]

I think this clearly sums it up

Hello JeffyB, if you want that to sum things up then that will sum things up, however if you care to look into things a bit more instead of seeing a single set of bench results and making your mind up then you may find you've been over-charged . . .

I see you own a Intel® Core™ i7 920 and I apologies if this thread attempts to lessen their appeal but it's not aimed at you, it's aimed at Intel® . . . I am hoping to determine through subjective analysis the true worth of this processor using the AMD® Athlon™ X4 620 as a baseline, I am in the process of digging through a whole bunch of test results to see how much better (if at all) the Core™ i7 920 is, once this is worked out we will then set a new price ££ for the processor . . . yes you read that right!

As it stands being over a year old tech is too expensive, if you want to preserve it's high selling price then please continue to *justify* away but if you would like to see Intel® forced to slash its price to £163 or less then get behind me!

Yes both cpu's can do everything thrown at them, how quickly is another thing

Do you honestly think the more affordable AMD® Athlon™ X4 620 would even bat an eyelid at any task you can throw at it? . . . do you feel it would somehow be laggy or slow?

I believe that time is very important as we only have a finite amount of it and the quicker tasks can be done the better. I can always earn more money, i cannot earn more time.

Heh well to debate the law of time & space continuum goes beyond the scope of this thread but I kinda know what you mean. I am curious as to what work you are doing on the Intel® Core™ i7 920 and how you personally benefit from the little extra bit of speed it offers? . . . I'm in no doubt that for a professional the increased productivity may well justify the 100% premium but we don't get many professionals posting on this forum, if you have time can you tell me more about this increased productivity, are you a video-editor or something even cooler? . . . have you always used Intel® or?

[edit] P.S: I'm not sure if you need to quote that huuuggeee image in your previous post?

 

[Raikiri]

They seem good for the cash, would still rather spend the extra £50 to get an i5 750 based system though.

I still think I've had the two best bang for buck CPUs ever though, an e6300 for nowt followd by a Q6600 for £5