• 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 920 still the best?

^Onboard pci-e controller on the 750 gives it an edge over the 920 in single gpu, gpu limited situations, even when at exactly the same clock frequency.

Wtf Easy? Wayne has been far more useful than you in this thread, if your presence is mutually exclusive then you should get the **** out, not him.
 
RavenXXX2 said:
The 750's turbo mode takes it up to 3.2Ghz, 920 2.9Ghz, there's your difference.

Turbo mode on the 920 can be set so all cores run at max speed no matter the load, 750 and co will knock back frequency when all cores are maxed.
Click to expand...

does not compute. why would anyone buy an i7 if that was the case?

ah thinking about it, the i5 seems like a much better option then, I mean it.s very rare, in fact olny when i do it on purpose I can max 4 cores out...
 
Last edited:
Turbo is an extension of speed step, you get an extra +1, or +2 (chip dependent) as long as the chip is cold enough, drawing little enough current and not using too much power. I don't like it, but that's not rational of me.

If you're overclocking it's pretty much irrelevant, it helps lots if you're going to run at stock speeds and do a lot of things which only use one thread. So if you're overclocking and actually benefit from a quad core, it's pretty close to worthless.

Turbo is more "advanced", i.e. raises the multiplier more, on the P55 chips mainly because they came out later than the 920. Gamers should buy the 750, the 530 or one of the amd options. Number crunchers still want the 920/930. Much like the early adopters of the Q6600.
 
It does not compute? it's fact!

JonJ678 said:
Turbo is an extension of speed step, you get an extra +1, or +2 (chip dependent) as long as the chip is cold enough, drawing little enough current and not using too much power. I don't like it, but that's not rational of me.

If you're overclocking it's pretty much irrelevant, it helps lots if you're going to run at stock speeds and do a lot of things which only use one thread. So if you're overclocking and actually benefit from a quad core, it's pretty close to worthless.
Click to expand...

i7 920, all power savings disabled except speedstep, turbo mode on, blk 200 = 4Ghz turbo mode = 4.2Ghz for all cores and no throttling or going down to one core when maxed out.
 
Last edited:
mattyfez said:
does not compute. why would anyone buy an i7 if that was the case?

ah thinking about it, the i5 seems like a much better option then, I mean it.s very rare, in fact olny when i do it on purpose I can max 4 cores out...
Click to expand...

Because clock for clock, both the I7 920 and I5 750 are identical except for HT, so if your chips maximum stable frequency is 4.2 Ghz with Turboboost on, the I7 920 and I5 750 will be the same.

However, the I5 750 allows you to get much better frequencies with lower clocks + BCLK thanks to the better turboboost. I have the I7 920 because it was the first one out, right now I would have rather gone P55 + I5 750.
 
but turbo boost, is essentially when your chip is not underclocking it's self a-la-speedstep if i'm correct, as in running at it's rated speed?
 
Last edited:
RavenXXX2 said:
The 750's turbo mode takes it up to 3.2Ghz, 920 2.9Ghz, there's your difference
Click to expand...
Hey RavenXXX2, hows it going man? :)

That's an interesting point . . . have you checked the test configurations to see if Turbo-Mode was enabled or disabled for the testing?

Also are you suggesting that none of those games are multi-core enabled *or* produce such a light threaded load that Turbo-Boost works on every one of them?

  • Fallout 3
  • Left 4 Dead
  • Far Cry 2
  • Crysis Warhead
  • Batman: Arkham Asylum
  • Dragon age Origins
  • Dawn of War II
  • World of Warcraft
 
No idea what bhavv is going on about, seems to be contradicting himself all over the place.

The processor you want is the 920, or the 930. Doesn't really matter.

Turbo, with an option checked in the bios anyway, just means the stock multiplier is higher than you'd expect. For the 920 you can have turbo on, and it has a x21 multi. Or turbo off, and it has a x20 multi. I blame turbo for some instabilities so don't like it much.

A lot of people are assuming you're exclusively a gamer, I don't see that written anywhere though. Asking for the new Q6600 suggests you're not.

Wayne posting about Intel chips, interesting.
 
Last edited:
In combination with speedstep it ups the multi by one, if you disable all power saving on the 920 you get the full advantage of an extra 2 Ghz through turbo mode. You lose powersaving features so the multi will not drop and neither will the CPU volts, but overclockers don't mind that anyway.

@ wayne, I have the 920, I think it's the best chip ever, I am biased.;)
 
Last edited:
JonJ678 said:
No idea what bhavv is going on about, seems to be contradicting himself all over the place.

The processor you want is the 920, or the 930. Doesn't really matter.

Turbo, with an option checked in the bios anyway, just means the stock multiplier is higher than you'd expect. For the 920 you can have turbo on, and it has a x21 multi. Or turbo off, and it has a x20 multi. I blame turbo for some instabilities so don't like it much.

A lot of people are assuming you're exclusively a gamer, I don't see that written anywhere though. Asking for the new Q6600 suggests you're not.

Wayne posting about Intel chips, interesting.
Click to expand...

I dare say gaming will be the most taxing thing it will do, bar benchies, but it will need to be a stable HTPC also... and it will be oc'd a bit so I guess turbo is the new buzzword for speedstep unless I'm missin something? - I've never seen an i7 BIOS, I'm used to core2/s775
 
Turbo is scaling the speed upwards when there is headroom for it, it's a move towards automatic overclocking. It works well in combination with speedstep, but is a separate feature.

If it's a htpc then noise is presumably important. This suggests the i3 530 to me, it's low power so can be cooled quietly. It's easily fast enough for you to be gpu limited when gaming. It's hyperthreaded so will cope with the move towards quad core optimised games in the future better than pure dual cores would. However there's a good chance amd are a better choice, and it's only my ignorance of their range which prevents me recommending one.
 
JonJ678 said:
No idea what bhavv is going on about, seems to be contradicting himself all over the place.
Click to expand...

Turbo on the I5 750 increases the multi by 2, on the I7 920 by 1, which is why the I5 can outperform the I7 at lower frequencies.

But if you run them both at the same frequency (turbo off), there shouldnt be any difference in games.
 
The Core i5 750 has a TDP of 95W whereas the Core i7 920 and 930 have a TDP of around 130W. The Core i5 is the better value choice for gaming especially since the H55 and P55 motherboards are cheaper too.

The money saved could go towards a better graphics card or something else in the build.
 
Just buy a 750 and be done with it, TBH you're not going to notice the difference between it and an i7 anyway, save some mula and go i5, leave i7 to the enthusiasts/vantage whores.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom