Indeed. That i7 rig i spec is just £63 more expensive but has 2 GB more ram,Runs triple channel and has a faster cpu at the heart.
Forgive me...But is this not the sweet spot in terms of price V perforamnce?
erm.....no there isn't
-
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.
AMD® Phenom™ II X6 and Intel® Core™ i7 Debate
- Thread starter Big.Wayne
- Start date
Indeed. That i7 rig i spec is just £63 more expensive but has 2 GB more ram,Runs triple channel and has a faster cpu at the heart.
Forgive me...But is this not the sweet spot in terms of price V perforamnce?
erm.....no there isn't
so lets get this straight.Not sure what people don't get
your overclocking to 4ghz with 10666 memory and an artic cooling feezer 7 pro?
seeing as your argument is always every chip will hit 4ghz
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 14,081
- Location
- Between Realities
I do think you'd struggle to get to 4ghz with that particular cooler, but 3.6 would be doable.
And an I7 @ 3.6 isnt something to be sniffed at
And an I7 @ 3.6 isnt something to be sniffed at
Barely faster.
I keep hearing this barely faster
Similar performance
Fact is i7 is faster and barely more expensive.
In fact Hex core looks expensive to me for a slower chip and 2GB less ram.
I know where my 63 quid would be going.
The option for SLI and Xfire, triple channel ram and a faster PC
3.6 with 10666 ram?
u keep saying the 2GB less
but i post a spec with 8GB in the other thread and it was still less than what u posted...
also so what if one cpu slower than the other, both does the job, honesty people need to get out more.
Last edited:
you would be hard pressed to find anything outside of benchmarks that uses anywhere near 4gb of memory anyway so 4gb vs 6gb is irelevant when 4gb is more than enough
i know that and u know that.
but easyrider is banging on about 6GB "more ram is better"
/slaps BW for even contemplating an intel system.
Love my AMD x6 @ 4ghz - nothing in terms of raw processing (other than the £900 stonker from intel) comes close. For gaming - you know better than us BW!, that graphics counts for more than CPU these days
For encoding - the x6's extra two cores will outperform any 20% clock for clock advantage the i7 has.
I know the 1090T's hit 4ghz easily enough, unlike the i7's which tend to overheat quite quickly (and I believe one has to switch off the hyperthreading - so you lose the extra gain over the phenoms). The 1055's get to about 3.8. That's all comfortable overclocks - not extreme ocing.
Can't say I'm a fan of gigabyte though - my asus has been quite reliable and i think ticks all the boxes your after (spec wise). - Using a 5850 ATI graphics card my current sytem slices through everything at 1080p (1920x1080) including BFBC2 which i'm still playing using 4X AA and 8X AF.
Oh and don't worry about memory - I only went for 8Gb for the VM's I run, otherwise overall system performance (especially in games) doesn't change one bit. hth dude
PS - The IMC's are much stronger on the X6's than the X4's - I'm running DDR3 in all four banks @ 1600 Mhz with a CPU-NB of 2400Mhz - now thats saying something! - others here are comfortably running 2800 or 3000 CPU-NB's with 2 sticks of RAM
Love my AMD x6 @ 4ghz - nothing in terms of raw processing (other than the £900 stonker from intel) comes close. For gaming - you know better than us BW!, that graphics counts for more than CPU these days
For encoding - the x6's extra two cores will outperform any 20% clock for clock advantage the i7 has.
I know the 1090T's hit 4ghz easily enough, unlike the i7's which tend to overheat quite quickly (and I believe one has to switch off the hyperthreading - so you lose the extra gain over the phenoms). The 1055's get to about 3.8. That's all comfortable overclocks - not extreme ocing.
Can't say I'm a fan of gigabyte though - my asus has been quite reliable and i think ticks all the boxes your after (spec wise). - Using a 5850 ATI graphics card my current sytem slices through everything at 1080p (1920x1080) including BFBC2 which i'm still playing using 4X AA and 8X AF.
Oh and don't worry about memory - I only went for 8Gb for the VM's I run, otherwise overall system performance (especially in games) doesn't change one bit. hth dude
PS - The IMC's are much stronger on the X6's than the X4's - I'm running DDR3 in all four banks @ 1600 Mhz with a CPU-NB of 2400Mhz - now thats saying something! - others here are comfortably running 2800 or 3000 CPU-NB's with 2 sticks of RAM
Last edited:
This is why Core i7 860 keeps up with Core i7 930 and is somehow a cheaper option. It does profit from Turbo Boost and lacks only a few features that are really negligible.
Core i7 870 vs Core i7 940 clock for clock comparison:
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 14,081
- Location
- Between Realities
I know a certain retailer(Almost wrote it then, would have been a nice holiday
) were selling ready made rigs, Intel Core i7 920 Asus P6T and Corsair PC3-1333MHz overclocked to 3.6ghz out the box. FYI, This thread is just starting to go the same way as the other. I like debating this, as its so fine and close its debatable! I will always buy the best value\overclockable processor. I feel the I7 is still the one to get. I dont get upset that others prefer the 1055t though. You're welcome to it, and every time you get to use your 2 other cores, Good! I hope it gives you a nice performance boost.
Just spotted a few comments above about I7 overheating quickly? I'm confused, What do you mean. You only overclock with adequate cooling? and with D0 hyperthreading can be kept
You could ditch 2GB of RAM from the i7 and save yourself even more cash for next to no loss in performance.
Also the i7 with a decent cooler and a bit of skill will cruise past 4GHz when overclocked, my 920 is at 4.4GHz on water.
Also the i7 with a decent cooler and a bit of skill will cruise past 4GHz when overclocked, my 920 is at 4.4GHz on water.
i think u quoing the wrong person mate...
i've not said anything about Core i7 860 and Core i7 930
You and arknor were saying that 4GB RAM is enough, I quoted benchmarks of two different platforms, one with Core i7 870, another with Core i7 940, proving both yours and mine points
ohhh i understand now.You and arknor were saying that 4GB RAM is enough, I quoted benchmarks of two different platforms, one with Core i7 870, another with Core i7 940, proving both yours and mine points
sorry mate
I think the majority of people reading this thread will understand the "premise" of the debate . . . I am of the opinion that LGA1366 Intel® Core™ i7 system in the O.P is faster in some tasks it doesn't appear to be faster in all tasks . . . if anyone has got some data where it can be demonstrated that in "fact" the Intel® Core™ i7 system hold a substantial advantage please feel free to post some links up in this thread as that could be something I have not yet seen and actually unaware of . . . as it stands at the moment the price-premium requires a large leap of faith which I would prefere not to make . . . I'm really only interested in "fact" from as close to the orginal source as possible . . . I'm not prepared to spend £120-£150 extra because someone who may not know what he is talking about tells me too? . . . I need some evidence that was is being said is actually true . . . not false?
This person who keeps suggesting I go with the cheapest possible Intel® Core™ i7 build . . . thanks for your suggestion but I think as I said in the O.P it is in fact a "moot" point . . . if one chooses cheaper components for the Intel® build then one also chooses cheaper components for the AMD® build . . . . both prices come down and the question of "value" remains the same?
The premise of the thread is simple . . . I need "facts" to evaluate which system gives the most performance for the money £££ . . . this is a simple principle picked up from the old school OverClocking days known as Bang-for-Buck!
I'm being very open-minded here guys, if you got the "justification" and the "facts" then I got the money . . . I'd rather not spend the money just for the sake of spending the money though!
Last edited:
Hello arknor,
no I'm not intending to OverClock to 4GHz unless the power-consumption looks reasonable . . . I didn't list an Arctic Freezer 7 Pro in the O.P as I felt it may struggle with either chips and a big overclock . . . I'm sure its better than the stock cooler though . . .
I'm also intending to use DDR3-1600 memory not "10666 memory"
If you can deliver any useful performance data from either Intel®/AMD® systems that could be duplicated by the O.P systems I would be grateful . . . I did put many hours into this already so any help from you or anyone else would be most appreciated . . . remember I am the one here who needs convincing either way . . . you don't need to spend your time convincing a Intel® Core™ i7 owner that he needs to buy a Intel® Core™ i7? . . . you can if you want but I am the O.P who needs the help!
Thanks Mr Krugga,
I wasn't brushing you off earlier but I didn't have the headspace yet to really digest another option . . . I can tell your keen so I reckon you have a valid point to make so I promise when I get some time later I will sit down with a flask of coffee and "contemplate" the Intel® Core™ i7 LGA1156 idea you are suggesting!
eh?
What about running 64bit sony Vegas?
64bit sonar 8.5 with 64 tracks of audio running with FX in realtime?