Core i7 overclocking

overclocks, from what I've seen, same as penryn on air, 4.2Ghz is nothing even remotely special to be perfectly honest, yes, even on air. 4Ghz was "fairly" easy on air on kentsfield cores.


if you work, professionally and do encoding/3d rendering and time is literally money then an upgrade to an i7 rig is well worth it, if you game, aren't a millionaire or don't need to do encoding/3d rendering for WORK and only do it for a lark or hobby then stick with whatever you've got, its no faster for gaming, general use or anything else, its very good in certain encoding and 3d rendering though, very very good. Gaming its marginally better in some games and marginally worse in others, not really noticable in either case.
 
i can imagine though, as the new chips start to come out over the coming months/years, it'll come into its own with gaming, as i'm sure developers will start making use of the oodles of threads these things can handle
 
twist3d0n3 said:
i can imagine though, as the new chips start to come out over the coming months/years, it'll come into its own with gaming, as i'm sure developers will start making use of the oodles of threads these things can handle
Click to expand...

not really, we got dual cores how many years ago now and frankly most games barely utilise them, mostly the "main" threads simple can't be split up which is why we are where we are. Gaming by nature is generally a lot of sequencial code, which can't be split across multiple thread. theres very little in the way of threads being split up, just in terms of separating the physics, from the ai, from the sound, gfx, etc, etc. Theres really only so many threads one needs, and frankly if your quad core is only 50% loaded, hyperthreading isn't going to help as theres plenty of spare power anyway.

Really in terms of clock for clock speed advantage the i7 has very little clock for clock advantage, improvements to registers for certain things make certain things, mostly encoding, massively improved but thats always been the case. Almost every new chip amd and intel has some new register set that speeds up specific multimedia functions. i7 won't be any better than kentsfield/yorkfield for gaming, at any point in time.
 
if you work, professionally and do encoding/3d rendering and time is literally money then an upgrade to an i7 rig is well worth it,
Click to expand...

I disagree you can get a lot more speed for your money with a dual xeon setup most people in the rendering world will have this.

Xeon chips are the fastest of the current generation cpu's.

Of course this will very soon change when the 2cpu i7 variants appear.
 
Blackbadger said:
I disagree you can get a lot more speed for your money with a dual xeon setup most people in the rendering world will have this.

Xeon chips are the fastest of the current generation cpu's.

Of course this will very soon change when the 2cpu i7 variants appear.
Click to expand...

The problem is the i7 965 manages to give a fully tricked-out Skulltrail rig a good hiding in pretty much all the benchmarks I've seen. And the 9775 (Xeon in drag) is the fastest Core 2 one can buy...
 
The Xeon X5492 quadcore has been out for a while, 3.4ghz stock.
Also the 3.5ghz stock X5270 dual core is used by serious players.

In the reviews the oc'd I7 to 4ghz just about matches performance of a dual 2.5ghz system, in no way does it come remotely close to competing with a high end skulltrail.
 
Blackbadger said:
The Xeon X5492 quadcore has been out for a while, 3.4ghz stock.
Also the 3.5ghz stock X5270 dual core is used by serious players.

In the reviews the oc'd I7 to 4ghz just about matches performance of a dual 2.5ghz system, in no way does it come remotely close to competing with a high end skulltrail.
Click to expand...

I would like to see the performance of a 2x Intel Core i7 965 3.20Ghz Extreme Edition skulltrail system, compared to a high end Intel Core 2 skulltrail.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom