How does the Intel naming work????

[p3ndldqny2]

Ok i used to think i7 was best, 9xx then 8xx, i5 etc, but then i saw this:

Intel Core i7 920 2.66GHz, 200 GBP
Intel Core i5 670 3.46GHz, 220 GBP
Intel Core i7 860 2.8GHz, 245 GBP

Does this mean for straight core performance i would prefer the i5 670? Is this model for those who dont want 4 cores, 8 hyper threads and just do number-crunching etc? Correct me if im wrong, but thats the fastest freq ive seen.

 

[Hotwired]

Intel Core i7 920 2.66GHz, 200 GBP
Intel Core i5 670 3.46GHz, 220 GBP
Intel Core i7 860 2.8GHz, 245 GBP

Corrected that for you.

Yes, the i5 670 has a fast stock clock speed.

But I can't honestly think of a reason to get it...

The i5 750 is a superior chip, very easily overclocked to that level without having to increase voltage and it's cheaper.

In fact it's so much cheaper that with the spare cash you could buy a graphics card better than the IGP on the i5 670 to go with your i5 750...

Thats just how weird the position of the i5 670 is.


The chips you want if you

dont want 4 cores, 8 hyper threads and just do number-crunching

are the i3 range or possibly the i5 750.

 

[p3ndldqny2]

Corrected that for you.

Yes, the i5 670 has a fast stock clock speed.

But I can't honestly think of a reason to get it...

The i5 750 is a superior chip, very easily overclocked to that level without having to increase voltage and it's cheaper.

In fact it's so much cheaper that with the spare cash you could buy a graphics card better than the IGP on the i5 670 to go with your i5 750...

Thats just how weird the position of the i5 670 is.


The chips you want if you are the i3 range or possibly the i5 750.

Edited

What makes you suggest i3 (ive never really looked at i3 before, know next-to-nothign about them). I looked up clarkdale and the memory timings are ugly, referring to the i5 670 i mentioned.

The i7 860 looked good, especially if i could get it to 4GHz on water.

 

[Hotwired]

I suggested i3 because they are dual cores similar to the i5 670 you were talking of but priced a lot more logically. The clarkdales do have a worse memory controller than the lynnfields but worse is relative and it doesn't ruin them by any means.

Did you want a quad core with hyperthreading or were you after a fast dual core?

 

[p3ndldqny2]

I suggested i3 because they are dual cores similar to the i5 670 you were talking of but priced a lot more logically. The clarkdales do have a worse memory controller than the lynnfields but worse is relative and it doesn't ruin them by any means.

Did you want a quad core with hyperthreading or were you after a fast dual core?

Lets just say i dont need lots of cores, 2 would be fine. I would prefer more speed in a single core?

Edit ive seen an i7 870 for 160GBP which looks very tempting!! Ii must admit i probably won't make a purchase for 6 weeks.

 

[cmndr_andi]

Looking at this (the single threaded benchmark) the i5 670 is faster in the single threaded benchmark. However, clock-for-clock the i5 750 is faster even in this benchmark - so if you OC both to 4GHz then the 750 would perform faster even when single threaded. Considering this, and the far superior multithreaded performance, I think the quad core still makes more sense considering the price. Also, the i3 aquits itself well considering its much lower price.

However, if you can get an i7 870 (stock 2.93GHz, hyperthreading enabled) for less than the price of an i5 750 (2.66GHz stock, hyperthreading disabled) then I say snap it up. Its a great chip, similar excellent performance in single threaded applications and loads of overclocking headroom.

 

[p3ndldqny2]

Looking at this (the single threaded benchmark) the i5 670 is faster in the single threaded benchmark. However, clock-for-clock the i5 750 is faster even in this benchmark - so if you OC both to 4GHz then the 750 would perform faster even when single threaded. Considering this, and the far superior multithreaded performance, I think the quad core still makes more sense considering the price. Also, the i3 aquits itself well considering its much lower price.

However, if you can get an i7 870 (stock 2.93GHz, hyperthreading enabled) for less than the price of an i5 750 (2.66GHz stock, hyperthreading disabled) then I say snap it up. Its a great chip, similar excellent performance in single threaded applications and loads of overclocking headroom.

Hey thanks

Could you recommend good OCing gear to compliment it? I dont mean to burden you but i dont really know much, my last mobo was an ASUS P5W Deluxe but im thinking of watercooling this time. I also probably know JS about PSUs and memory for OCing.

 

[Troezar]

Interesting stuff, I wondered why the 670 was more expensive than the 750, logical numbering system!!

 

[Vir]

I'd say a i5 750 or i7 860.
I wouldn't go for the Dual Cores anymore, nothing wrong with it but Quad Core is really the way to go now if investing in a new rig imo ...

 

[ThomasTheTankEngine]

Interesting stuff, I wondered why the 670 was more expensive than the 750, logical numbering system!!

I believe the intel chips are actually numbered by manatees, using a system of coloured balls.

 

[cmndr_andi]

Hey thanks

Could you recommend good OCing gear to compliment it? I dont mean to burden you but i dont really know much, my last mobo was an ASUS P5W Deluxe but im thinking of watercooling this time. I also probably know JS about PSUs and memory for OCing.

Sorry for the slow reply.

This is the motherboard I would go for. Its a solid overclocker and has plenty of features.

This is the RAM I would go for.

The PSU choice will also depend on what graphics card you are going to use. However, if you want a quick catch-all solution - this PSU is good quality, has good warranty and will power an overclocked machine, a high-end single GPU and has headroom for plenty of upgrades.

As for a watercooling setup, I don't know much about that area - so far I have only used air cooling - though I do plan to try watercooling soon. I would suggest you make a new thread about watercooling when you have a good idea of the rest of your system specs - as many people here will be able to give you some great advice on a watercooling system.

Alternatively, a decent aircooler (+ a decent fan or two) like this should take an i5 750 or i7 860 to 4GHz anyway - though it won't perform or look as cool as a custom watercooling system.

 

[jorzeh]

Only reason i went for core I7 and the X58 based boards was i fully intend to get a 5890 then the payday after that month get another n xfire them can't do that with full x16 lanes on a p55 board : ( QQ