• 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 now considering the price drop?

Associate
Joined
28 Apr 2010
Posts
19
I don't think I'd be able to ever take advantage of the full power of the i7 920, though I would prefer having it ofc.

I was wondering if I should go for the i7 now while its cheaper, so spending about £350 for cpu + heatsink + mobo rather than like £250 for the same with phenom II because they feel like the last of the chips on AM3?

So if 1366 will last longer wouldn't it be worth going that route now for £100 extra, while getting better performance?

Thanks
 
Problem is no one knows for sure if Bulldozer will be compatible with AM2/AM3 mobo's.If this is the case you are more futureproof going the AMD way :)
 
I would suggest that if you can spend the extra money for the i7 920 system - it is worth it (especially at the crazy prices they are at now).

The i7 may be faster than you need now - but it will take keep you going much longer until you need your next upgrade, so its not exactly wasted money. Also, with the dual x16 PCIe slot and compatibility with upcoming 32nm hex cores means that you will be able to upgrade the system if you wish.

As for AMD upgrade possibilities - AMD have a track record of supporting older sockets. However, it certainly isn't above them to do an intel and switch sockets completely (s939-AM2 anyone?) - such a practice is often necessary and may be required to unleash the power of Bulldozer, which from what we hear will be quite a departure from current AMD chips.
 
Last edited:
From what I've read the i7 is definitely eol early 2011 whereas AM3 will take the first Bulldozer chips so should have more life in it...
 
The thing is although the i7-920 has come down in price, the motherboards are actually slightly more expensive than they were last year, and of course DDR3 has gone up drastically (assuming you don't have it already).

I was considering a 1366 setup a year ago, it was something like this:

i7-920 = £200
x58 mobo = £130
6GB PC12800 = £90
Total = £420

In the end I went for i5 at launch because of the MSI mobo deal though (Total ~£300 for cpu, cooler, mobo and 4GB PC12800C7)

Nowadays yes you save a fair few quid on the i7-920 processor but you've got to downgrade to slower, more expensive RAM compared to the above so to be honest anyone who doesn't already have DDR3 has to pay as much today as they did back then if they want to move to 1366
 
From what I've read the i7 is definitely eol early 2011 whereas AM3 will take the first Bulldozer chips so should have more life in it...

Actually, i7 (well the X58 platform) is EOL Q3 2011 to be replaced by the top-end Sandy Bridget Parts.

As for Bulldozer, do you have a source that confirms that Bulldozer will be compatible with AM3?


What Hangtime says is correct - compared to a year or so ago the other prices in a system have crept up. The motherboards are more expensive (mainly due to the weakness of the pound), though you can find P6T SE boards for ~£140 if you look around and the RAM prices have skyrocketed (£130 for 6GB 1600MHz).

That said, the same can be said for an AMD system - 4GB of DDR3 costs £90-100 and a motherboard on the same level as an X58 cost ~£130 - however if you don't need all the features then a cheap £50 board will support a Phenom II chip, something X58 can't compete with.
 
I think that's always been the 'problem' with S1366 - lack of any cheap mobos. Then again, it's always been the 'high end' platform so perhaps understandable. Over the years though you've nearly always been able to get a board supporting intels latest cpu range for £100 or less (my slot1, s370, s478, s775 boards averaged about £80 I think) , so I think Intel had to bring out S1156 to get people buying their new gear
 
Current times are what count i think, i am fed up of holding out for new tech, unless its only a few weeks away, we all know the delays are going to happen + avail + costs of new tech is overpriced.
 
920 is a steal


Its an awsome CPU and will last you for ages.

You are then able to stick one of the cheaper 6 cores in coming soon.
 
920 is a steal


Its an awsome CPU and will last you for ages.

You are then able to stick one of the cheaper 6 cores in coming soon.
I agree. i7 920 would definitely would have better longevity than the Phenom II X4. The Phenom II X4 955/[email protected] would be just barely faster enough to keep up with a single 5970 or pair of 5850 in crossfire without CPU bottleneck, whereas i7 920@4Ghz would be fast enough to keep up with three 5870 and still have a some breathing room left.

So i7 920 would last graphic card upgrades till the day when a single GPU graphic card becomes as fast as three 5870 in the future...which I believe would be a long long time away (for people that only consider single GPU cards and no crossfire/SLI).

Let's assume Phenom II X4 965BE at stock speed 3.4GHz is as fast as i7 920 at stock speed 2.66GHz (ignore the fact that the i7 920 is faster for now). Phenom II X4 965BE overclock from 3.4GHz to 4.0GHz, that would be a 18% overclock. Now if we consideing overclocking the i7 920 by 18% from 2.66GHz, that would make it 3.14GHz. So what this mean is that a Phenom II X4 965BE at 4.0GHz is only as fast as a i7 920 at 3.14GHz.

So I think it would take quite a big leap forward from the Phenom II X4 for the AMD Bulldozer X4 to be as fast as as i7 920, let alone beating it. And the AMD Bulldozer X8 is most likely gonna be way too expensive and the extra cores are most likely not gonna benefit gaming:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2871/2

Hate to say this...but until games start making use of 5th-8th cores, gaming performance would still be more dependent on CPU architecture on which CPU offer more speed per core, not how many extra cores a CPU offer above Quad.
 
Last edited:
Problem is no one knows for sure if Bulldozer will be compatible with AM2/AM3 mobo's.If this is the case you are more futureproof going the AMD way :)

What do you mean no one knows, Bulldozer might be compatible with AM3, it certainly won't work on AM2 boards, we'll have to see.

Server versions look set to get quad channel memory, its plausible the highest end Bulldozers will be quad channel, as 4 memory sticks isn't difficult with 1 stick per channel meaning no increased difficulty. Servers are getting a dual channel version aswell so we'll have to see.

Intel are dumping their sockets against next year and i7 has very little longevity in it. Its more likely Bulldozer and AMD chips will be compatible for a while than on the Intel side and their new chips.

I think thats partially down to AMD's experience/early jump to on die memory controllers, which largely makes the chipset/mobo irrelevant.

Obviously the first gen will need some tweaks and things fixed, but one you get a good platform, AM2 then AM3, well theres little new mobo's give you than new DDR types in reality. Theres incredibly little between a 790fx and 890fx in terms of performance and features.

Give Intel a couple chipset generations to get everything somewhat perfect and they'll probably be able to produce a chipset that really doesn't need upgrading/changing in a long long time like AMD.
 
I agree. i7 920 would definitely would have better longevity than the Phenom II X4. The Phenom II X4 955/[email protected] would be just barely faster enough to keep up with a single 5970 or pair of 5850 in crossfire without CPU bottleneck, whereas i7 920@4Ghz would be fast enough to keep up with three 5870 and still have a some breathing room left.

So i7 920 would last graphic card upgrades till the day when a single GPU graphic card becomes as fast as three 5870 in the future...which I believe would be a long long time away (for people that only consider single GPU cards and no crossfire/SLI).

Let's assume Phenom II X4 965BE at stock speed 3.4GHz is as fast as i7 920 at stock speed 2.66GHz (ignore the fact that the i7 920 is faster for now). Phenom II X4 965BE overclock from 3.4GHz to 4.0GHz, that would be a 18% overclock. Now if we consideing overclocking the i7 920 by 18% from 2.66GHz, that would make it 3.14GHz. So what this mean is that a Phenom II X4 965BE at 4.0GHz is only as fast as a i7 920 at 3.14GHz.

So I think it would take quite a big leap forward from the Phenom II X4 for the AMD Bulldozer X4 to be as fast as as i7 920, let alone beating it. And the AMD Bulldozer X8 is most likely gonna be way too expensive and the extra cores are most likely not gonna benefit gaming:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2871/2

Hate to say this...but until games start making use of 5th-8th cores, gaming performance would still be more dependent on CPU architecture on which CPU offer more speed per core, not how many extra cores a CPU offer above Quad.

Firstly the Bulldozer will be faster than I7, architecturally it just has WAY more of EVERYTHING, its a freaking beast, the question is can Intel's next chips beat Bulldozer, its incredibly unlikely. Once Bulldozer gets a AMD gpu on die, which it can use for incredibly FPU power than Intels current intergrated gpu's couldn't hope to match, then theres a very real chance Bulldozer will absolutely demolish anything Intel can get out for a good while. Though in gaming, neither Intel nor AMD's new chips are likely to offer any real gaming performance, or be required for any games for years.

As for the P2, a P2 @ 4Ghz is in no way close to bottlenecking on crossfire, that is UTTER rubbish.

Take Metro 2033, one of the best looking and newest games around with a pretty heavy performance toll to go with the looks. a 2Ghz i7, performs IDENTICALLY to a 4Ghz i7, which performs IDENTICALLY to a 2Ghz P2, which performs IDENTICALLY to a 4Ghz P2.

Games are not cpu limited, crossfire/sli DOES NOT INCREASE the amount a game is bottlenecked by a CPU, there have been maybe 3 games in the past two years to be CPU limited, GTA4 has recently been "fixed" to perform unbelievably better on a dual core than it used to, it was a horrific port of a horrifically unoptimised game.
 
Back
Top Bottom