• 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.

***Intel Core i5 / i7 (1156) Reviews and Discussion Thread***

Have read some but not all reviews but thoughts are that if you were building a new system then the i5 is not a bad choice but.....

I had decided that the extra performance that I might get from i7 was not worth the cost of the upgrade from theQ9650 am currently running @4.05

I'm afraid that I have the same view of an upgrade to i5 & as previously decided will hang on & see what the move to 32nm brings.

If I were building to a budget from scratch I'd probably go with i5 but might be tempted to switch to Amd as there appears to be very little difference in performance & for me it would depend on the actual deal I could make on the day.
 
The cheapest i5 vs i7 rigs cpu/mobo combos in-stock here are:-
OEM i5 750 (£149.99) + Gigabyte GA-P55M-UD2 (£86.99) = £236.98
OEM i7 920 (£199.99) + MSI X58M Intel X58 (£129.98) = £329.97

In pure performance terms the i7 is not worth 30% more than the i5. I guess it depends how much that extra little bit of performance is worth to you.
 
Well I have mine up and running now, I was surprised to see the speeds hitting 3.2Ghz, I guess it must be the Intel Turbo mode doing that, I haven't had a proper play yet but I an already tell it's faster than my Phenom II, I ran Super Pi and it cracked 1M in 13s ..which is pretty impressive.

I haven't got the correct fitting for my Noctua yet so I'm just using the tiny Intel stock hsf unit, which is really rather inadequate to say the least, I'm idling at 39/40c with it and hitting 61/62c under load.

I haven't done a fresh install of W7 yet, so I'm running ontop of whatever mess my 790FX board left behind, seems ok but 3D Mark wont run, I get an error, tried reinstalling it but no joy, so I'll do a totally fresh install when I get the chance.

I did notice that during a run of 64bit Cinebench the clock speed kept moving between 2.8Ghz and 3.2Ghz, sometimes dipping back to 2.66Ghz ...I suppose it's doing this due to heat, as I say, it gets pretty hot with the stock hsf. None the less it ripped through Cinebench 64bit with a score of 14144.

I did notice something odd though, notice in the screenshot the discrepancy in clock speed between what cpuZ reports and what Core Temp shows, odd.

Screenshot
 
Last edited:
and as i said earlier,and as i expected i5 tuk the lead from AMD by a little margin ,but to me still AMD AM3 and Intel 1366 is the way ,as thy wil b having 6 cores cpu by nxt year, AMD prices wil reduce soon
 
Moeks said:
Well I have mine up and running now, I was surprised to see the speeds hitting 3.2Ghz, I guess it must be the Intel Turbo mode doing that, I haven't had a proper play yet but I an already tell it's faster than my Phenom II, I ran Super Pi and it cracked 1M in 13s ..which is pretty impressive.
Click to expand...
Nice one, sorry to be nosey, what rig did you end up going for? I'm tempted to switch just for the sheer fun of it.
 
Nelly said:
Nice one, sorry to be nosey, what rig did you end up going for? I'm tempted to switch just for the sheer fun of it.
Click to expand...

Well it's in my sig, but it's an I5 750 with a Gigabyte GA-P55M-UD2 matx motherboard, I'm using a 4GB set of G.Skill Ripjaw memory, the one with blue ramsinks, and my old 8800GT, running Windows 7 RC on a G.Skill Falcon 128GB SSD.

After doing some reading about Turbo mode, it should be running the cpu at 2.8Ghz, so I guess the 3.2Ghz reported by cpuZ was incorrect and Core Temp was right. I have no idea why I keep seeing 3.2Ghz then, must be a miss reading as Core Temp always shows 2.8 and that fits with what the Bios says and Intel say.
 
Last edited:
Ouch oerrr hitting 68c after just a minute of Prime95 on 4 cores. I really need a better cooler, the Intel one is more like a toy, indeed it's more like something you would expect to see cooling a North Ridge not a cpu.

I hope Noctua can get me the correct fitting in good time.

I scraped Intel's own thermal compound straight off and used MX2, I think I might reapply and reseat, see if that brings those temperatures down a bit, that's high even by stock cooler standards imo. Then again the cooler is smaller than the one I got with my E6600 in 2007.
 
Last edited:
easyrider said:
The holes around the socket look like S775 will my s775 waterblock fit?

Like on the asus P5T i7 mobo?
Click to expand...

You will have to check each board, some have dual mounting holes so you can mount either 775 or a 1156 hsf/block.

Asrock have some for sure and somebody else but cant remember.
 
Yea thats what i thought moeks, wont get much of a clock with the stock but it'll do as temporary
 
Last edited:
Moeks said:
Well I have mine up and running now, I was surprised to see the speeds hitting 3.2Ghz, I guess it must be the Intel Turbo mode doing that, I haven't had a proper play yet but I an already tell it's faster than my Phenom II, I ran Super Pi and it cracked 1M in 13s ..which is pretty impressive.

I haven't got the correct fitting for my Noctua yet so I'm just using the tiny Intel stock hsf unit, which is really rather inadequate to say the least, I'm idling at 39/40c with it and hitting 61/62c under load.

I haven't done a fresh install of W7 yet, so I'm running ontop of whatever mess my 790FX board left behind, seems ok but 3D Mark wont run, I get an error, tried reinstalling it but no joy, so I'll do a totally fresh install when I get the chance.

I did notice that during a run of 64bit Cinebench the clock speed kept moving between 2.8Ghz and 3.2Ghz, sometimes dipping back to 2.66Ghz ...I suppose it's doing this due to heat, as I say, it gets pretty hot with the stock hsf. None the less it ripped through Cinebench 64bit with a score of 14144.

I did notice something odd though, notice in the screenshot the discrepancy in clock speed between what cpuZ reports and what Core Temp shows, odd.

Screenshot
Click to expand...

I would not advise you drop in a intel setup , in a previously AMD hardware installed OS. Hopefully you'll be ok but id recommend you re-install windows.

What your describing is infact the intel speed step. It flicks through the clocks rather than sticking to a clock. If you disable the speedstep and C1 stuff in the bios it will not do this. But some times its handy as it uses minimal clock and power to do stuff , then give you the full 3.2ghz on load.

Those temps do not seem bad on the stock cooler. My i7 920 @ 4ghz is about the same 39-45 idle depending on temps and 65 -75 load. :p This is using the CWC H50 though.
 
Last edited:
Oh I know it's bad practice to stick a new board with a totally different chipset into a machine without reinstalling the OS, I will do it tomorrow, I just wanted to see if it would boot, and when it did, I thought I'd have a play around anyway.
 
JonnyG1982 said:
The I5's need to be cheaper, they have too many disadvantages for the price. The I7 920 is the clear choice for upgrade imo.
Click to expand...

I think it's touch and go. I had budgeted myself £600 for a new rig, and couldn't afford that if I go for the i7. i5 fits the bill for me. Add to that that I'm not a super uber power user, and that the i5 limitations (lack of extra threads, only 16 PCI lanes etc) will never be an issue for me, and the i5 becomes more attractive to me than the i7 920.

That said, you're right. The i7 920 is still the best chip based on its price.
 
Iraklis F.C. said:
seeing the reviews i am confused , is the i7 920 still the best bang for buck cpu out there?
Click to expand...

It never was the best bang for buck CPU, but it seems that you should either buy an i5 on 1156, or an i7 on 1366 - don't bother with the i7 on 1156.

JonnyG1982 said:
The I5's need to be cheaper, they have too many disadvantages for the price. The I7 920 is the clear choice for upgrade imo.
Click to expand...

I'm sure they'll come down in price. Look at how much i7 was when it came out, or anything for that matter.
 
Last edited:
From the reviews the picture is a little confusing, trouble is the reviews talk about $100 motherboards and sub $200 chips. Looking at shops here in blighty the motherboards are way higher priced than that and this confuses the decision. Looking at our pricing, as it currently stands, D D Danneh's right, i5 750 on 1156 to keep the cost down or jump to the 920 on 1366 for the extra mem bandwidth, future upgrade path and HT.
 
Anyone know how much an i7 920 and decent motherboard dropped in price 2 months after release? Looking at i5 + P55 + DDR3 + Crossfire HD58xx for christmas. :)
 
I guess this has been asked a fair bit, but

Would it be worth it from a gaming perspective to upgrade from a very stable and reliable 4000Mhz E8600 to a Core I7 920 with a possible OC of 4000Mhz,
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom