• 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 CPU Comparison [Low, Mid, High End] - Opinions?

Emphacy

Emphacy

Emphacy

Associate
Joined
24 Nov 2010
Posts
1,866
Location
127.0.0.1
As some of you already know, I'm writing an article on selecting desktop components for beginners.
Therefore I've been creating tables to give the user an idea of low end, mid range and high end Intel CPU's.

Before I mark this one off and continue doing the AMD versions of these tables (which I'm struggling with) I thought I'd ask averyones opinion here.

Here are the tables:

IntelCPULowEnd.png


IntelCPUMidRange-1.png


IntelCPUHighEnd.png


Is there anything you think needs changing? This is how I would class the different ranges of CPU, they're based off AnandTech benchmarks from several CPU's, but unfortunately I can't find a bench for EVERY CPU so had to use my own experience for a few of them.
As you can see, this is current. That's why Sandy Bridge has had such a large impact, where some of the i3 CPU's are mid range. The tables will be updated when Ivy Bridge arrives too.

Your opinions are really important! Thanks :D
 
Sin_Chase said:
Are they Turbo Frequencies?

Consider adding number of threads. (IE Which chips have Hyperthreading or not)
Click to expand...

Normal Frequencies, Turbo frequencies are much higher.

I'm trying to keep the tables simple for the first part, threads and additional capabilities (Multi-Threading, Turbo, Cache) will be added later.

ng93 said:
Lynnfield i7s are high end imo as they perform similarly to bloomfield
Click to expand...

Or maybe the "bloomfield" CPU's should be mid range?
 
Wouldn't getting off the 45nm CPU's off the list first is a better idea? I mean even if the 45nm CPUs ares till on the retailers and e-tailers, their prices doesn't justify their performance against the new 32nm line of CPUs.
 
Emphacy said:
Before I mark this one off and continue doing the AMD versions of these tables (which I'm struggling with) I thought I'd ask averyones opinion here.
Click to expand...

would have thought that'd be easier tbh, zacate/sempron/athlonx2 low end, athlonx3/phenomx2 mid range, athlonx4/phenomx4/phenomx6 high end

Emphacy said:
Or maybe the "bloomfield" CPU's should be mid range?
Click to expand...

imo they still provide more performance then most people will use (even gamers), which makes them high end

Lelouch said:
Wouldn't getting off the 45nm CPU's off the list first is a better idea? I mean even if the 45nm CPUs ares till on the retailers and e-tailers, their prices doesn't justify their performance against the new 32nm line of CPUs.
Click to expand...

depends if he just wants current gen or all currently available cpus
 
But if the article were for a magazine or a website would'nt you expect for the beginners to know about and purchase new gen stuff?
 
Lelouch said:
But if the article were for a magazine or a website would'nt you expect for the beginners to know about and purchase new gen stuff?
Click to expand...

no? That's the point in the article. To help beginners understand the range of CPU's available, what's best to go for, for their particular build.



Hmm, I wanted a generalisation of all the CPU's past the Core 2 series, but now that it's been mentioned, there isn't really any benefit in listing the 45nm socket 1156 CPU's at all.
I'm currently unsure of what to do... I'd only be left with SB and Gulftown.
 
what about the Intel Pentium G620, G840 and G850 sandybridge based, low end socket 1155 chips...?
 
bru said:
what about the Intel Pentium G620, G840 and G850 sandybridge based, low end socket 1155 chips...?
Click to expand...

Done, that has been changed.
I'm keeping the 1156 socket because I'm later going to explain why it's best to choose the latest architecture.
If I didn't half of the tables would be missing.

Hotwired said:
Split into i3 i5 and i7

Having i7 quads with HT as *midrange* while dual and quad cores without HT are *high end* is just wrong.
Click to expand...

Well this is where I'm having problems, because an i5 2500K could easily outperform an i7 860 as it's Sandy Bridge, which is why it's high end.
 
Last edited:
Emphacy said:
Or maybe the "bloomfield" CPU's should be mid range?
Click to expand...

high end aswell imo, the triple channel setup and bandwidth not just from the cpu but the whole chipset really does make it well up there, even though the i5ks can match and potentially beat it on clock speeds.
#
i guess it depends how your measuring this and on what basis? the i7s were never supposed to be all about games and catered for the heavy cad, vegas audience aswell.
 
Okay guys, I took the advice from all of you. The 1156 sockets have been removed. It has been split into i3, i5 and i7 and the Pentium G Series has been added to the low end.
How does this look now? If you where a beginner choosing a CPU for say a low end pc (internet browsing) a mid range PC (some gaming, Photoshop) or a High End PC (Video encoding, rendering, heavy gaming) would this table help you decide?

IntelCPUNEW.png


Thanks for your help, it is really appreciated. There's no point creating this thing for a market that doesn't agree with it.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom