• 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.

Upgrading i7 920 --> Ivy bridge ( I5 or I7 ) Video encoding

rIcK

rIcK

rIcK

Associate
Joined
5 Jan 2004
Posts
1,724
Currently I have an Intel I7 920 overclocked to 3.6 Ghz which I have owned for a good few years now.

I do lots of video encoding and fancy something a bit more powerful, typically I use handbrake // Ripbot264 and encoding H264 Video.

Simply put, is it worth going for an I7 Ivy Bridge over an I5? Would the hyper threading make much of a difference and would the faster GPU and quick-sync help at all?

Any help would be appreciated! I will be overclocking this processor.
 
rIcK said:
Simply put, is it worth going for an I7 Ivy Bridge over an I5? Would the hyper threading make much of a difference and would the faster GPU and quick-sync help at all?
Click to expand...

You tell me.

cyberlink20mediaespress.png
 
The 3570k would ouy do the 920 up until you needed hyperthreading. Then it would obviously seem worse. Not sure why people are telling you not to get IB. It's a viable upgrade from a 920 with quite a decent amount of performance gains. If they are telling you not to get it purely because "it doesn't oveeclock well" then they are the type that enjoys big numbers that in real life performance give nothing. I know very few people that have sandybridge processors past 4.3ghz and IB can happily do that at stock volts most of the time. So if you have the cash and feel your 920 is bottlenecking your gpu greatly why not go for it? If not much of a bottleneck/no bottleneck then just wait for haswell.
 
Also Ivy is ~1.5x as fast at quicksync encoding as Sandy was due to the jump from HD3000 to HD4000, and Sandy quicksync left software encoding and CUDA accelerated encoding for dust in the first place.

Basically if encoding is important to you, get an IB CPU, games and general use may not see a massive leap from a 920 but encoding will be night and day.
 
Last edited:
I was surprised at how good HD4000 graphics are, I ran the Cinebench OpenGL test and got 21FPS on the HD4000 graphics- pretty good considering that our old family computer, using the integrated graphics on an i3 530 only managed 2FPS. I'd imagine that HD4000 graphics would be playable on quite a few games, provided the settings were set to low and the resolution turned down.
 
IIRC the HD4000 is supposed to be on the same level as a 6800 Ultra or 8600GT. Intel really have come along leaps and bounds with the HD series, if you look at a GPU benchmark hierarchy chart I think the HD-HD3000 jump skips three tiers and the HD3000-HD4000 jump skips four O.O
 
Be aware that although Quick sync is fast the quality is not supposed to be as good as software encoding. Also there is no Quick Sync support for handbrake, and I think only about two or three applications do support it, which is a shame because it's a phenominal feature.
 
I think going for a i5 3570k from i7 920 is still a downgrade. close per clock ivy bridge has advantage but it still would only win in single thread applications, in applications that use all threads the 920 has the edge.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom