• 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.

why is i5 better than i7 for gaming

fabdabcab

fabdabcab

fabdabcab

Associate
Joined
16 Jan 2010
Posts
63
Location
sunny st neots
was just wandering why this is? surely i7 is quicker they are both quad core.i have now decieded on intel just got to choose between the above, decisions decisions:confused:
 
stulid said:
The i5 turbo boost is more aggressive/faster.

It also depends which i5 your comparing, as only the 750/760 are true quad cores.
Click to expand...

+1

Clock-for-clock the i5 (i'll just be talking about the 700 series i5s here, the 600 series a dual cores and not nearly as good for gamers) is usually as fast as an i7 since the architecture is very similar and the i7's hyperthreading (creating virtual cores, to provide a boost in highly multi-threaded applications) is not made use of by most modern games.

Often benchmarks will show that the i5 is faster than an i7 - as stulid mentions this is usually the more aggressive turbo boost of the i5 kicking in and "overclocking" the CPU when under workloads that don't stress all four cores (like many games). However, when turbo boost is turned off (when overclocking you really want it off) you will find that the i5 and i7 perform very similarly at the same clockspeed (usually within a few %).

Even with turbo off, the i5 can be faster as it has the PCIE controller on the CPU -so when using a single graphics card this can provide another few % over an i7.

In conclusion, for gaming the i5 is the chip to buy. The i7 isn't really any slower, but suited to different tasks and more expensive.


That all said, unless you imminently need a new system I would not buy a nahalem i5 or i7 now. On January 9th Intel's next generation CPUs and motherboards are being released ("Sandy Bridge"). These chips will be 10-20% faster clock-for-clock than current i5s and i7s, be clocked higher at stock and overclock very well (if you go for a K series).
 
An i5 760 is equivalent clock-wise to an i7 930 for 3-4 cores under load and an i7 950 for 1 core under load because of the more aggressive turbo boost.

In both of these scenarios the i7 just about beats the i5 but the difference is usually negligible (except for applications that can really make use of HyperThreading, e.g. x264 encoding). For gaming, the i5 just makes more sense cos it's a bit cheaper.
 
The only time an i7 will be faster is with multiple gpu's, even then this will show up more in benchmarks though compared to real world game performance, dual x16 for sli/xfire on i7 vs dual x 8 on the 15's.
 
there use to be a time when triple channel ram was much more expensive, but now your getting 50% more capacity with a 6GB kit for less than a 50% increase in price.
 
fabdabcab said:
any idea on price range of the sandy bridge pls and thanks for the quick replies thats why i love this site ;-)
Click to expand...

Well this table gives us the best idea. This is the US dollar price for bulk ordered CPUs. To put these prices in perspective in terms of what we will pay in the UK for a retail one - when the i5 750 launched it cost $196 and in the UK on retailers it cost ~£160. The exchange rate is very similar now to what it was them.

If you are mainly gaming then I would I would strongly suggest looking at the i5 2500K. It should be good bang-for-buck and overclock well - however we will need to wait for January 9th before we can do a full comparison against current generation CPUs, as the NDA for all the review websites should lift around then.
 
thanks so as i plan to crossfire i would be better of going for i7 even though its more expensive? i kind off feel that sandy bridge like most new technoligy needs to prove it self first before i take the plunge.
 
IIRC, Lynfield chips (like the 750 and 760) also have a faster connection to the PCIE busses compared to Bloomfield, thanks to the controller being on-board, which would give than a slight edge in single-graphics card setups.
 
Luke_Bowman said:
i5 760 is faster for Gaming because the i7 creates virtual cores while the i5 760 ( and 750 ) are true quad cores
Click to expand...

Not quite. Both i7 and i5 are true quad cores - they both have four physical cores. It is just that the i7 has hyperthreading that creates two virtual cores per physical core - hence the i7 has four true cores, but eight threads. This doesn't degrade its performance in single or lightly threaded applications.
 
Luke_Bowman said:
i5 760 is faster for Gaming because the i7 creates virtual cores while the i5 760 ( and 750 ) are true quad cores
Click to expand...

erm thats not true at all

the i7 are "true quads" as well

the virtual cores your talking a bout is hyerthreading, which u can also turn off if u want, althou not much point having an i7 if u do :P

the virtual cores make is has 8 cores, 4 physical, 4 virtual.

there is very little difference between them in terms of games, which is what makes the i5 better, as its usually a lot cheaper.
games dont use the full power of an i7, so the extra money spent on them is wasted for games.

the pci-e controller gives slightly better gpu performance on the i5 thou, but again, the difference in real world is very small
 
What I'm wondering is, given that tripple channel ram and x16/x16 sli/x-fire make close to no difference at all in almost all applications, certainly gaming, what are the new high-end Sandy Bridge platforms with tripple and quad channel ram (socket 1356 and 2011) actually going to offer gamers, or anyone, over the first wave of 1155 stuff? Hmmm.

The thing is people are reading the intel roadmap blurb saying 1155 is the 'mainstream' replacement and the later 1356 and 2011 are the 'enthusiast' parts. This is making some people conclude a current i7 is a better, more 'future-proof' choice than the January 1155 SB stuff, as current x58/i7 is also designated 'enthusiast'. Couldn't be further from the truth if you ask me. In reality an 1155 i5 or i7 K is going to be better than a current 1366 i7, and the later 1356 and 2011 SB stuff with its tripple/quad channel ram and more PCIe lanes is probably not going to offer much more in real-world single user situations, i.e. gaming, for some huge prices - mirroring current 1156 vs 1366 performance/price. Yet cos of the intel labelling, this forum is littered with spec-me threads where people are saying 'ooh no I'm not waiting for SB cos January is only going to be the mainstream parts - I'll have me a current i7 then cos that's enthusiast and I dont want to wait till the end of next year for enthusiast SB.

Oh well.
 
Liampope said:
snip
Click to expand...

I completely agree - the SB chips (specifically the K series i5) and the s1155 motherboards (with PCIE x8x8) will be ideal for gamers and a much better option than i7/X58, since the triple channel RAM and PCIE x16x16 hardly benefits gamers - but the enhanced CPU performance of SB will certainly aid gamers in CPU heavy games.

As for what will the "enthusiast" level SB offer - I think the main thing is more cores. It will not just be quad cores that we will see in the autumn/winter , but also Hex and Octo cores. Also, overclocking will be properly supported on these systems - unlike the unfied bus of the s1155.

How much the six and eight core CPUs will benefit gamers - i'm not sure. I strongly suspect that the LGA 1155 will be more than enough for modern games and cost much less. However, if you use a lot of CPU heavy, multithreaded applications then I can see the "enthusiast" platform being a benefit (or if you are one of the few that want to run three or more graphics cards), but for the vast majority of gamers the SB 1155 will be more than fast enough and much cheaper than the "enthusiast" platforms - hence making it the obvious intel choice (I am really looking forward to see what AMD brings to the table next year with Bulldozer).
 
Yeah - I'll buy an octo-core just cos it sounds cool :).

I'm also very excited about Bulldozer - I've had plenty more AMDs than Intels over the years. 2011 will be an exciting year - as it ought to be, since the world is ending in 2012.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom