Do I need the fastest chip?

[Sprocket7]

I'm sure that most people have reached the stage I'm in right now at some time or another. But there will be others who will follow after me and it is as much for them that I write this thread....

A good while back I decided to upgrade my AMD Athlon Dual Core 4200 system. I was loathe to fork out a big lump of cash in one go so took the piecemeal approach. At the time Intel i7 and DDR3 was just starting and beyond me, but like many before me and since I 'followed the crowd' and headed off in Intel's general direction, gradually adding quality generic components. You can see from my sig where I've got to so far. Aside from getting a 60GB SSD for Windows and my most used applications, it is crunch time for me. - I've got to choose between AMD and Intel - just like everyone else must do at some point. Crucially, no matter which I choose I've got to upgrade chip, mobo and RAM in one go, so the decision is a long-term one. And like most folks, I set my sights on getting the i7 920 DO set up - it was the fastest and I WANTED the fastest, the 1366 layout appeared to have greater longevity to me when compared to its 1156 cousin. Increasingly, I came to realise that 'bragging rights' were such a big factor in my decision, and the more I thought about it, the more I considered the power used and did I really NEED the fastest set up? And the power used by the i7-based system at UK power prices for hours on end is a factor. US prices look almost 'free' by comparison.

Then I came across a really excellent post by Malakai in which he compared AMD and Intel. He focused upon the fact that we rarely take a long hard look at what we ACTUALLY NEED before jumping on the Intel bandwagon for our bragging rights. (His post is under the AMD vs Intel thread begun by Senshido). I confess I was all set to do the same. But his post made me sit up and take a second look at the Intel i7 920 'rut' that I had freely got myself into....

I'm not a great gamer and I doubt I ever will be, as I do find the conflict games bore me silly after a few weeks, just like a game of golf would be a waste of a good walk to me.... But hey! Millions do both - they're just not for me that's all. But I do love to surf for information - to me the net is one huge reference library and its fun. I use Adobe Photoshop, Bridge, InDesign very heavily and my existing set up 'chokes a bit' and prevents me from using them simultaneously. But I'm hoping with the new kit I can do all this and enjoy my Sennheisers. I also reckon it will be fun to OC my final choice.

So for now, I've veered away from the i7 set up and I'm looking warmly towards the Phenom II X4 965 processor. And I don't think that waiting for the new 6-core chips (due in May?) will be worth the wait for me, for what I intend to use it for. What do you think?

 

[jazon1]

i was in the same boat not long ago only i was running a x2 6400+ but i was getting bsod off and on(come to find out it was only a HDD) and i was due for and upgraded machine,i figure i spend alot on time using one so the cost would be worth it to me,and i started looking at the new x4's from amd and realized i would have to move to ddr3 which also meant a new mobo,so after a little thought i started looking a cpu benchmarks charts,and noticed sadly that amd was a long way behind in performance these days.so i hesitantly started to look at intels(i was always an amd guy)and to my surprise the prices where not half as bad as i thought they would be,the biggest being the motherboards and not the cpu's like i thought it would have been,well i could have saved a hundred or two and gone with an amd,but with the intel i was looking at(that i ended up with)was much more powerful the socket was new and would be compatible with the new 6 core cpu's had sata 3 and usb 3.0.so for me it boiled down to spend a little more now and save alot later.i dont buy a new computer every year but i like to upgrade them every once in awhile and with this system i will be able to.and as far as power consumption there both about the same the amd uses 125w and the intel uses 130w,amd has cool and quiet for power savings and intel has speedstep,so there would be penny's difference on your electric bill.im glad i switched to intel don't get me wrong i have nothing against amd after all if it wasn't for them intel would probably charge even more for there chips.

 

[A-Dub]

Have you looked at the i5 750? It's the same price as the Phenom II 965 and fairly matched against the i7 920. Another option though, would be to get the Phenom II 955 for a bit less $$ which will most likely do 3.4GHz at stock volts and for the most part overclocks just as high as the 965. Also, if you went with an AMD chip you would also have the option of upgrading to Thuban/Bulldozer then they are available. Just a few things to consider.

 

[Sprocket7]

'I5' was not really on my radar because I saw it as something of a evolutionary deadend. Whereas with the i7 and amd routes at least the ram and mobo bought today could still be used with future chip upgrades. Saying that, it is most likely that only with the amd route will such upgrades come under 4 figures and be obtainable for me.....

You're right jazon, the chip prices are not so different as they once were. I notice for example, that here in the UK the amd 965 is £143, the intel920 is £216 and the intel930 is £232. But by taking the amd route I would considerably improve my pc far beyond what it is capable of today and with the change saved I would easily afford an SSD that would make an additional and significant performance difference to the whole.

The bottom line is whether or not my intended PC use necitates an i7 chip - which is just what Malakai's article suggested initially.

 

[jazon1]

'I5' was not really on my radar because I saw it as something of a evolutionary deadend. Whereas with the i7 and amd routes at least the ram and mobo bought today could still be used with future chip upgrades. Saying that, it is most likely that only with the amd route will such upgrades come under 4 figures and be obtainable for me.....

You're right jazon, the chip prices are not so different as they once were. I notice for example, that here in the UK the amd 965 is £143, the intel920 is £216 and the intel930 is £232. But by taking the amd route I would considerably improve my pc far beyond what it is capable of today and with the change saved I would easily afford an SSD that would make an additional and significant performance difference to the whole.

The bottom line is whether or not my intended PC use necitates an i7 chip - which is just what Malakai's article suggested initially.

yea i cant argue about the performance difference that a good SSD will make

 

[glussier]

The only thing I don't understand is that the op, in his first post, about the cost of electricity in his country, and for that reason he is thinking about purchasing an AMD 965 instead of an i920. The 965 is probably the cpu using the most electricity available right now.

 

[jazon1]

yea thats what i was saying

 

[A-Dub]

If you're concerned about power usage, there's the Phenom II 905e, which still has good multithreaded app performance and provides an upgrade path.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103682

 

[NOVAA]

Heres how I see it. If you have the budget for the i7, get the i7 because they are certainly the fastest chips out there, and will overclock quite well too. But if budget it at any point a problem, get a decent $80-100 AM3 board, drop a 965 in there, and use the left over money to bolster another part of your rig.

 

[OptyTrooper]

Quite frankly your current set-up has the potential to overclock quite well 2.7+ on stock volts with a bit of luck and quite a bit higher if you up the Vcore and IMHO waiting for Bulldozer would be your best bet.

As you mentioned you are not a heavy gamer and you made no mention of any serious encoding/conversion type stuff going on. Point being a nice OC and a SSD and in daily tasks you are not going to see one smidgen of difference b/t your current set-up and say a 965.

A bit convoluted but you get my point hopefully.

 

[DocClock aka MadClocker]

If you are concerned about platform longevity, you might want to consider the Intel Xeon...Historically the Xeon socket has lasted quite a bit longer than it's PIII/P4/Core counterparts, but they are not optimized for power savings.
If most you are doing is mild photoshop, and surfing, a good cheap AMD quadcore should suffice.

 

[Sprocket7]

My mistake, sorry for the power confusion.

Correct me if I'm mistaken here, can I drop a 965 on to my board following a Bios flash (F5 from F1) that would also unlock my ram (Corsair 5-5-5-15 & locked by the chip to just 800)? Then treat myself to the 890GPA board and faster ram 1866 to suit when it becomes available over here. On that basis my needs would be more than satisfied. Any suggestions for the new ram anyone?

 

[Brutal-Force]

As one person pointed out. In Intel i5 750 can be had for practically nothing. It competes very well with the i7 860 or i7 920 in speed, it just lacks the Hyper-threading, which to be honest very few people make full use of.

In terms of 1156 Socket being a dead-end, I can't begin to say how much this upsets me to hear. The reason most say this is because the 1366 socket is supposed to get a Six Core processor, but at a starting price of $500 dollars how many people will get them? And if you are not really a power user right now anyways, would you even need a Six Core CPU within the next 10 years?

As for power consumption, the i-series chips do very well, especially if you use EIST and Cstates and use Intel Turbo Boost.

I have no problems with AMD and their approach to upgrading sockets is IMO a better one for the customer, but I think Intel inched ahead when they came out with the i-series and did it on two different platforms. Much like the Celeron/Pentium erra. The i3/i5 is for the average user (but still enough power to do everyday tasks) and the i7 for the power users.

Good luck in your choice.

 

[Sprocket7]

Thanks BF - I like the i5 750 you mentioned, although it does not have the HT that your 860 has I won't miss it with my use. It does not have a triple-channel memory controller either though I don't know what that effect has which means still more research. Certainly the 750 has been well camoflaged by Intel's recent branding confusion despite their assurances to the contrary from their marketing team. I take on your points about the different intel sockets - I certainly would not buy an hexunit for years!

 

[Sprocket7]

Just for the record I've ordered my i7 920 SLBEJ for £230 incl taxes and shipping - should be here tomorrow. What a relief!! No more hassling over different components. Because I needed a new chip, mobo and RAM there was relatively little difference in cost especially when I considered the time it was taking to decide which way to go! Now the decision is made I can focus on mobo and ram. In the end it was between the 'fast Ford' and the 'Mazeratti' - sure they can both do 150, but which one looks and sounds better? I went for the 'Maz' - the six-core 'Ferrari's' are for people with deeper pockets.

 

[jgv115]

omg... the 920s are being discontinued and replaced with the 930s. They are at the same price too...

lol bad luck mate

 

[glussier]

The i930 is only 1 speed bin over the i920, there is not that much bad luck there.