Should i go for a core 2 quad, get the i7 920 and overclock it, or should i just wait for either the i5 to come out or for octo-core i7s to come out?
Core 2 Quad vs. i7 vs. waiting
- Thread starter LW07
- Start date
LW07, edplayer recommends you choose core 2 quad of your list of options.
edplayer, this is your id speaking, please remove the stick that super-ego left in there when he and ego were playing last night
- Sep 28, 2005
- 21,069
- 3,575
- 126
Originally posted by: Idontcare
LW07, edplayer recommends you choose core 2 quad of your list of options.
edplayer, this is your id speaking, please remove the stick that super-ego left in there when he and ego were playing last night
super ego?
bigger then mine?
IDC i dont think you'd be strong enough to be an Id for me. Gillbot bearly keeps me in check, and sometimes he still gives up.
I think it's time to do a little research, stop waffling and make a decision on your own.
All of the "what should I get?" threads you've created don't seem to be helping you out much.
Originally posted by: aigomorla
Originally posted by: Idontcare
LW07, edplayer recommends you choose core 2 quad of your list of options.
edplayer, this is your id speaking, please remove the stick that super-ego left in there when he and ego were playing last night
super ego?
bigger then mine?
IDC i dont think you'd be strong enough to be an Id for me. Gillbot bearly keeps me in check, and sometimes he still gives up.
das Über-Ich
Buy if in need, and if so then get i7. If you don't need it then wait until you do and make the decision then.
Denithor
Diamond Member
- Apr 11, 2004
- 6,298
- 23
- 81
I think someone just wants a cheap C2Q to show up shortly in the FS forum...
Seriously, is there anything your current rig cannot handle comfortably? If yes, it's time to upgrade. And because you're only looking at ~$150 difference between a dead-end C2Q build and a top tier i7 setup - decide how much the difference is worth and buy one.
I don't know about waiting vs buying.
But I just went from e5200--->q9650----->core i7 in less than 2 months. I don't game, but heavy multitasking over 4 monitors and the i7 has blown away my expectations.
I have it set up with an Intel SSD which is only $300 in a combo with a 920; and the cost difference versus the q9650 I had with a velociraptor was actually negligible, especially considering the performance difference.
But I just went from e5200--->q9650----->core i7 in less than 2 months. I don't game, but heavy multitasking over 4 monitors and the i7 has blown away my expectations.
I have it set up with an Intel SSD which is only $300 in a combo with a 920; and the cost difference versus the q9650 I had with a velociraptor was actually negligible, especially considering the performance difference.
VirtualLarry
No Lifer
- Aug 25, 2001
- 56,587
- 10,225
- 126
And I thought that I had upgrade-itis, going from a 3.2Ghz E2140 to a 3.6Ghz Q6600 in six months, and thinking about a UD3P and Q9650, when I still don't have another quad built.
Denithor
Diamond Member
- Apr 11, 2004
- 6,298
- 23
- 81
I'm on the 1.5 year plan myself. e6400 @ launch to e8400 a bit after launch and Westmere will be my next CPU. At that point I'll even get the SMP F@H client running, I suppose.
EDIT: Actually, there were several steps in between there.
e6400/965P-DS3 -> e6400/IP35-E -> e6400/IP35 Pro -> e8400/IP35 Pro -> e8400/P5Q Pro
And I've been thinking about a UD3P for some reason... :roll: Someone stop me, please...
EDIT: Actually, there were several steps in between there.
e6400/965P-DS3 -> e6400/IP35-E -> e6400/IP35 Pro -> e8400/IP35 Pro -> e8400/P5Q Pro
And I've been thinking about a UD3P for some reason... :roll: Someone stop me, please...
- Sep 28, 2005
- 21,069
- 3,575
- 126
YUMMY!
http://i125.photobucket.com/al...aigomorla/IMG_1272.jpg
oh wait im suposed to stop you?
YEAH RIGHT.. its a VERY YUMMY BOARD.
nOOky
Diamond Member
- Aug 17, 2004
- 3,263
- 2,349
- 136
I was torn for weeks over what to get to replace my AMD 6400. The dual core, quad core, and even tri core options are so daunting. I ended up with the E8500, UD3P, G-Skill memory and a Freezer Pro cooler. Rarely do I do multi-tasking, the AMD's while okay don't overclock as well, and the i7 is too expensive.
I am the kind of buyer who usually chooses mid-range items and replaces them more often, rather than buy the best at the time and keep it for years. It's more fun to upgrade frequently
I am the kind of buyer who usually chooses mid-range items and replaces them more often, rather than buy the best at the time and keep it for years. It's more fun to upgrade frequently
hmm i wonder what his budget is
1k, 2k, 10k
??
1k guys go for core 2 quad
or if possible a core i7
2k guys go for a i7
10k guys donate me some money
u already have too much
1k, 2k, 10k
??
1k guys go for core 2 quad
or if possible a core i7
2k guys go for a i7
10k guys donate me some money
u already have too much
I'd go with the cheapest i7 and over clock the hell out of it. I hear it's easy to do, and the i7 is dominating the benchmarks. i5 sounds like a "budget" i7 from what I've heard, and 8 core procs are a little ridiculous at this point.
I'm guessing going from four cores to eight cores would be a little like going from 1 GB of RAM on a single core processor to 2 GB of RAM. Would there be a performance gain? Sure. Would you be able to notice a performance gain? Unless multi-threading suddenly becomes integrated into every new piece of software, I doubt it.
A recent study showed that due to various limitations, you get less and less performance gain after a certain threshold in regards to number of cores added. The study concluded that you actually get a DOWNTURN in performance at a certain point, indicating that 16 cores performed on par with 2 cores due to bottlenecks and what not.
Bang for the buck, I'd say get the low end i7 now.
I'm guessing going from four cores to eight cores would be a little like going from 1 GB of RAM on a single core processor to 2 GB of RAM. Would there be a performance gain? Sure. Would you be able to notice a performance gain? Unless multi-threading suddenly becomes integrated into every new piece of software, I doubt it.
A recent study showed that due to various limitations, you get less and less performance gain after a certain threshold in regards to number of cores added. The study concluded that you actually get a DOWNTURN in performance at a certain point, indicating that 16 cores performed on par with 2 cores due to bottlenecks and what not.
Bang for the buck, I'd say get the low end i7 now.
- Sep 28, 2005
- 21,069
- 3,575
- 126
Originally posted by: Jabbernyx
That's just... fail. Now you're not going to have any luck with the ladies
2 oz copper board + decient stock cooling + excellent overclocking record.
And duribility as the Rock of Gibraltar, i wouldnt be a good person not recomending the board.
if you have the money, then get the i7. if you don't, then wait for i5. i think it will be the same price of the core 2 quad
when it comes out, and alot faster.
when it comes out, and alot faster.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 411
Facebook
Twitter