Core i7, i5, i3

[ochadd]

I've considered myself an enthusiast for a long time and read more tech news than I care to admit. Still Intel's path has me confused as hell. I've read some posts where angry people get more angry over questions about this so just piss off and stop reading if it bothers you. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

New Skulltrail = Over the top of the line coming soon. Dual socket 1366 supporting nehalem ep? Assume overclocking is an option as it was with Skulltrail? Path eventually leading to dual 6/8 core processors and 24/32 threaded systems?

Core i7 = Top of the line as of June 09. Intel provided the Core i7 920 to tide people over who would normally opt for upper mainstream/lowend enthusiast parts. Transitioning to higher price chips > $500? Cheaper chips going EOL? Eventually getting to 8 core/16 threaded systems.

Core i5 = Crappier version of what P45/P35 is? Path leading to high clocked quad cores with no hyperthreading. Leading to 4 core/4 threaded systems with potentially higher clocks.

Core i3 = This is the onboard graphics type of setup comparable to G35/G45? Likely dual cores with hyperthreading?

It seems everyone is pushing for many core setups and Core i5 and i3 are going to give you zero upgradability due to marketing in other segments? The way I'm seeing this is that the upper end is going to give you a MASSIVE advantage in raw performance. If games, encoding, etc, are going the way of being massively threaded going anything less than i7 would be risky...

The difference between platforms isn't just features anymore. It locks you into a processor series. If the uber end supports 16 cores/32 threads when the 32nm chips start rolling out and the upper mainstream supports 4 cores/4 threads how many people who consider themselves enthusiasts could reasonably lock themselves into the lower end stuff? I can remember no time in recent history where there has been such a large gap in performance between segments. Making that jump, say a $500 jump between MB and processor, gives you 300-400% performance advantage?

Maybe it's all speculation but I've got a feeling the return of $2000+ systems is in my future. :disgust:

 

[z1ggy]

Intel is just making it much easier for me to build a high end AMD budget build next year. No way am I dropped 2 grand for a good machine when I could have the best AMD man can build for a ton less, even if I have to shave of the impressive benchmarks etc that the i7 gives. If AMD gets a good 32nm within the next few years then I don't see any reason to go over the top with i7.

 

[ilkhan]

$650-700 gets you an X58 motherboard that'll work for the upcoming 6 core gulftowns (which WILL have a $266 version) and current 4 core bloomfields, an i7 920 that'll be 2.66Ghz by default and quite a bit more overclocked, and 6GB of DDR3.
Those prices won't change in the near future. $2000 systems are certainly possible, but not required. A C2Q based system (X48/Q9550/4GB) can be had for approx $420-450. OMG its so much more expensive! More, yes. Double, basically. Still only $250 difference.

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: z1ggy
Intel is just making it much easier for me to build a high end AMD budget build next year. No way am I dropped 2 grand for a good machine when I could have the best AMD man can build for a ton less, even if I have to shave of the impressive benchmarks etc that the i7 gives. If AMD gets a good 32nm within the next few years then I don't see any reason to go over the top with i7.

the of an Intel i7 is not a few grand.

Infact if you total it out, you'll see its about 200-300 dollars more then a AMD system.

And if your an overclocker, the performance on the intel will spank the AMD.

Even then, Intel has had its board socket revision, AMD hasnt. AMD is in turn for a socket revision i heard.

In short, if u have the budget the i7 is the only path to go.

 

[taltamir]

if you are comparing the C2Q to the P2 (which is what it compares to, the i7 is in a whole different league), than a comparable intel machine is 5$ more on newegg.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: ochadd
I can remember no time in recent history where there has been such a large gap in performance between segments. Making that jump, say a $500 jump between MB and processor, gives you 300-400% performance advantage?

Maybe it's all speculation but I've got a feeling the return of $2000+ systems is in my future. :disgust:

Hence my thread about "Remember when computers got faster AND cheaper?"

 

[RaptureMe]

I think everyone here agree's core i7 is the way to go man.
Why side grade to a last gen system and to be honest thats what am3 is.
You know if you get a am3 system you are going to kick your self in the @ss for not gettting a core i7 system.If you are like me and most of you are I know you are going to want one of those 6 core 12 thread cpu's which you can just drop into existing 1366 mobo's.

 

[NA1NSXR]

X58/i7 combo will last through the entire Nehalem era. You will have the 6 core option. Nothing I've read about i5 suggests that it will entice any prospective i7 buyer to wait for it. The only thing about P55 that is attractive is the support for a few new peripheral connection standards, which I don't think are going to be that essential for the Nehalem era. i7 920 is offering one of the longest lasting enthusiast solutions we've seen in a long time. My friend is going with a PII build citing build cost issues with i7. I think he is nuts. After looking at the CPU and GPU roadmaps I stretched my budget a bit just to get an i7.

 

[GEOrifle]

Where can i buy cheapest I7 920 with D0 ?

 

[RussianSensation]

Originally posted by: RaptureMe
I think everyone here agree's core i7 is the way to go man.
Why side grade to a last gen system and to be honest thats what am3 is.
You know if you get a am3 system you are going to kick your self in the @ss for not gettting a core i7 system.If you are like me and most of you are I know you are going to want one of those 6 core 12 thread cpu's which you can just drop into existing 1366 mobo's.

It all depends what the person's budget is and what they are using their computer for.

Core i7 920 = $230 at microcenter
MSI X58 = $180
Total: $410

vs.

Quad Phenom II 3.0ghz + mobo = $230
So you get a 'free' 4890

So if you want to play games on a limited budget, then Core i7 is definately not the way to go.

 

[aigomorla]

if your an overclocker tho,

i7 will blow any AMD system out of the water.

i have 4 x 4.0ghz+ while 3 being 4.4ghz with HT to prove anyone wrong.

The 3rd is this guy:

http://i125.photobucket.com/al...73/aigomorla/w3570.jpg


i havent shown her off yet, nor do i think i will because i already showed off its bigger sister, my W3580.

 

[ZimZum]

Originally posted by: aigomorla
if your an overclocker tho,

i7 will blow any AMD system out of the water.

i have 4 x 4.0ghz+ while 3 being 4.4ghz with HT to prove anyone wrong.

The 3rd is this guy:

http://i125.photobucket.com/al...73/aigomorla/w3570.jpg


i havent shown her off yet, nor do i think i will because i already showed off its bigger sister, my W3580.

What i7 heatsinks are you using?

 

[phillyman36]

Uuhh im so confused. So there will be a core i7 in the 1156 as well as 1136. So the i7 with the 1156 pin count adds pci e on die and is dual channel memory and not tri channel memory? This means if im upgrading around September since i never use more than 1 graphics card the 1156 i7 would be better for me than the 1136 i7 right?

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: NA1NSXR
X58/i7 combo will last through the entire Nehalem era. You will have the 6 core option. Nothing I've read about i5 suggests that it will entice any prospective i7 buyer to wait for it. The only thing about P55 that is attractive is the support for a few new peripheral connection standards, which I don't think are going to be that essential for the Nehalem era. i7 920 is offering one of the longest lasting enthusiast solutions we've seen in a long time. My friend is going with a PII build citing build cost issues with i7. I think he is nuts. After looking at the CPU and GPU roadmaps I stretched my budget a bit just to get an i7.

actually the attraction of P55 is "better performance on single GPU for much less money".
P55 will work with i3, i5, and i7.

The new i7 takes the X58 and INTEGRATES it into the CPU core. Integrating the memory controller into the CPU has done wonders for performance, likewise integrating the GPU links will also improve performance.
It is amazing to me that people actually believe that the X58 is somehow a better platform.

It has one advantage only, and that is the fact that intel currently does not plan on having a 2x 16x v2 pcie on CPU. only 1x 16x v2 pcie. But if they DID make it, it would be superior to the X58 approach.

I recommend to anyone to go with a P55 + i7 lynnfield. although overclockers will probably want an i5 or i3 depending on its OCability.

i7 = 4 core 8 thread nehalem
i5 = 4 core 4 thread nehalem OR 2 core 4 thread nehalem.
i3 = like i5, but without turbo mode.

 

[taltamir]

In a reply to a PM...

Hey taltamir sorry to bother you but can explain to me how having the pcie on die helps improves performance? Do you ahve a simple example?

simple, by having it on die, the latencies for communication is cut down. Sure they are both 16x links capable of the same throughput, but latency is affected by distance.

Basically the throughput (16x pcie v2) determines (mostly) the MB/s data you can transfer. the latency determines (mostly) how many miliseconds you have to actually wait for a specific bit of data.
To make the obligatory car analogy, latency is mph AND distance. while bandwidth is how many 10 ton containers you can transfer per hour on a set stretch of road. For some things it only matters how many 10 ton container per hour you transfer. For some things it matters how long it takes a SPECIFIC container containing a specific single envelope to travel from point A to point B, which is determined by mph and physical distance.

This matters because in a computer operating in gigahertz (billions of cycles per second) you can have cycles go by without doing anything while waiting for specific data.

If intel was releasing a new chip with triple chanel memory controller and full 2x 16x pcie v2 GPU controller on the CPU. it would obsolete the current i7 and replacing it with a faster, smaller, less power consuming, and with cheaper and smaller mobos. However they combine the great advantage of fully integrating the northbridge into the CPU with the disadvantages of half the pcie lanes and dual channel controller...
This is because they release the vast majority of the market uses ONE 16x pcie v2 lane (single or dual GPU on single card) and doesn't benefit from triple channel ram. So they cut out unnecessary (to vast majority of users) chaff and combine it with great improvements. But for those who DO need those things, there is a problem.

The 1366 will definitely live on in the multi socket systems, but I don't see much of a future for it as a single CPU system.

 

[IntelUser2000]

The only CPUs ending up to be named Core i3 will be the low end that's just above a Celeron. So a successor to Pentium Dual Core would be called "Core i3". Since both Arrandale and Clarkdale will have Turbo Mode, there will be a range of the CPUs from Core i3 to Core i5 for desktop, and Core i3 to Core i7 for laptop.

 

[StinkyPinky]

I find these new intel cpu labelling damn confusing. All I want to know is the amount of cores in the cpu...I can do research on the rest.

That's why I liked the Core2 cpus. E = 2 cores. Q = 4 cores. Nice and easy.

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: IntelUser2000
The only CPUs ending up to be named Core i3 will be the low end that's just above a Celeron. So a successor to Pentium Dual Core would be called "Core i3". Since both Arrandale and Clarkdale will have Turbo Mode, there will be a range of the CPUs from Core i3 to Core i5 for desktop, and Core i3 to Core i7 for laptop.

where are you getting this information? according to articles in anandtech and others the ONLY difference between a quad core i3 and an i7 is that the i3 will not have HT or turbo mode. and for a dual core it will just not have turbo mode (And have two instead of four cores), thats it!

It will not be equivalent to a celeron, in fact it seems like the celerons and C2 series will remain as a lower end than the i series.

 

[RussianSensation]

Originally posted by: aigomorla
if your an overclocker tho,

i7 will blow any AMD system out of the water.

Aigo that's a sweet overclock. I have to admit that I would certainly want to play with a Core i7 myself over a Phenom II! But I still recognize that there is value to be had with AMD or Core 2 Quad for that matter.

Obviously if $ was not a factor, then without a doubt I'd spring for a Core i7 system for performance.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Originally posted by: taltamir

where are you getting this information? according to articles in anandtech and others the ONLY difference between a quad core i3 and an i7 is that the i3 will not have HT or turbo mode. and for a dual core it will just not have turbo mode (And have two instead of four cores), thats it!

It will not be equivalent to a celeron, in fact it seems like the celerons and C2 series will remain as a lower end than the i series.

Sigh. I did not say equivalent to a Celeron, but just above a Celeron like Pentium Dual Core is. There's a difference in what I said and you did not realize it since you are just skimming through it. But Core i3 is basically going to be the NEW Pentium Dual Core. AKA the value-performance segment, if that even makes sense.

And let's look at what Anandtech article says again: "The Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Quad branding will eventually disappear."

What will probably happen is significant number of Core 2 chips will be phased out and some of the Core 2's that fits between the Core i5 and Celeron will be renamed as Core i3, along with the low-end Nehalem derivatives.

 

[taltamir]

or the C2Q could be renamed celeron. you don't know what intel is gonna do with their naming. All we know is that the current plans for i3 will mean that it is not far behind i7, only lacking turbo mode and maybe HT, and guess what, overclockers are gonna turn off turbo mode to get a more stable overclock

 

[ilkhan]

Originally posted by: taltamir

Originally posted by: NA1NSXR...

...

I know we've been over this before, but you abandoned that just when it was getting interesting.

With the last link IDC posted, I see the benefits of the onboard GPU links disappearing. Its still connected via QPI, just now the PCI-E bridge is on the same substrate in a seperate die instead of a couple inches away. Im sure there will be *some* benefits, but I don't think they'll be as great as you expect.

You still get 32 links instead of 16 links. Changing to PCI-E v3 this fall (do we know if the DX11 chips are going to be v3?) will be easier on s1366. Also remember G300 or the refresh will probably start starving for bandwidth over a single x16 v2 link at high res/settings.

With a couple of highly OCed 4870s and an equally clocked X2 with an X58 board would make for some interesting testing of PCI-E bandwidth.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Originally posted by: StinkyPinky
I find these new intel cpu labelling damn confusing. All I want to know is the amount of cores in the cpu...I can do research on the rest.

That's why I liked the Core2 cpus. E = 2 cores. Q = 4 cores. Nice and easy.

I think the new branding will make it easier for the less-informed computer buyers.

See, the important thing to take here is the Turbo Mode.

The point with Turbo Mode is NOT random clock speed increases, but a SMART clocking that factors in the cores that are active and power usage.

(Now this doesn't matter to overclockers, but the thing is, binning and different clock speeds don't really matter to them anyway. They'll get what they want based on their research and take miniscule portion of the market)

-The reason integrated graphics versions aren't necessarily Core i3

See, the Clarkdale CPUs have integrated graphics, but a discrete graphics can be paired with them. The branding is purely about CPU performance, I reckon. A Clarkdale with IGP enabled will be slower than capable discrete graphics coupled CPU, but a Clarkdale with a discrete graphics might not be.

With the new branding, it'll always be Core i7>Core i5>Core i3. If it worked the way most of us thought(Core i7=Bloomfield, Core i5=Lynnfield, Core i3=Clarkdale), that wouldn't have been true.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Originally posted by: taltamir
or the C2Q could be renamed celeron. you don't know what intel is gonna do with their naming. All we know is that the current plans for i3 will mean that it is not far behind i7, only lacking turbo mode and maybe HT, and guess what, overclockers are gonna turn off turbo mode to get a more stable overclock

How many computer buyers are enthusiasts?? Less than 5%. The Turbo Mode coming in the future CPUs will be significant. The benefits will get greater as the form factor goes away from enthusiast. Desktop users will have the least benefit, especially the Extreme Editions(hence the low Turbo Mode clock increase), then it'll be the laptop users(most are thermally limited or aren't overclockable at all), and finally the ultraportables(where overclocking is completely out).

For the users that play stock, or aren't knowledgeable about computers, branding is straightforward, i7>i5>i3.

 

[taltamir]

The Turbo Mode coming in the future CPUs will be significant

Except, right now i7 turbo mode is a 133mhz increase... insignificant. and the HT can actually decrease performance in some programs... although it can show a hefty increase when it works right, it will require programs to be 8 core/thread capable, where most struggle to utilize a quad core.