Gaming: X4 965 BE or I5/I7?

[WaitingForNehalem]

In gaming they do for the most part. And price/performance. Seeing as this thread is about gaming, I think your comment is incorrect in this context.

I think the only game that I've seen really benefit in a big way with an Intel i series processor over Phenom is Far Cry 2. Otherwise they seem to be pretty close for the most part from what I've seen.

OP, is your current processor holding you back in the games you play? I'd think that what you have is still pretty capable.

The more powerful GPU's become, the bigger the gap will be between Phenom II and the Core i series. This is evident on multi-gpu setups.

 

[tiblot]

The AMD setup is by far the better performance/cost ratio. The Intel Core I3-I7 chips are fast and the I7 is pretty much untouchable by AMD.

Unless money is no factor or you absolutely must have the best performance in, I would go AMD. Its like buying a luxury car - do you need it? No. Should you buy it? No. But alot of people do, because having the amenities is a priority.

 

[toyota]

The AMD setup is by far the better performance/cost ratio. The Intel Core I3-I7 chips are fast and the I7 is pretty much untouchable by AMD.

Unless money is no factor or you absolutely must have the best performance in, I would go AMD. Its like buying a luxury car - do you need it? No. Should you buy it? No. But alot of people do, because having the amenities is a priority.

sorry but that is absolutely not true. the Phenom 965 setup is actually a worse bang for buck compared to the i5 setup. overall they cost about the same and the i5 performs better. then you factor in how much more the i5 can oc and its even better deal than the Phenom 2 965. not to mention the i5 does all this while using much less power too. thats not just an opinion and anybody that actually breaks things down will come to the same conclusion.

http://techreport.com/articles.x/18448/18

"Before we go, we can't ignore the fact that our overall leader in both power efficiency and performance per system cost was the Core i5-750. If you're purely rational about these things—and you can afford to spend nearly $200 on a CPU—the i5-750 is obviously the best choice among the processors we tested."

 

[WaitingForNehalem]

sorry but that is absolutely not true. the Phenom 965 setup is actually a worse bang for buck compared to the i5 setup. overall they cost about the same and the i5 performs better. then you factor in how much more the i5 can oc and its even better deal than the Phenom 2 965. not to mention the i5 does all this while using much less power too. thats not just an opinion and anybody that actually breaks things down will come to the same conclusion.

http://techreport.com/articles.x/18448/18

"Before we go, we can't ignore the fact that our overall leader in both power efficiency and performance per system cost was the Core i5-750. If you're purely rational about these things—and you can afford to spend nearly $200 on a CPU—the i5-750 is obviously the best choice among the processors we tested."

They aren't being fair with Athlon II X2 255, it has an IMC which is why it consumes a little more power than the Intel Pentium Dual Core 6500.

 

[theevilsharpie]

I want best gaming power to cost ratio BUT if its not much improvement over current i wont bother.

My current setup:
E8400 dual core/4 gig ddr2/GTX 280

Are you using a monitor with a 120Hz refresh rate? If not, your CPU is not a bottleneck. Invest in a better video card if you want better gaming performance.

 

[toyota]

Are you using a monitor with a 120Hz refresh rate? If not, your CPU is not a bottleneck. Invest in a better video card if you want better gaming performance.

that would have nothing to do with those few games where an i7 would provide a much better minimum framerate. yeah overall its not really worth the cost to upgrade until he gets a faster card though.

 

[pjkenned]

Not going to lie, I have a watercooled 4ghz i7 920 with 12GB of RAM and a Vertex 120GB now (Vertex LE has been ordered which will be OS drive and current Vertex is going to be local apps drive). Video card(s) were SLI GTX 285's.

I purchased a 47" "120hz" LCD. It only runs at 1920x1080 so I then realized that I only really needed a single GTX 285 and thusly sold one.

So my suggestion is:
1. Spend money to get a decent BIG monitor.
2. Figure out what you want to play.
3. Size CPU/GPU accordingly. (Remember it is cheaper to play at 1920x1080)

And for the record, I am basically at the point where if I could get by with 4 or 8GB of ram, I would be using the i5-650 that is basically silent as my main PC w/ a GTX 285 (only thing that would make noise). The power consumption of the i3's and i5's (I have an i3-530 also) is just amazing.

 

[konakona]

Going by the gaming benches I have seen, I must agree with toyota. Unless you get a really good deal at your local Fry's, AMD's bang for buck is maximized if you are willing to take the risk and unlock that 550/555 (C3). For what newegg and other etailers charge for 965, the difference is too small to not move up to i5 750.

About a year ago, AM2+ made a whole lot more sense when people had loads of DDR2 and DDR3 was still crazy expensive compared to DDR2. Not as much now with the DDR2 pricing jacked up to match that of DDR3.

 

[cbn]

Going by the gaming benches I have seen, I must agree with toyota. Unless you get a really good deal at your local Fry's, AMD's bang for buck is maximized if you are willing to take the risk and unlock that 550/555 (C3). For what newegg and other etailers charge for 965, the difference is too small to not move up to i5 750.

This is how I feel. I most likely wouldn't go AMD unless Fry's is unloading Phenom II x4/AM2+ mainboard combos.

That being said I think the real thorn in AMD's side is the price of a Retail Windows 7 OS.

For example, I have seen Phenom II 945/Gigabyte AM2+ mainboard combos for $120 AR, but the total price of my swap (re-using DDR2 memory) would be $300 because of the cost of the OS.

In a nutshell, the hardware is cheap compared to software. Therefore most people really don't see an extra $50 for Intel gear as a deal breaker.

 

[Kuzi]

i5 750 and PII 965 X4 are both great processors, you want go wrong with either one of them. Although the i5 750 is slightly better, and the advantage becomes greater if you decide to OC.

 

[soccerballtux]

it's really not his fault that you couldn't specify p2 in your statement. Regardless, current athlons are based on the p2 architecture anyways.

your stupid counterexample spans across two completely different architectures.

lol
l3 cache imo
that is all i have to say

 

[HeXen]

I'm going by some of these benchies. There is only a few fps difference in this class, Considering cost at stock speeds, AMD isnt bad at all. Even the Sysmark tests were close enough that i doubt i'd notice even if i could compare side by side.
I'm concluding that i would likely not notice the benefits of i7 in most of what i do and therefore not worth the extra $100 plus higher cost of mobo. So i got the AMD setup and a Corsair Liquid cooler H50 and i'll overclock it.

Numbers look good on paper, but you can't see numbers when playing games or running apps. I need performance i can notice, a wow effect and i dont feel i'll get that from the I7 vs X4.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3619&p=7

 

[Chapbass]

First, would an upgrade to quad X4/I5/I7 be noticable for me? I want best gaming power to cost ratio BUT if its not much improvement over current i wont bother. I'm looking heavily at the X4 965 black edition but not sure how they compare to Intel's plus their hyperthreading. Plus intel is swapping to 32nm soon.

My current setup:
E8400 dual core/4 gig ddr2/GTX 280

What resolution are you running at? Ive got almost the same setup but an 8800GTS 640mb....I'm still not feeling like im missing out on much. gives me the ability to pump more money into home theater

 

[deimos3428]

OP: Stick with what you have, it's "good enough". Upgrade when it's not to maximize your bang/buck ratio.

 

[cbn]

I'm going by some of these benchies. There is only a few fps difference in this class, Considering cost at stock speeds, AMD isnt bad at all. Even the Sysmark tests were close enough that i doubt i'd notice even if i could compare side by side.
I'm concluding that i would likely not notice the benefits of i7 in most of what i do and therefore not worth the extra $100 plus higher cost of mobo. So i got the AMD setup and a Corsair Liquid cooler H50 and i'll overclock it.

Numbers look good on paper, but you can't see numbers when playing games or running apps. I need performance i can notice, a wow effect and i dont feel i'll get that from the I7 vs X4.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3619&p=7

In both those graphis it looks like high end Core 2 quad is better clock for clock.

 

[toyota]

In both those graphis it looks like high end Core 2 quad is better clock for clock.

they are also not showing the min framerate which is where the Phenom 2 usually fails even if it matches the average.

 

[HeXen]

min frame rate means nothing. you always look at averages.
thats why benchmarkers make note of them and not the minimal.

In both those graphis it looks like high end Core 2 quad is better clock for clock.

yeah, 2 frames per second difference in Fallout and 1fps difference in Crysis and X4 in the lead.
For $179, i think i'll live :sneaky:

Upgrade when it's not to maximize your bang/buck ratio.

and when would that be? i'm not ever spending excessive for a CPU, the difference in games for them is usually minimal and their all outdated about as fast. i'll spend a bit more if the differences are noteworthy to make it worth the price, but so far i have not seen that the case. I take that extra money and put it into Nvidia's upcomming "Fermi" when it comes out. nothing improves games performance and visuals like a new GPU.

So i already ordered the X4:awe: suggestions here were good insight, It should do fine through the next GPU upgrade and couple years down the road maybe 8 cores will be commonly affordable.

thanks all for the help. Now look over at my OC thread, i'm not that great at OC'ing but wondering if i need to break in a new cpu/mobo first
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2052863

 

[toyota]

min frame rate means nothing. you always look at averages.
thats why benchmarkers make note of them and not the minimal.



yeah, 2 frames per second difference in Fallout and 1fps difference in Crysis and X4 in the lead.
For $179, i think i'll live :sneaky:



and when would that be? i'm not ever spending excessive for a CPU, the difference in games for them is usually minimal and their all outdated about as fast. i'll spend a bit more if the differences are noteworthy to make it worth the price, but so far i have not seen that the case. I take that extra money and put it into Nvidia's upcomming "Fermi" when it comes out. nothing improves games performance and visuals like a new GPU.

So i already ordered the X4:awe: suggestions here were good insight, It should do fine through the next GPU upgrade and couple years down the road maybe 8 cores will be commonly affordable.

thanks all for the help. Now look over at my OC thread, i'm not that great at OC'ing but wondering if i need to break in a new cpu/mobo first
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2052863

min framerate means nothing? lol, yeah okay. if I average 50 fps in a game but have several dips in the low 20s or even teens then thats much worse then averaging 40fps with framerates never going below 25 or 30. the min framerate plays a huge part of determining whether a game feels smooth or not.

 

[soccerballtux]

In both those graphis it looks like high end Core 2 quad is better clock for clock.

they are also not showing the min framerate which is where the Phenom 2 usually fails even if it matches the average.

min is most affected by changes in the CPU-NB frequency (L3 cache). You clock it at 2.6Ghz like everybody can, and the cores are no longer starving for new datas.
example-- compare the bright yellow bar with the one 2 groups of bars up-- almost a 40% improvement:

purple and green drivers are maxing out, these were benched before AMD implemented those massive 10-20% Crysis engine improvements.

 

[cbn]

they are also not showing the min framerate which is where the Phenom 2 usually fails even if it matches the average.

Why do you think Phenom has lower minimum frame rates?

P.S. Do you have any links to benchmarks where this is measured? EDIT: Nvm, Soccerballtux just posted the graphs.

 

[toyota]

Why do you think Phenom has lower minimum frame rates?

P.S. Do you have any links to benchmarks where this is measured? EDIT: Nvm, Soccerballtux just posted the graphs.

check out most of the games where they tested min framerate. even the Core 2 Duo usually does better than the Phenom 2 X4 in that respect. http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/radeon-hd5870-cpu-scaling_4.html

 

[cbn]

min is most affected by changes in the CPU-NB frequency (L3 cache). You clock it at 2.6Ghz like everybody can, and the cores are no longer starving for new datas.
example-- compare the bright yellow bar with the one 2 groups of bars up-- almost a 40% improvement:

Whoa, what happpened? It looks like I accidently blocked images from your photobucket using firefox. How do I unblock them?

 

[soccerballtux]

min is most affected by changes in the CPU-NB frequency (L3 cache). You clock it at 2.6Ghz like everybody can, and the cores are no longer starving for new datas.
example-- compare the bright yellow bar with the one 2 groups of bars up-- almost a 40% improvement:

purple and green drivers are maxing out, these were benched before AMD implemented those massive 10-20% Crysis engine improvemens.

Whoa, what happpened? It looks like I accidently blocked images from your photobucket using firefox. How do I unblock them?

not my photobucket

 

[cbn]

not my photobucket

Do you know how I can unblock? Sorry about this.

P.S. Thanks for posting the graph. I tried to zoom in on it by clicking on it, but apparently hit "block image from x photobucket"

 

[soccerballtux]

not my photobucket

Do you know how I can unblock? Sorry about this.

P.S. Thanks for posting the graph. I tried to zoom in on it by clicking on it, but apparently hit "block image from x photobucket"

I don't, sorry.

Case in point is, when you clock the NB at 2.6-2.8Ghz, the Ph2 965 is perfectly fine.