• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

quicky: what cpu is faster

happy medium

happy medium

Lifer
q9550 @ 4ghz or i3 4120 @ 3.4?

Will the i3 (with a gtx960) be as fast for games as my q9550 (with a gtx960) or even close?
I might use the i3 as a CHEAP stopgap and give the q9550 system
to my parents until something much faster comes out. I want the features of a new motherboard, that's the only reason for the side/up grade.
 
Last edited:
ok so it will be at least a sidegrade....good, seems worth it. Better motherboard , more memory, usb 3.0, new video card,and finally a ssd drive. Sounds like a plan, Thanks guys.
 
Last edited:
ultimatebob said:
Can you really get a Q9550 to 4 GHz? That's impressive.
Click to expand...

Been clocked that way for years and still serves me well. The guy who had the combo before me had it over 4.1ghz. Best money I've ever spent on a motherboard/cpu/ram, combo.
Yea, IDC is right, once you get above 3.6 you have to push the voltage quite higher. A good cooler and a case with good airflow helps.
 
Last edited:
Used to run my schools QX9770 at 4.0 all the time............at 1.55v 😛

Its not like I paid the $1000 price for it, wutevs.........
 
Speaking of the QX9770 I knew a guy who went whole hog and bought one of those for the full $1000..... 2 weeks before Nehalem came out. One of those computer science types that likes computers but never dug into the hardware so he didn't check beyond Newegg...
 
Just to be clear, there has never been a Core i3-4120.

The current i3 is the 4160, which replaced the 4150/4130 released previously.

And yes, the 4160 will blow away a 4GHz q9550 in gaming.
 
Good review here

Uses Ivybridge and a Q9550 at 3.4

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ivy-bridge-wolfdale-yorkfield-comparison,3487.html

Summary

Average-Gaming-Performance.png


Applications-Performance.png


About the same in games, the 9550 is a little faster in applications.

This is really a sidegrade.
 
^ A few clarifications on the above post.

First of all, the i3-4160 is 20% faster than a 3225. So that matches the 4GHz 9550's advantage over a 3.4GHz 9550. Thus, the delta remains - about 10% faster. But you also have to consider the game selection in that May 2013 article.

If you focus on cutting-edge games, like Crysis 3, the delta is far more than 10%:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ivy-bridge-wolfdale-yorkfield-comparison,3487-10.html

Overall, it's not really a sidegrade when one CPU is faster in every single game that isn't GPU-limited (i.e., Tomb Raider).

Not to mention that a 4160 will draw about 70W versus the 250W or so his Q9550@4GHz is likely drawing.
 
Idontcare said:
I had my QX6700 at 4GHz for years. That 65nm (and then 45nm) silicon could really push the clocks provided you were willing to push the volts.
Click to expand...

and THAT is impressive. They couldn't all do that

my e2180 couldn't go past 3.4ghz on 1.48v. I was thermally limited by my Thermal-something Ultra120 non-extreme. Hit either 74C or >1.5v and I'd immediately start erroring in stress test.

That was when I realized exactly how precisely engineered Intel chips are. The spec is 73.2C and 1.5v.

Although, this was before my 130CFM fan :hmm:
 
Last edited:
Headfoot said:
Speaking of the QX9770 I knew a guy who went whole hog and bought one of those for the full $1000..... 2 weeks before Nehalem came out. One of those computer science types that likes computers but never dug into the hardware so he didn't check beyond Newegg...
Click to expand...

the common language runtime handles that!

those people really bug me
 
Termie said:
^ A few clarifications on the above post.

First of all, the i3-4160 is 20% faster than a 3225. So that matches the 4GHz 9550's advantage over a 3.4GHz 9550. Thus, the delta remains - about 10% faster. But you also have to consider the game selection in that May 2013 article.

If you focus on cutting-edge games, like Crysis 3, the delta is far more than 10%:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ivy-bridge-wolfdale-yorkfield-comparison,3487-10.html

Overall, it's not really a sidegrade when one CPU is faster in every single game that isn't GPU-limited (i.e., Tomb Raider).

Not to mention that a 4160 will draw about 70W versus the 250W or so his Q9550@4GHz is likely drawing.
Click to expand...

IMO a 4ghz Penryn is plenty fast for anything. the reason to upgrade would be RAM.

when DDR4 comes out I'm going to buy the largest, fastest single module of DDR4 I can afford on a motherboard that can handle the most, since the module size goes up to 128GB.
 
Just don't forget to turn back to stock before giving to your parents. They REALLY don't need to burn all that power/energy with the machine idling at 4GHz for hours at a time and likely seeing minimal duty even during use. They would likely be far better off with a speedy Pentium setup that will sip power and still be plenty fast for light duties (email, Facebook, YouTube, etc).
 
Termie said:
Just to be clear, there has never been a Core i3-4120.

The current i3 is the 4160, which replaced the 4150/4130 released previously.

And yes, the 4160 will blow away a 4GHz q9550 in gaming.
Click to expand...

I think you are confused. The i3-4130 was the original Haswell base i3, while the i3-4150 replaced it later on as the Haswell-Refresh version (Devil's Canyon). Afaik all the other chips are just higher clocked versions.

Intel's website says that the i3-4150 and i3-4160 were released at the same time.
 
jji7skyline said:
I think you are confused. The i3-4130 was the original Haswell base i3, while the i3-4150 replaced it later on as the Haswell-Refresh version (Devil's Canyon). Afaik all the other chips are just higher clocked versions.

Intel's website says that the i3-4150 and i3-4160 were released at the same time.
Click to expand...

No, I'm not confused. The 4160 was released much later. And the Intel website makes that very clear, actually:

4150: http://ark.intel.com/products/77486/Intel-Core-i3-4150-Processor-3M-Cache-3_50-GHz
4160: http://ark.intel.com/products/77488/Intel-Core-i3-4160-Processor-3M-Cache-3_60-GHz

Also, Devil's Canyon only refers to the 4690K/4790K, not the 4150, 4160, or any other chip.

BTW, to be clear, when Intel releases subsequent chips at the same pricepoint, it's essentially EOL'ing the previous chips. Therefore, buying a 4130 or 4150 doesn't make sense today unless they're on clearance.
 
Last edited:
my bad ,it was a i3 4130 ,not 4120.

http://ark.intel.com/products/77480/Intel-Core-i3-4130-Processor-3M-Cache-3_40-GHz

Edit , well it seems the used motherboard, cpu, and 8gb ram combo was sold ,I missed the boat .
Now I'm back to square one. Mabe I'll just wait to see what socket 1151 brings new to the table.
I'm just sick of this setup 🙂, I want to upgrade. I have a brand new case and 850 watt psu just sitting in my basement collecting dust.
 
Last edited:
Termie said:
No, I'm not confused. The 4160 was released much later. And the Intel website makes that very clear, actually:

4150: http://ark.intel.com/products/77486/Intel-Core-i3-4150-Processor-3M-Cache-3_50-GHz
4160: http://ark.intel.com/products/77488/Intel-Core-i3-4160-Processor-3M-Cache-3_60-GHz

Also, Devil's Canyon only refers to the 4690K/4790K, not the 4150, 4160, or any other chip.

BTW, to be clear, when Intel releases subsequent chips at the same pricepoint, it's essentially EOL'ing the previous chips. Therefore, buying a 4130 or 4150 doesn't make sense today unless they're on clearance.
Click to expand...

Oh I didn't see that sorry. Is it worth paying more for a high-clocked i3 though? I'd just choose the cheapest one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top