LA_Kings_Fan Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 I don't think General was comparing the i5 2500K and i7 2600K when he brought up over clocking, why would he ? The stock i5 clocks in @ 3.3GHz = $220 in USA, and the i7 @ 3.4GHz = $315 US. And both should be able to OC to just around 5.0 GHz depending upon the individual chip, your MoBo and your cooling solution. I think he was saying the i5 would suit most basic gamers needs just fine w/o spending the extra $100 and he'd be right about that, though the i7 IMO is worth the extra $100 for other reasons. Now where you can get into a nice debate about this however is the i7 2600K Quad w/ HT vs. the i7-990X Extreme 6-core @ 3.46GHz = $1,000 US. Are the extra cores worth $700 ? does the Hyper-Threading mean the Sandy-Bridge runs "like" an 8 core under the right applications ? Do you wait and say screw both ... IVY-Bridge is around the corner ? Do you say screw Intel I'm an AMD man and they're cheaper and more cross compatible, and BULLDozer will be the bomb. LOL yeah AMD ... bwhahahahahaa ... oh . ahhhh technology. Wait I'm sounding like a geek again, I need to stop. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 (edited) I don't think General was comparing the i5 2500K and i7 2600K when he brought up over clocking, why would he ? The stock i5 clocks in @ 3.3GHz = $220 in USA, and the i7 @ 3.4GHz = $315 US. And both should be able to OC to just around 5.0 GHz depending upon the individual chip, your MoBo and your cooling solution. I think he was saying the i5 would suit most basic gamers needs just fine w/o spending the extra $100 and he'd be right about that, though the i7 IMO is worth the extra $100 for other reasons. Now where you can get into a nice debate about this however is the i7 2600K Quad w/ HT vs. the i7-990X Extreme 6-core @ 3.46GHz = $1,000 US. Are the extra cores worth $700 ? does the Hyper-Threading mean the Sandy-Bridge runs "like" an 8 core under the right applications ? Do you wait and say screw both ... IVY-Bridge is around the corner ? Do you say screw Intel I'm an AMD man and they're cheaper and more cross compatible, and BULLDozer will be the bomb. LOL yeah AMD ... bwhahahahahaa ... oh . ahhhh technology. Wait I'm sounding like a geek again, I need to stop. well, i actually was comparing the two....the extra hundred bucks for little more is not much worth it imo? but i was saying that i5 2500k would support needs of gamers just as well as i7 2600k. i may be instead waiting for new amd processors that are coming in a month or two Edited August 16, 2011 by General Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jefke Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 well, i actually was comparing the two....the extra hundred bucks for little more is not much worth it imo? but i was saying that i5 2500k would support needs of gamers just as well as i7 2600k. i may be instead waiting for new amd processors that are coming in a month or two Dunno if they will be worth waiting for, they high end bulldozer cpus will cost about 300 dollar (and then you will need a am3+ socket mobo => I already got one ) If you wait for the amd processors, wait long enough and check the benchmarks ^^, because the expectations are a bit to high atm according me... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Dunno if they will be worth waiting for, they high end bulldozer cpus will cost about 300 dollar (and then you will need a am3+ socket mobo => I already got one ) If you wait for the amd processors, wait long enough and check the benchmarks ^^, because the expectations are a bit to high atm according me... they are replacing ALL their thuban core processor, is what i heard from a friend. so i assure you not ll their proc will be 300 ^^ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jefke Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 they are replacing ALL their thuban core processor, is what i heard from a friend. so i assure you not ll their proc will be 300 ^^ http://www.geek.com/articles/chips/amd-8-core-zambezi-3-6ghz-fx-processor-to-be-300-20110728/ one of the many articles claiming the prize of 300 dollar ^^ Offcourse everything is still 'wild guess': couldn't find a thing on AMD website Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 http://www.geek.com/articles/chips/amd-8-core-zambezi-3-6ghz-fx-processor-to-be-300-20110728/ one of the many articles claiming the prize of 300 dollar ^^ Offcourse everything is still 'wild guess': couldn't find a thing on AMD website well tats an 8core, and 3.6ghz, ill probably only be buying a 6 core ^^ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoGooD Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Hrm. This is off topic now. =Death Hunter= wants to build or buy a computer within a set price range. Being as it's his first build I doubt he's going to be in a hurry to overclock the hell out of it. Dropping $300 on a proc for your first build only to fry it a few weeks later doesn't sound like a good plan. This is especially the case if he gets a mobo that will allow him to push the voltage high. Personally I would get an i7 over the i5 not for right now, but for in 2 years when you want to try out a game and your just barely hitting the min requirements with an i7. I think if he wants to save a few bucks the i5 is a great proc. I like AMD, but I don't think they are in the running for good, efficient, powerful desktop CPU's anymore. Perhaps it would work better to see what the guy needs in terms of parts that he's comfortable with spending and setting up. Otherwise just go drop $1200 for an entry level Alienware and fuhgettaboutit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 (edited) Hrm. This is off topic now. =Death Hunter= wants to build or buy a computer within a set price range. Being as it's his first build I doubt he's going to be in a hurry to overclock the hell out of it. Dropping $300 on a proc for your first build only to fry it a few weeks later doesn't sound like a good plan. This is especially the case if he gets a mobo that will allow him to push the voltage high. Personally I would get an i7 over the i5 not for right now, but for in 2 years when you want to try out a game and your just barely hitting the min requirements with an i7. I think if he wants to save a few bucks the i5 is a great proc. I like AMD, but I don't think they are in the running for good, efficient, powerful desktop CPU's anymore. Perhaps it would work better to see what the guy needs in terms of parts that he's comfortable with spending and setting up. Otherwise just go drop $1200 for an entry level Alienware and fuhgettaboutit. You must have missed my earlier post.....Alienware is made by Dell, and dell is bad and overprices, so! alienware = dell, dell = overprice, so alienware = overpriced And im not exactly sure if he wanted to build his own pc or if he wanted to buy one xD Cyberpowerpc.com has customizeable pcs, its like building your own pc Edited August 16, 2011 by General Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rolf Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Death Hunter i like the sound of the first one but i've not heard of lenovo used as a gaming computer lol. i've heard it used more for business however the intel i7 and the video card are not bad.. along with the 8gb ram was it? The videocard of the i7 is bad. For gaming at least, comparing with the current gaming graphic cards. or if you want gaming, i heard good results about Alienware laptops/computers for gaming/programming if you want to look into that. buying new laptop is not something i would rush lol. good luck The given pc's aren't laptops, so I doubt he will need those. Furthermore, laptops aren't meant for gaming. STOP! right there is your mistake. Alienware pcs/laptops are made by Dell. Why is this bad? Because Dell is not that great, and dells are overpriced! Dell's are NOT overpriced. They have just a different idea of what/how a laptop should be. In the Netherlands, they look quite expensive. And then you get a 'free' Win7 licence with it, good support*, etc. Creating a similar setup yourself is about as expensive, the great advantage of building your own pc, is that it's a lot easier to switch components (that, for Dell but actually all pre-fab systems, is expensive) and leave out components (who needs a new keyboard/mouse/webcam/wireless card/etc?) I wouldn't buy a dell pc for home, but I'm damn glad with my dell laptop. There wasn't been a cheaper, comparable, laptop at that time. For my sister, I bought a Dell too recently. Great price/quality if you calculate all the costs and profits. * good support: if the hardware/pc fails and you don't know why, they will fix it for you. I don't need it, others will. and he says he can get it to 4.7GHz with only a little bit of work. Also, if you're OCing, you absolutely need a aftermarket fan, or watercooling. Guaranteeing an overclock is stupid. Beyond stupid actually. I knew when I bought my CPU, it would get it from 3GHz to 3.6GHz without a problem, and 4GHz was common too, but I wasn't able to achieve that (although I must say, I didn't try hard, I rather kept the pc silent than that few MHz more). Aftermarket cooling is always good, but watercooling is either just as good or slightly better (e.g. Corsair H50), or overpriced/overkill (creating your own setup, Danger Den and stuff). Watercooling is simply overrated for common use. All you need is the mobo manual and of you go ^^ That. And common sense. If it doesn't fit, it shouldn't fit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 (edited) The videocard of the i7 is bad. For gaming at least, comparing with the current gaming graphic cards. The given pc's aren't laptops, so I doubt he will need those. Furthermore, laptops aren't meant for gaming. Dell's are NOT overpriced. They have just a different idea of what/how a laptop should be. In the Netherlands, they look quite expensive. And then you get a 'free' Win7 licence with it, good support*, etc. Creating a similar setup yourself is about as expensive, the great advantage of building your own pc, is that it's a lot easier to switch components (that, for Dell but actually all pre-fab systems, is expensive) and leave out components (who needs a new keyboard/mouse/webcam/wireless card/etc?) I wouldn't buy a dell pc for home, but I'm damn glad with my dell laptop. There wasn't been a cheaper, comparable, laptop at that time. For my sister, I bought a Dell too recently. Great price/quality if you calculate all the costs and profits. * good support: if the hardware/pc fails and you don't know why, they will fix it for you. I don't need it, others will. Guaranteeing an overclock is stupid. Beyond stupid actually. I knew when I bought my CPU, it would get it from 3GHz to 3.6GHz without a problem, and 4GHz was common too, but I wasn't able to achieve that (although I must say, I didn't try hard, I rather kept the pc silent than that few MHz more). Aftermarket cooling is always good, but watercooling is either just as good or slightly better (e.g. Corsair H50), or overpriced/overkill (creating your own setup, Danger Den and stuff). Watercooling is simply overrated for common use. That. And common sense. If it doesn't fit, it shouldn't fit. Maybe in NL they arent overpriced, but here in the US, when i wanted to buy a laptop, everybody steered me away from dell saying they were overpriced, and they slightly are, and he can guarentee it easy when hes been OCing for years, oc'd this specific cpu many times, and as mentioned by someone earlier, a i5 or an i7 can get up to 5ghz bya good ocer. see bolds for what im responding to i have a video card slightly better than the nvidia 420, and i get 90fps table on max settings in games, so the card is decent for a buyer on a budget oh, lastly, watercooling is not overrated. it keeps pcs quite a bit cooler, for common use or gaming. Edited August 16, 2011 by General Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rolf Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 And laptops are already more expensive in the Netherlands. I really doubt which (other) laptops you might buy there then, if Dell's already overpriced? Anyway, offtopic About OC, it does not depend (only) on the OC'er, but also on the CPU itself. If you have a monday-morning-batch, forget those uber-OC scores. Of course, with Intel, overclock is pretty much always possible these days, but don't take it for granted. The Nvidia 420 , it is damn slow. http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html (points: 565). That is slower than a 100$ graphic card (9800GT) of over 3 years old. That is not fast, that is slow. Really slow. Still consider it fast? The integrated GPU's in the current Intel CPU's are about 50% faster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nordwolf Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 And laptops are already more expensive in the Netherlands. I really doubt which (other) laptops you might buy there then, if Dell's already overpriced? Anyway, offtopic About OC, it does not depend (only) on the OC'er, but also on the CPU itself. If you have a monday-morning-batch, forget those uber-OC scores. Of course, with Intel, overclock is pretty much always possible these days, but don't take it for granted. The Nvidia 420 , it is damn slow. http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html (points: 565). That is slower than a 100$ graphic card (9800GT) of over 3 years old. That is not fast, that is slow. Really slow. Still consider it fast? The integrated GPU's in the current Intel CPU's are about 50% faster. Agreed, the 420 is slow. Put some bucks in gfx card, it needs to be decent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 (edited) Agreed, the 420 is slow. Put some bucks in gfx card, it needs to be decent. if you guys say so. mine is a 450, not that much higher and its great....might grab a 2nd one and crossfire or sli. and rolf, what do you mean by "monday morning batch" Edited August 16, 2011 by General Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rolf Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 if you guys say so. mine is a 450, not that much higher and its great....might grab a 2nd one and crossfire or sli. 420: memory bandwidth: 28.8GB/s cores: 48 GFLOPS: 134 450: memory bandwidth: 57GB/s OR 96GB/s cores: 192 GFLOPS: 600 A 450 is 3 times faster in practice and rolf, what do you mean by "monday morning batch" A bad batch. The CPU's are produced in batches (not a continues process). Some batches produces slightly better chips than others. Furthermore and even more interesting, all chips are produced from a so-called "wafer", which is a circular Silicon (iirc?) plate on which they 'project'/burn/cut the chips. "Of course", the chips in the center of the plate are better than the one on the edges. This usually result in selling the chips on the edges for "lower quality", or actually a lower clocked CPU (such that there is still enough margin that it will work). I know AMD is very happy about selling those on the edges with a disabled core. Sometimes, the core will actually work, but sometimes it doesn't. Hence, unlocking a core is not always succesful. And that is exactly similar to overclocking CPU's. Guaranteeing an overclock can only be done AFTER you've overclocked it, you don't know what batch it exactly is. Yes, eventually with enough experience (of yourself and others), you can make assumptions, but guaranteeing cannot be done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 420: memory bandwidth: 28.8GB/s cores: 48 GFLOPS: 134 450: memory bandwidth: 57GB/s OR 96GB/s cores: 192 GFLOPS: 600 A 450 is 3 times faster in practice A bad batch. The CPU's are produced in batches (not a continues process). Some batches produces slightly better chips than others. Furthermore and even more interesting, all chips are produced from a so-called "wafer", which is a circular Silicon (iirc?) plate on which they 'project'/burn/cut the chips. "Of course", the chips in the center of the plate are better than the one on the edges. This usually result in selling the chips on the edges for "lower quality", or actually a lower clocked CPU (such that there is still enough margin that it will work). I know AMD is very happy about selling those on the edges with a disabled core. Sometimes, the core will actually work, but sometimes it doesn't. Hence, unlocking a core is not always succesful. And that is exactly similar to overclocking CPU's. Guaranteeing an overclock can only be done AFTER you've overclocked it, you don't know what batch it exactly is. Yes, eventually with enough experience (of yourself and others), you can make assumptions, but guaranteeing cannot be done. ahh. i am going to make a poll in a minute, vote (will be in same section) please Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.