# Difference between core2quad and i5 and so on



## netieb (Aug 16, 2010)

Hi everyone,

right now i have a core2quad look at system specs. Now i would like to now where the difference is between the old core2quad and the new i models?


----------



## mstenholm (Aug 16, 2010)

http://ark.intel.com/Compare.aspx?ids=48496,33924,


----------



## hat (Aug 16, 2010)

Different arcitecture. i5 is native quad, has L3 cache, uses QPI instead of FSB, different socket, DDR3 only, NB on chip, faster... not sure what the difference is between i5 and i7, I would say HT but there's an i7 chip that doesn't have HT.


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Aug 16, 2010)

netieb said:


> Hi everyone,
> 
> right now i have a core2quad look at system specs. Now i would like to now where the difference is between the old core2quad and the new i models?



45/32nm as opposed to 65nm whole new architecture faster clock for clock, new socket, memory controller on chip not NB probably some newer standards like ssse4 etc brought back hyperthreading ....


----------



## 3volvedcombat (Aug 16, 2010)

Also to add more to his question "no thread jack intended"

Also In overclocking and performance after the 4Ghz mark.

Meaning is it worth it to upgrade i5 if you have a core 2 quad at 4Ghz
or is game performance about even at that piont 


***EDIT**** He both have 45 NM CORE 2 QUADS WITH 12MB OF L2 CACHE. 

so 45=45nm same stuff


----------



## netieb (Aug 16, 2010)

Okay so there is no BIG diffrence? I got my 9550 at 4.6 Ghz but my cooler is not good enough to keep it cool so i run it at 4 Ghz. I think i will wait for something new so the i get cheaper ^^


----------



## 3volvedcombat (Aug 16, 2010)

netieb said:


> Okay so there is no BIG diffrence? I got my 9550 at 4.6 Ghz but my cooler is not good enough to keep it cool so i run it at 4 Ghz. I think i will wait for something new so the i get cheaper ^^



To be anust- between our processors, our q9550's, they over-clock a tad better then i5 750's i know for sure. 

I do hear from people and good friends at tpu that upgraded from q9550's to i5 750's that the i5's have smoother desktop performance and game performance- smoother then a q9550.

but in reality sense i can get my q9550 to 4.25Ghz 24/7 upgrading to a i5-750 that might be able to do that speed could be a side grade.

first of the q9550 is a really high end core 2 quad- with 12mb of l2 cache. 
Its racked up with alot of features and over-clocks like a beast. its a true quad.

Looking at the benchmark a q9550 is about 5-15% slower then a i5-750.

a q9550 at 4.0Ghz+ in gaming applications might not even show anything slower then a i5-750 at 4.0Ghz

Personally i think there's no difference to a point- because certain q9550's and such over-clock better then i5 750's which evens performance.


----------



## MomentoMoir (Aug 16, 2010)

If 3vc is game we will show you a bench comparison on i5 vs 9550 at 4ghz to see if there is a big difference. Im curious as well.


----------



## hat (Aug 16, 2010)

NdMk2o1o said:


> 45/32nm as opposed to 65nm whole new architecture faster clock for clock, new socket, *memory controller on chip not NB* probably some newer standards like ssse4 etc brought back hyperthreading ....



All i5 chips have the NB on the processor. Socket 1156 made that move. Some of the i7's, designed on 1336, keep the NB on the processor, but do still keep the memory controller on the CPU as you say.



netieb said:


> Okay so there is no BIG diffrence? I got my 9550 at 4.6 Ghz but my cooler is not good enough to keep it cool so i run it at 4 Ghz. I think i will wait for something new so the i get cheaper ^^



IMO, no sense throwing all kinds of money out to have an i5 or i7 sit at 4GHz when your Q9950 already does it. It may be slightly faster, but you already have a Q9550 at 4GHz... is the "slightly faster" worth the cost of a new board and processor at least, and memory if you don't have DDR3 already? I think you've been bitten by the upgrade bug, or you just want to play with something new. Keep what you have.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Aug 16, 2010)

i7 860 vs Q9550 both OC at 4.00GHz


----------



## netieb (Aug 16, 2010)

Wow so many replies. Well i didnt really want to upgrade. I just wanted to now if there is a huge diffrence or not. But it seems like its not worth upgrading right now. So I will keep what I have until the rig falls apart ^^


----------



## MomentoMoir (Aug 16, 2010)

Not entirely a legit scenario. I dont remember him mentioning whether he had HT on or not for the i7. He also had some of the tests running 4.2ghz instead of 4/4 like the rest. Kudos for the try, but not reviewer quality. 

For gaming its no doubt not a very big difference between C2Q and Core i clock for clock. We need to see some legit CPU benches against 2 matching clock CPUs.


----------



## ebolamonkey3 (Aug 16, 2010)

netieb said:


> Wow so many replies. Well i didnt really want to upgrade. I just wanted to now if there is a huge diffrence or not. But it seems like its not worth upgrading right now. So I will keep what I have until the rig falls apart ^^



At this point I don't think you should upgrade. The i7 is faster no doubt, but you might as well wait a bit longer and upgrade to LGA2011 when it comes out in... 2011. I'm sure your Q9550 will hold you over until then


----------



## Wrigleyvillain (Aug 16, 2010)

Yeah I am "just a gamer" and only upgraded to i5 after a recent bad experience with a 775 DDR3 board got me fed up (even though it was my fault). That plus $40 rebates on EVGA boards combined with cheaper CPUs at Microcenter (if you have one nearby) made sense for me and I decided to sell all my 775 gear. And of course it's always fun to play with new stuff. And due to the wierd SDRAM market and some international buyers hard up for decent hardware I sold everything for pretty close to what I paid for it...


----------



## proton_chain (Aug 17, 2010)

netieb said:


> Okay so there is no BIG diffrence? I got my 9550 at 4.6 Ghz but my cooler is not good enough to keep it cool so i run it at 4 Ghz. I think i will wait for something new so the i get cheaper ^^



What do you do? If you do 3D rendering, then go for i7. Even an i3 can challenge a Core 2 Quad. Its about different architectures and HT. If you do something else, then don't, be happy with 9550. You got a great overclock, I see...


----------



## francis511 (Aug 17, 2010)

Compare Intel Core i7-920 (Bloomfield 4c), Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 (Yorkfield 4c), Intel Core i5-750 (Lynnfield 4c)

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/chart...tml?prod[2617]=on&prod[2620]=on&prod[2884]=on

Or compare q9550 and virtually anything else


----------



## Mussels (Aug 17, 2010)

with the OP's specs, i dont think he needs to worry about upgrading for another 6-12 months.


----------



## overclocking101 (Aug 17, 2010)

facts are facts, i5-7XX and i7-8XX/9XX haveMUCH much better memory performance and reduced latency. they are better on most things but if you have a q9550 that hits 4.6ghz i'd say you are fine. but the i5-6XX and under are on par memory performance wise or worse that core2. but personally i would offload the 775 stuff an upgrade while the 775's are still worth a damn because soon as sandy bridge launches you will not be able to sell anything 775 for more than 1/3 of cost or less.


----------



## Kursah (Aug 17, 2010)

Mussels said:


> with the OP's specs, i dont think he needs to worry about upgrading for another 6-12 months.




+1 and maybe longer...I'm still on a q6600 @ 3.6, and it's still performing great for gaming. No I won't say it holds a candle to a newer quad, but every game I play is smooth and that's how I like it. I almost upgraded 6 months ago...glad I haven't yet...I have yet to see a reason to yet (aside from upgrading to an HD5870 from a GTX260).


----------



## overclocking101 (Aug 17, 2010)

also cpu-pci-e performance is much beter on i5-7XX and up as well due to onboard pci-e controller less latency etc etc, i56XX and under its on par or worse


----------

