# AMD 955 vs Intel i7 920



## bombfirst885 (Dec 17, 2009)

I'm building a new PC, and sort of new to the whole thing. I was wondering if the price difference of the 920 is worth it?


----------



## erocker (Dec 17, 2009)

What are you using your PC for?


----------



## troyrae360 (Dec 17, 2009)

Lol, just wanted to see what your Disabled image was


----------



## Jeffredo (Dec 17, 2009)

IMO the i7 is not worth an additional $120 for what I use it for (gaming).  Depends on what your primary use for the PC is.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Dec 17, 2009)

I7 is faster by alittle bit


----------



## Flyordie (Dec 17, 2009)

Phenom II if just for gaming.  i7 is really only useful if you do multi-stage rendering or video processing for a living.. lol.


----------



## InTeL-iNsIdE (Dec 17, 2009)

Flyordie said:


> Phenom II if just for gaming.  i7 is really only useful if you do multi-stage rendering or video processing for a living.. lol.



It is also a known fact that the i7 gives one a much bigger e-peen, I can vouch for this, before i7 I was an average white dude epeen kind of person, now with i7 I have a magnificent holy smokes  epeen you dont want your mrs to see


----------



## Kei (Dec 17, 2009)

I concur with all the replies in the thread so far lol. For anything short of doing multistage rendering, video/audio processing, or otherwise something ridiculous that you do for a living the Phenom is a smarter buy.

Personal preference may have you buy the i7 anyway if you prefer a particular company. Just know that if you went the Phenom route you will not lose anything and will be smokin fast with either processor.

Kei


----------



## patheticcockroach (Dec 17, 2009)

IMO the i7 920 isn't really worth it due to the expensive mobo that comes with it, for not much of a performance gain. My main hesitation would be with the i5 750, which costs barely more than the P2X4 965 for a decent increase in video encoding (I saw a +20% for DivX, too bad they didn't test the codecs I use...) and something else I forgot, and comparable performance for the rest.


----------



## Kantastic (Dec 17, 2009)

I wouldn't go P55, it's a dead-end socket. AM3 has Bulldozer laid out for it and the architecture seems interesting/promising.


----------



## patheticcockroach (Dec 17, 2009)

Kantastic said:


> I wouldn't go P55, it's a dead-end socket. AM3 has Bulldozer laid out for it and the architecture seems interesting/promising.


Yeah, right. I'm not an upgrader so I didn't take that into consideration, but obviously for someone willing to upgrade the CPU later, P55 might not be a good idea indeed.


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Dec 17, 2009)

well a i7 may be over kill for a gaming rig today, but no one can argue with the fact that the i7 will keep up with future games alot better than any of the current Phenom II CPUs. Something to consider(longer useable lifespan with the i7).


----------



## InTeL-iNsIdE (Dec 17, 2009)

patheticcockroach said:


> IMO the i7 920 isn't really worth it due to the expensive mobo that comes with it, for not much of a performance gain. My main hesitation would be with the i5 750, which costs barely more than the P2X4 965 for a decent increase in video encoding (I saw a +20% for DivX, too bad they didn't test the codecs I use...) and something else I forgot, and comparable performance for the rest.



Ok, put it this way, if you have the $/£ to spend then it is worth it. 

If you dont have the budget dont buy, simple. If you do, you simply wont regret it for a start my i7 920 at 4ghz no pII can touch in terms of raw performance, not just encoding either, I run multiple vm's and having 8 threads helps a hell of a lot. Not only that but in 3 years time when your pii 965 is obsolete, my i7 will still be able to kick it.

I do have to agree if its just a gaming rig you are after and you dont have the budget then get the pii 965, its a damn good cpu for the $, however I know I can keep this rig for the next 3 years and only have to seriousley think about upgrading my gpu in that time. Also if you are a bench junkie then tri channel ram > dual channel, and in a year the i9 hexacores will be out, of course AMD have a hexacore on the horizon too, though whether it will be just for workstations yet I dont know, and still you dont get the raw performance of the i7/i9 and thats not too mention hyperthreading which does yield a significant performance increase in multi threaded apps/environments


----------



## bombfirst885 (Dec 18, 2009)

My main purpose would be for gaming, yes.

I'm not the average tech head so I'm planning on using this with a HD 5770 for at least the next three years. Also gaming at 1900x1200 if that matters.


----------



## Zubasa (Dec 18, 2009)

bombfirst885 said:


> My main purpose would be for gaming, yes.
> 
> I'm not the average tech head so I'm planning on using this with a HD 5770 for at least the next three years. Also gaming at 1900x1200 if that matters.


You are better off getting at lease a 5850 for gaming @1920*1200 
Especially if you are not going to upgrade for the next 3 years.


----------



## MKmods (Dec 18, 2009)

I think InTeL-iNsIdE hit it on the head... 
I had x58 and went back to AM3, to be honest I like the AM3 better, it runs a LOT cooler, uses less power and plays all my games just as good as the i7. Oh and it was quite a bit less $ too..

The 1 thing I loved about X58 (besides the bad ass red/black mobo theme) was I constantly change GPUs and it was fun to be able to switch between SLI and Crossfire.


----------



## Lionheart (Dec 18, 2009)

get a PII dude, i have a core i7 rig and they are powerful but not worth it one bit, I wish i went with AM3 platform to be honest, intel is too complex for me.


----------



## BraveSoul (Dec 18, 2009)

definitely 5850  and crossfire able motherboard ,, u will be fine with amd 955


----------



## Lionheart (Dec 18, 2009)

maybe even the PII 965 125w, I would get that, or even the so called PII 975 if AMD are actually bringing that out!


----------



## PaulieG (Dec 18, 2009)

Kantastic said:


> I wouldn't go P55, it's a dead-end socket. AM3 has Bulldozer laid out for it and the architecture seems interesting/promising.



Ughhh, we really need to get away from this sort of thinking. The 1156 upgrade path is not much different than 1366. The primary difference is a single EE edition 6 core cpu that will cost you $1000. The 1156 socket gives you the options of i5, i7 and 1156 Xeon chips. It will be around for a long time.


----------



## BraveSoul (Dec 18, 2009)

nice pic Paul...somebody's getting an early Christmas present
i wonder tho   will 1156 socket support any 6core or 8 core cpu's down the road,, i dont c y not,, if it will then that's an awesome platform


----------



## brandonwh64 (Dec 18, 2009)

Ive been discouraged with my Phenom II 965 BE C3 125W due to overclocking issues. If this chip would do what i wanted it to do i would be so happy. Other than the overclocking issue, Its a fast CPU! it does alot of things that would take other CPUs alot longer to do. I7 920 is a good CPU but like some of the other  guys said, its expensive and yes it maybe faster but not really by much. Im trying to sort out my Overclocking issues but other than that im comfortable with this CPU


----------



## Lionheart (Dec 18, 2009)

brandonwh64 said:


> Ive been discouraged with my Phenom II 965 BE C3 125W due to overclocking issues. If this chip would do what i wanted it to do i would be so happy. Other than the overclocking issue, Its a fast CPU! it does alot of things that would take other CPUs alot longer to do. I7 920 is a good CPU but like some of the other  guys said, its expensive and yes it maybe faster but not really by much. Im trying to sort out my Overclocking issues but other than that im comfortable with this CPU



what do you think is causing the OC issues? just curious thats all.


----------



## Soylent Joe (Dec 18, 2009)

I agree that the 955 + 5850 will give you the greatest bang for the buck here.


----------



## Lampmaster (Dec 18, 2009)

You should check out this review here.

Maybe by looking at the numbers you can decide if it's worth it or not. Personally I'm surprised by the difference and glad i went i7.


----------



## Lionheart (Dec 18, 2009)

Lampmaster said:


> You should check out this review here.
> 
> Maybe by looking at the numbers you can decide if it's worth it or not. Personally I'm surprised by the difference and glad i went i7.



Smells like fakeness to me


----------



## Lampmaster (Dec 18, 2009)

CHAOS_KILLA said:


> Smells like fakeness to me



How so? A Phenom 2 at 3.4 (P2 965) performs about the same as an i7 at 2.7 (i7 920), which seems about right to me. I guess it could also depend on whether the OP plans on overclocking or not since the i7 has more headroom.


----------



## DrPepper (Dec 18, 2009)

i7 is faster and the 955 is fast anyway. 

Put it this way I can stick my 920 at 1.6ghz and still run l4d2 and codmw2 at 100+fps.


----------



## Kei (Dec 18, 2009)

DrPepper said:


> i7 is faster and the 955 is fast anyway.
> 
> Put it this way I can stick my 920 at 1.6ghz and still run l4d2 and codmw2 at 100+fps.



I used to do crazy things like that just to see exactly how powerful the processors (and gpu's) really are these days. I remember running tests with codmw1, unreal tournament 3, and a few others running only at 1.8Ghz and it still playing beautifully.

If we're all honest we know that we have more power than is needed for pretty much anything...we're just greedy and see through very squinty eyes now. lol 

Kei


----------



## DrPepper (Dec 18, 2009)

Kei said:


> I used to do crazy things like that just to see exactly how powerful the processors (and gpu's) really are these days. I remember running tests with codmw1, unreal tournament 3, and a few others running only at 1.8Ghz and it still playing beautifully.
> 
> If we're all honest we know that we have more power than is needed for pretty much anything...we're just greedy and see through very squinty eyes now. lol
> 
> Kei



That's true. Either one will do fine tbh. Personally I went i7 for the babes (still waiting) and because I could. I'd like to use a 1136 system which I would recommend because its a kind of middle ground between the 955 and 920.


----------



## 3dsage (Dec 18, 2009)

DrPepper said:


> That's true. Either one will do fine tbh. Personally I went i7 for the babes (still waiting) and because I could. I'd like to use a 1136 system which I would recommend because its a kind of middle ground between the 955 and 920.



The girls are waiting for you man, not the other way around.

If your into benching, gaming or just plain old overclocking on Air ,920 get it hands down. Its the modern day Q6600 IMO. 2 years from now they will still hold their resale value, unlike PII"s.

The 965,955 are great cpu's though for the money. You probably wouldnt know the difference really in real world between the two, without CPU-Z.
At least in my experience from owning a 720B.E(X4)@ 3.8GHZ versus a 920 @ 3.8GHZ.


----------



## phanbuey (Dec 18, 2009)

Lampmaster said:


> You should check out this review here.
> 
> Maybe by looking at the numbers you can decide if it's worth it or not. Personally I'm surprised by the difference and glad i went i7.




great review!

Im waiting for the 32nm i5s personally... but I would go i5 if i had to buy all new shwag - just seems like it would last a bit longer.


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Dec 18, 2009)

Yea notice that unless its a dual gpu setup all platforms tend to be fairly equal and within a few % of each other. Socket 775 / AM3 / 1336  in multi gpu setups i7 tends to take the cake but its a mixed bag, reading that review i can see in some titles i7 tanks and loses to 775 / AM3 and when i7 loses it does so by a large margin, otherwise its as expected and is well out in front.

My point being that in terms of gaming and if DX11 with direct compute and opencl takes off the strain on the cpu should lessen. Thus any socket 775 / AM3 / 1156 /1336 setup will be viable for years yet. At the end of the day we are still mostly limited by the gpu. And as it stands most games like Dragon Age dont even utilize an Ati 4870 to its full potential. 

Wrap up:  i7 AM3 C2Q etc are all viable and in quadcore form will be plenty for years to come as we still havent gotten away from dualcores outrunning quads in gaming. I suspect we still have a few years till multi core game engines fully utilize are current cpus let alone future chips. Therefore i suggest getting a good quadcore no matter the platform grab some good ram and a nice gpu and just game on


----------



## EarlZ (Dec 18, 2009)

If you need every ounce of performance ( especially when overclocked ) then by all means get the i7 there is really no contest!

If you want budget then go for the AMD line-up, you really cant go wrong with any choice, your pocket says where to go


----------



## brandonwh64 (Dec 18, 2009)

CHAOS_KILLA said:


> what do you think is causing the OC issues? just curious thats all.



Well i believe my overclocking issues are with my PSU. When i first got the system setup i couldnt get ANYTHING stable over stock speeds and volts, so i took out my Enermax liberty 500W PSU and changed it with a Ultra LSP 650 from my previous setup and then i got it up to 4GHZ stable for like 3 days, THEN while during heavy loads the Ultra PSU started making this electronic buzzing sounds like it was melting LOL and about 10 minutes later it BSOD so i immediatly restart it and once it loaded windows i did prime95 again and it BSOD  so now i have it at stock settings and im not doing anything that requires alot of load til my new PSU gets here.


----------



## Lionheart (Dec 18, 2009)

brandonwh64 said:


> Well i believe my overclocking issues are with my PSU. When i first got the system setup i couldnt get ANYTHING stable over stock speeds and volts, so i took out my Enermax liberty 500W PSU and changed it with a Ultra LSP 650 from my previous setup and then i got it up to 4GHZ stable for like 3 days, THEN while during heavy loads the Ultra PSU started making this electronic buzzing sounds like it was melting LOL and about 10 minutes later it BSOD so i immediatly restart it and once it loaded windows i did prime95 again and it BSOD  so now i have it at stock settings and im not doing anything that requires alot of load til my new PSU gets here.



Ok cool, sounds about right, good luck with lit


----------



## _33 (Dec 18, 2009)

I went i7 last march, and my rig is still part of the top performers, just my radeon's not keeping up


----------



## patheticcockroach (Dec 18, 2009)

_33 said:


> I went i7 last march, and my rig is still part of the top performers


If money's not an issue, there's no discussion about whether i7 is "better" than P2X4: of course the i7 975 is faster. The i7 920 too, but not that much.


----------



## DaedalusHelios (Dec 18, 2009)

BarbaricSoul said:


> well a i7 may be over kill for a gaming rig today, but no one can argue with the fact that the i7 will keep up with future games alot better than any of the current Phenom II CPUs. Something to consider(longer useable lifespan with the i7).



Yeah, buying i7 is more than worth it if it fits in your budget. It won't depreciate like a vga card at the same price either. Phenom II Quads are on par with high end LGA775 Quads, its not exactly revolutionary for the times. I always feel weird buying new if its two sockets behind what a competitor has. The Phenom II is still a great value, its just not cutting edge. Think of Phenom II as midrange, nothing wrong with it though.


----------



## _33 (Dec 18, 2009)

patheticcockroach said:


> If money's not an issue, there's no discussion about whether i7 is "better" than P2X4: of course the i7 975 is faster. The i7 920 too, but not that much.



Well I run a 920 @ 3.6ghz using a Big Typhoon VX as my cooling solution.  It's not an obvious combo, but the big typhoon does the job keeping my 920 w/hyperthreading ON at 3.6ghz nice and cool.


----------



## subhendu (Dec 18, 2009)

amd phenom II x4 955 is a gr8 choice friend


----------



## Fourstaff (Dec 18, 2009)

Flip a coin: Heads 920 Tails 955. Both of them are extremely good, not easy to compare.


----------



## dir_d (Dec 18, 2009)

crazyeyesreaper said:


> Yea notice that unless its a dual gpu setup all platforms tend to be fairly equal and within a few % of each other. Socket 775 / AM3 / 1336  in multi gpu setups i7 tends to take the cake but its a mixed bag, reading that review i can see in some titles i7 tanks and loses to 775 / AM3 and when i7 loses it does so by a large margin, otherwise its as expected and is well out in front.
> 
> My point being that in terms of gaming and if DX11 with direct compute and opencl takes off the strain on the cpu should lessen. Thus any socket 775 / AM3 / 1156 /1336 setup will be viable for years yet. At the end of the day we are still mostly limited by the gpu. And as it stands most games like Dragon Age dont even utilize an Ati 4870 to its full potential.
> 
> Wrap up:  i7 AM3 C2Q etc are all viable and in quadcore form will be plenty for years to come as we still havent gotten away from dualcores outrunning quads in gaming. I suspect we still have a few years till multi core game engines fully utilize are current cpus let alone future chips. Therefore i suggest getting a good quadcore no matter the platform grab some good ram and a nice gpu and just game on



I agree with this totally and that is why i went with my AM3 setup because at the time you couldnt get i7 920 at microcenter for $200. My machine is purely gaming and performs just as well or better than any machine with the same GPU, i wish more people would realize what you stated when it comes to upgrading their machines.


----------



## patheticcockroach (Dec 18, 2009)

Fourstaff said:


> Flip a coin: Heads 920 Tails 955. Both of them are extremely good, not easy to compare.


Money would do the difference. I guess it depends on where you live, but here cheapest CPU+MOBO is around 230€ for P2X4 965 vs 330€ for i7 920.


----------



## dir_d (Dec 18, 2009)

IF the OP is building a pure gaming machine right now the best chip to buy will be the 955 C3.


----------



## Zebeon (Dec 18, 2009)

I am trying to decide between these 2 chips as well as an 1156 750.
Good read-

IS the 125W 965 out yet.. were to buy, the only ones I see is the 140W?


----------



## patheticcockroach (Dec 18, 2009)

Zebeon said:


> IS the 125W 965 out yet.. were to buy, the only ones I see is the 140W?


Where I live it's been out very soon after the official launch date, this was 1-2 weeks ago I think?


----------



## Kei (Dec 18, 2009)

Zebeon said:


> I am trying to decide between these 2 chips as well as an 1156 750.
> Good read-
> 
> IS the 125W 965 out yet.. were to buy, the only ones I see is the 140W?



Yes, newegg has had them for quite some time now. 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103727

Kei


----------



## MKmods (Dec 18, 2009)

http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=10011611


----------



## Delta6326 (Dec 18, 2009)

Newegg AMD 955-965 that's your best bet i don't know the difference form the 2 955's i think the 1 with no reviews is newer
EDIT: the955 is C3


----------



## Nick259 (Dec 18, 2009)

CHAOS_KILLA said:


> Smells like fakeness to me



yes some those results seem to contradict all of the reviews i've seen.


----------



## MKmods (Dec 18, 2009)

Lampmaster said:


> You should check out this review here.
> 
> Maybe by looking at the numbers you can decide if it's worth it or not. Personally I'm surprised by the difference and glad i went i7.





Nick259 said:


> yes some those results seem to contradict all of the reviews i've seen.



I normally dont care much for benches (real life matters a lot more to me) But I noticed in the test they used an old mobo and DDR2 memory and X8 on the PCI X slots. If I was using 5770s I dont think there would be a big difference (measurable but small) but using a 5870 there has to be a pretty good diff.

It seemed kind of silly using a top of the line AM3 CPU and an older AM2 mobo/memory and comparing that to Intels top of the line CPU/Mobo/mem combo, gee I wonder why the scores were a bit lopsided

Silly comparisons like that are why I insist on being more realistic when I choose hardware, leaving marketeers (and idiot reviewers) in charge really screws up good decision making.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Dec 18, 2009)

Am I the only one that thinks an i5 or i7 is the better buy with todays prices? I'm talking TODAY. Not 6 months ago.



DaedalusHelios said:


> Yeah, buying i7 is more than worth it if it fits in your budget. It won't depreciate like a vga card at the same price either. Phenom II Quads are on par with high end LGA775 Quads, its not exactly revolutionary for the times. I always feel weird buying new if its two sockets behind what a competitor has. The Phenom II is still a great value, its just not cutting edge. Think of Phenom II as midrange, nothing wrong with it though.



Mid-range? I wouldn't go THAT far.


----------



## Kenshai (Dec 18, 2009)

MKmods said:


> I normally dont care much for benches (real life matters a lot more to me) But I noticed in the test they used an old mobo and DDR2 memory and X8 on the PCI X slots. If I was using 5770s I dont think there would be a big difference (measurable but small) but using a 5870 there has to be a pretty good diff.
> 
> It seemed kind of silly using a top of the line AM3 CPU and an older AM2 mobo/memory and comparing that to Intels top of the line CPU/Mobo/mem combo, gee I wonder why the scores were a bit lopsided
> 
> Silly comparisons like that are why I insist on being more realistic when I choose hardware, leaving marketeers (and idiot reviewers) in charge really screws up good decision making.



Difference according to wizz's review is 1-2% across all resolution with pci-e 2.0 8x. As far as I know there isn't a dual x16 chipset out for AMD. 

I will still agree though that the amount would make a bigger difference in this case, as the amd and core 2 rig only had 2 gigs each?


----------



## MKmods (Dec 18, 2009)

I use a Crosshair III and its X16 X 2


----------



## Kenshai (Dec 18, 2009)

MKmods said:


> I use a Crosshair III and its X16 X 2



I stand corrected, suppose I haven't looked too much into it recently.


----------



## MKmods (Dec 18, 2009)

And DFI has the DK 790FXB-M3H5.  It may not be a huge dif but its dif none the less. If they were interested in a more even test why not use a mid level GPU instead?
(I looked pretty hard before I gave up my X58 and went back to AMD)

Hardware comparisons can be like polls for politicians, someone that has an agenda can skew the poll/comparison either way he wants. Now add to that millions of diff combos of hardware and people/companies paid (or receiving free hardware) and its almost impossible to make fair/even comparisons.

And than others say the 965 is a mid range CPU? are you kidding me?


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Dec 18, 2009)

theres alot of boards that have dual x16 that run crossfire in x16 lol no matter if its crossfire or sli

but true remains that even x8 x8 boards do just fine u wont miss the 2-5fps u lose because if your running crossfire to begin with your frames are through the roof anyway


----------



## MKmods (Dec 18, 2009)

crazyeyesreaper said:


> theres alot of boards that have dual x16 that run crossfire in x16 lol no matter if its crossfire or sli
> 
> but true remains that even x8 x8 boards do just fine u wont miss the 2-5fps u lose because if your running crossfire to begin with your frames are through the roof anyway



1- Nope (just a few)
2- its more than 2-5fps
3- yes once it goes over 100Fps its all good


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Dec 18, 2009)

MKmods said:


> 1- Nope (just a few)
> 2- its more than 2-5fps
> 3- yes once it goes over 100Fps its all good



Dude I'm willing to bet its less than 2-5 fps.


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Dec 18, 2009)

well for me in games where im getting 400fps it dosent really matter  and  i see more fps fluctuations depending on cpu and ram over PCIe slot config  literally a 200mhz -400mhz bump on my cpu has more impact then x8 or x16 crossfire

the only setup that would need x16 + x16 is a quad crossfire setup with 2 5970s

otherwise x8 x8 is = to x16 x16 as most single gpu cards still dont tax the bandwidth of x16 pcie 1.1


----------



## shevanel (Dec 18, 2009)

I can honestly say having the i7 has made me happy. I started with an e6600 in the c2d era then q9550.. then i7 920. I've been super happy with this setup since I got the gigabyte board to replace the MSI. I also feel like I don't need a cpu for quite a while and now whatever money I want to spend on upgrades can be spent elsewhere. I'm the type of person that if something is lacking anywhere it must be improved. period. And with the i7 chip I have no urges to look around at other processors trying to find one that does what I want.

I may not be a pro video editor ("only buy i7 if you encode for a living") but I like to record fraps vids and camcorder vids of my daughter and I enjoy being able to endcode the video into another format for whatever my use might be.. and I don't have to wait forever for it to finish. 

I also like the feeling of knowing I have more than enough juice for whenever I need it. I may not use it everyday but If I buy exspensive gear I want to be able to mess with it and run benches to kill the boredom while gaming doesnt seem entertaining. I love trying out newer hardware and nothing kicks my nuts harder than not being able to keep up with mid-level systems.. 

So i7 might be a little pricey but its money well spent for the time it will save you and the duration of it's ability to perform in todays world.

I'd have an extra $600 in my bank if I would have went i7 first instead of going up step by step.

I almost sold this rig but then I thought.. if I had anything less than an x58 + i7 rig.. I wouldnt even want it in my house.. whats the point. Not once have I ever sat here saying to myself "damn slow ass pc.. wtf??" ever!

You can jump on a i7 combo for under $400 nowadays. if it lasts 2 years thats only $16 a month

buy an average mans PC or buy an i7.. to me the choice is easy.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Dec 18, 2009)

> buy an average mans PC or buy an i7.. to me the choice is easy.


 Such an ego.

Anyway I own a 955. I owned a 720 before that and a 9550 before that. I own stock in AMD and Ill tell you this. Go with the i5 or i7. The price is to close anymore to justify a 955 or 965.  Six months ago I would have told you AMD all the way.


----------



## erocker (Dec 18, 2009)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Such an ego.
> 
> Anyway I own a 955. I owned a 720 before that and a 9550 before that. I own stock in AMD and Ill tell you this. Go with the i5 or i7. The price is to close anymore to justify a 955 or 965.  Six months ago I would have told you AMD all the way.



To add to that, why buy something that eats more power and runs hotter when you don't need it? I can buy what I want, and I got a PII because they are easy to use, run cool and don't use a lot of power. I buy based on my needs.


----------



## shevanel (Dec 18, 2009)

It's not about ego. It's about if someone is considering an i7.. get it. You will be happy you did and it's well worth it. If you don't sit around your pc more than a couple hours a day.. buy a budget rig. I  enjoy my PC. It keeps me out of trouble and out of the bars. It's the source to my world, it's my hobby and it's what i enjoy coming home to while I'm enjoying my time as a single man. If I didn't have time to play around on a PC the majority of the time I would be happy with any old PC but the majority of us here spend alot of time at our desk and at this point in the game buying anything else would be dumb imo. 

In 1-2 years when those sixcores are cheap you better believe I'll grab one and drop it into my x58 mobo in a heart beat. I might not be the guy that buys the big expsensive hardware on release day, but when the price is right it's an easy decision.

mailman said the smartest thing in the whole thread "Go with the i5 or i7. The price is to close anymore to justify a 955 or 965. Six months ago I would have told you AMD all the way."




erocker said:


> To add to that, why buy something that eats more power and runs hotter when you don't need it? I can buy what I want, and I got a PII because they are easy to use, run cool and don't use a lot of power. I buy based on my needs.



stock i7 920 was the same as my 3.8ghz q9550.. and it runs same temp if not cooler.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Dec 18, 2009)

erocker said:


> To add to that, why buy something that eats more power and runs hotter when you don't need it? I can buy what I want, and I got a PII because they are easy to use, run cool and don't use a lot of power. I buy based on my needs.



Thats also true. Really there is no wrong answer when you are trying to pick between Anna Nicole Smith or Pamela Anderson.


----------



## shevanel (Dec 18, 2009)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Thats also true. Really there is no wrong answer when you are trying to pick between Anna Nicole Smith or Pamela Anderson.



old geezer leftovers or rock star sloppy seconds.. choice is yours.


----------



## MKmods (Dec 18, 2009)

shevanel said:


> It's not about ego. It's about if someone is considering an i7.. get it. You will be happy you did and it's well worth it.


hey mods, while youre on the hook, do you have 3dmark o6? If so have you pulled a score on that xfire setup yet?[/QUOTE]


LOL, it "IS" about " ego" and its not worth it unless you specialize in heavy video editing/encoding. The OP wanted it for gaming so its not worth it even more.


----------



## shevanel (Dec 18, 2009)

MKmods said:


> LOL, it "IS" about " ego" and its not worth it unless you specialize in heavy video editing. The OP wanted it for gaming so its REALLY not worth it.




to each his own. people spend $200 on 60gb sdd hdd's.. think about it.

hey mods, while youre on the hook, do you have 3dmark o6? If so have you pulled a score on that xfire setup yet?


----------



## MKmods (Dec 18, 2009)

nope, comp is in pieces, Im on my Lego one now. 


shevanel said:


> to each his own. people spend $200 on 60gb sdd hdd's.. think about it.




And remember what this post is about... not who pisses away the most $, but what is a better choice for a gaming comp.


----------



## shevanel (Dec 18, 2009)

he says he plans on using a single 5770 for the next three years.. so i take it hes not trying to max out BC2 and AVP and whatever else is to come. in that case he should just pick up the cheapest thing he can get that'll do 3 to 3.5 ghz on 2 cores.


----------



## MKmods (Dec 18, 2009)

Thats what I did, AMD 250 FTW! and its doing just fine with my 5770s
($200 for a Crosshair III and 250)


----------



## shevanel (Dec 18, 2009)

speaking of pissing away money.. i just ordered 2 more 23" dell s2309w 1080p monitors... i hope the 5770's can keep up with it.. if not.. 5870x2 here I come.

well im sure the op will be able to make a sound decision on what he needs to do. plenty of mixed opinions here so he should be able to figure out what is best for him.. sorry if I came off like a prick but I wasnt sure what type of user he was and was only trying to reccomend getting something that'll keep up through the next couple years.


----------



## MKmods (Dec 18, 2009)

LOL, now that you mention it I was thinking of another 24" (2 sounds cool) but the 5770s would struggle a bit
(now I wish I had got the 5850, but dont tell anyone)


----------



## shevanel (Dec 18, 2009)

5850 is inferior to 2x5770

all the testing Ive done Ive surpassed a *5870* most of the time if not all the time. it's probbaly your cpu


----------



## MKmods (Dec 18, 2009)

(but not 2X 5850s lol, and when the holidays are done the 250 will go bye bye and a 965 will take its place)


----------



## Hunt3r (Dec 18, 2009)

prefer the new processor that will come out in 2010 .. it seemed that the name will change paw twrk .. something like that


----------



## eidairaman1 (Dec 18, 2009)

brandonwh64 said:


> Ive been discouraged with my Phenom II 965 BE C3 125W due to overclocking issues. If this chip would do what i wanted it to do i would be so happy. Other than the overclocking issue, Its a fast CPU! it does alot of things that would take other CPUs alot longer to do. I7 920 is a good CPU but like some of the other  guys said, its expensive and yes it maybe faster but not really by much. Im trying to sort out my Overclocking issues but other than that im comfortable with this CPU



probably your motherboard giving you fits.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Dec 19, 2009)

eidairaman1 said:


> probably your motherboard giving you fits.



LOL i hope the PSU was the man problem. I shall see on monday when it comes in


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Dec 19, 2009)

shevanel said:


> 5850 is inferior to 2x5770
> 
> all the testing Ive done Ive surpassed a *5870* most of the time if not all the time. it's probbaly your cpu



Yeah and two 5850's beat two 5770's. Your point?


----------



## DaedalusHelios (Dec 19, 2009)

MKmods said:


> LOL, now that you mention it I was thinking of another 24" (2 sounds cool) but the 5770s would struggle a bit
> (now I wish I had got *the 5850*, but dont tell anyone)





shevanel said:


> 5850 is inferior to 2x5770
> 
> all the testing Ive done Ive surpassed a *5870* most of the time if not all the time. it's probbaly your cpu





TheMailMan78 said:


> Yeah and two 5850's beat two 5770's. Your point?



Shevanel thought MKmods meant singular since Mkmods typed "the 5850" and not "the 5850's". He was only responding accurately to the text typed. Maybe MKmods meant to type plural but didn't. Lets keep the thread in a friendly tone please.


----------



## shevanel (Dec 19, 2009)

with the current drivers it looks as if 5770's are better than 5850's... but only for now  and the *5770 CF is about the same price as a solo 5850*.. with *5870+ performance*.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Dec 19, 2009)

shevanel said:


> with the current drivers it looks as if 5770's are better than 5850's... but only for now  and the *5770 CF is about the same price as a solo 5850*.. with *5870+ performance*.



You act as if thats a big deal. Thats how it should be.


----------



## shevanel (Dec 19, 2009)

then we have it good!


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Dec 19, 2009)

shevanel said:


> then we have it good!



Ok?


----------



## r9 (Dec 19, 2009)

This thread sound to me like: "Who will win in fight Chuck Norris vs old gramma ?"
And there always there will be people who think that the gramma would have a chance .


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Dec 19, 2009)

Shevanel just to let you know its true two 5770 will "beat" a 5850. However you are paying 30 to 40 more for two cards that will not scale as well as a single card AND you have no head room to grow. So honestly you are cutting yourself short. Dont belive me? Look at the GPU scores.

Shevanel|His 5770 Xfire|850/1200|P17215| i7 920@4Ghz






TheMailMan78|HIS HD5850|775/1125|P13804|Phenom II 955@3.20Ghz





You paid 40 bucks more for 600pts in Vantage and I can always add another 5850


----------



## DaedalusHelios (Dec 19, 2009)

Why this bickering? The real difference comes in games with eyefinity until we see more demanding games. Nobody buys a card for Vantage unless they are just into benching. Benching is e-peen dick measuring unless you are using extreme cooling while shooting for world records.

You guys should fold with all that GPU power....... nevermind its ATi


----------



## MKmods (Dec 19, 2009)

What I "ment" to say was The 5770s ROCK! they play everything at ultra 1920 X 1200 and run cool.

BUT!

If I had picked up a 5850 (couldnt afford 2 at 1 time) I could pick up another soon. I wish the 5770s were just a bit more oomf for a bit less $.


----------



## shevanel (Dec 19, 2009)

Yeah mailman.. sad score on premature drivers. such a pitty. 

I don't plan on keeping these 5770's for more than 30-45 days tops.  I am planning to play around with either 2x 5850 or 2x5870.. but not unitl I see drivers that do them justice which "might" be after January. then again, I am also considering going back to NV once the pricing/performance on their cards finally arrive, which it will eventually.

I figure I have until March sit around benching for sport.. no games out that I want right now and the ones I play will play fine on 8800gtx which is coming monday. I'm looking forward to seeing if CF 5770 have enough to run 3x23" 1920/1080.. it's going to be a gamble but like I said the 5770's are just something to mess around with for now.



> You paid 40 bucks more for 600pts in Vantage and I can always add another 5850



you're wrong, I paid $80 more. I order my stuff with Fed Ex next day.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Dec 19, 2009)

shevanel said:


> Yeah mailman.. sad score on premature drivers. such a pitty.


 And so are the 5850 drivers.


----------



## 3dsage (Dec 19, 2009)

r9 said:


> This thread sound to me like: "Who will win in fight Chuck Norris vs old gramma ?"
> And there always there will be people who think that the gramma would have a chance .



Stay on topic please

Chuck Norris's blood has arsenic, so even if gramma manages to kill him with a grenade his blood spatter will slowly kill her.


----------



## Hunt3r (Dec 19, 2009)

places in crossfire to see how the result is AMD


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Dec 19, 2009)

why dont you all stay on topic this is an i7 vs 955 debate not ati vs ati debate i suggest moving most of this to a new thread


----------



## shevanel (Dec 19, 2009)

TheMailMan78 said:


> And so are the 5850 drivers.



yes very true. look at erockers posts.. clearly shows there is alot of beast waiting to be unleashed.


----------



## shevanel (Dec 19, 2009)

crazyeyesreaper said:


> why dont you all stay on topic this is an i7 vs 955 debate not ati vs ati debate i suggest moving most of this to a new thread



we've already established that a 955 would be a better choice for the average medium res gamer that isn't into benching and video encoding.


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Dec 19, 2009)

true enough altho still seems awkward discussing gpus in a cpu thread


----------



## DaedalusHelios (Dec 19, 2009)

crazyeyesreaper said:


> true enough altho still seems awkward discussing gpus in a cpu thread



Thread organization isn't as important as sharing ideas on an open forum. As long as it stays friendly a good spontaneous discussion is good. It is along the same train of thought because the cards perform differently based on multicard configurations and what CPU is used.


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Dec 19, 2009)

i admit defeat 

but i figured id try to keep things going as far as the OPs thread and his question  since he only responded once and didnt show any idea of having made a decision


----------



## MKmods (Dec 19, 2009)

crazyeyesreaper said:


> since he only responded once and didnt show any idea of having made a decision


LOL, which seems to be the case so many times...

At least it was fun hanging out


----------



## DrPepper (Dec 19, 2009)

So I guess the universal conclusion is you can't go wrong either way


----------



## shevanel (Dec 20, 2009)

DrPepper said:


> So I guess the universal conclusion is you can't go wrong either way



Amen to that.


----------



## bombfirst885 (Dec 20, 2009)

Wow, this thread grew. lol

So what is the main difference between the i5 and i7 other than power? i5 doesn't have hyperthreading, correct?


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 20, 2009)

i7 has a QuickPath Interconnect link while i5 doesn't (it does, but it is strictly under the processor cap).   Both have hyperthreading and turbo. i7 also supports tri-channel memory while the rest are dual channel.


For what it is worth, the i7 920 takes the majority of gaming benchmarks  (even with slower cards) in comparison to the 955.

920: 9
955: 4
tie: 3


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Dec 20, 2009)

true enough its been said in multi gpu that i7 wins but in the games same with single card

but you will notice as the graphics settings are turned up and AA is turned up its still limited by the gpu so while i7 gives more frames the fact remains that the phenom dosent really lose anything as both run games well and with a decent gpu any game will be playable and even with multi gpus in alot of games at higher resolution where multi gpu makes sense 

to be honest if i had the money id go i7 but ive never had good luck with intel cpus

but even so i7 dominance is undisputed but i5 when overclocked closes the gap with i7 and i5 is the more easy to digest finacially platforms so to speak from intell 

again if u got the money go i5 or i7 if u want perfromance on the cheap go AMD

that article u linked said it best most games show an advantage with i7 but in terms of real world playability all systems are delivering high frame rates in all titles


----------



## Wile E (Dec 20, 2009)

erocker said:


> To add to that, why buy something that eats more power and runs hotter when you don't need it? I can buy what I want, and I got a PII because they are easy to use, run cool and don't use a lot of power. I buy based on my needs.



That just makes you a tree-hugging hippy pansy. 

At any rate, I'd go i7 920. Not as much for the performance difference, but because of greater flexibility of the platform, and the better upgrade potential.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 20, 2009)

Has anyone found a benchmark running 8 threads on Phenom II 955 and Core i7 920?  That would tell you if hyperthreading/extra power consumption is worth it or not.

If no one has seen such a benchmark, maybe we should make one.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Dec 20, 2009)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Has anyone found a benchmark running 8 threads on Phenom II 955 and Core i7 920?  That would tell you if hyperthreading/extra power consumption is worth it or not.
> 
> If no one has seen such a benchmark, maybe we should make one.



Ive seen a bunch with video encoding. Supreme Commander would be a great bench for gaming and multi-threading but no one seems to give a rats ass about it.


----------



## bombfirst885 (Dec 20, 2009)

What would be the best (cheapest) motherboard for the i7?


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Dec 20, 2009)

well mailman i know for a fact with 2 5850s and my 940be at stock 8000 units on screen i still peg 60fps with vsync on using core optimizer which forces the game to use up to 32 cores as it works for both sup com and sup com fa


----------



## subhendu (Dec 20, 2009)

Cpu - Intel core i7-860 (2.8Ghz with turbo boost to 3.46ghz with 4 core/8threads ) 
Mobo - Gigabyte P55 UD3R
555$ total


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Dec 20, 2009)

subhendu said:


> Cpu - Intel core i7-860 (2.8Ghz with turbo boost to 3.46ghz with 4 core/8threads )
> Mobo - Gigabyte P55 UD3R
> 555$ total



You have Micheal Jackson in your avatar. You cannot be trusted with computer advice or small boys.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 20, 2009)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Ive seen a bunch with video encoding. Supreme Commander would be a great bench for gaming and multi-threading but no one seems to give a rats ass about it.


Naw, we'd need something that can specify how many threads to create (to make sure it always creates 8, regardless of how many processors are detected) and it must be CPU/RAM intensive in order to keep the hard drive out of it as much as possible.  It must also be identical in how it operates no matter the system.

I do have an app that meets all those requirements but it is a computational light weight but, if someone has a 965 or 955 at stock and would like to try it, it would at least be something.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Dec 20, 2009)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Naw, we'd need something that can specify how many threads to create (to make sure it always creates 8, regardless of how many processors are detected) and it must be CPU/RAM intensive in order to keep the hard drive out of it as much as possible.  It must also be identical in how it operates no matter the system.
> 
> I do have an app that meets all those requirements but it is a computational light weight but, if someone has a 965 or 955 at stock and would like to try it, it would at least be something.



I got a 955 at stock. PM me the details. In the meantime look at this Dirt2 bench.....


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 21, 2009)

You got PM...


Dirt2 benchmark?  It's only 1680x1050 at 1x AA and the sole 920 in there is overclocked.  The benchmark looks like it is clearly GPU limited seeing as most of the benchmarks on the higher end CPUs are in a statistical tie.


----------



## M3T4LM4N222 (Dec 21, 2009)

I honestly doubt you'll notice a difference between the two, but the Core i7 920 is faster, especially in multi-threaded applications.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 21, 2009)

Preliminary tests are very interesting.  In a simple task such as int and decimal addition, 4 threads is actually faster than 8 by quite a broad margin (2388193212.75 to 2876328473.25 and 1499773664.25 to 1545510125.25).  I'm waiting for MailMan though...


----------



## subhendu (Dec 21, 2009)

TheMailMan78 said:


> You have Micheal Jackson in your avatar. You cannot be trusted with computer advice or small boys.



your avatar is very good... 
You cannot be trusted with computer advice or small boys
Cpu - Intel core i7-860 + 
Mobo - Gigabyte P55 UD3R
is a nice combination .....


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 22, 2009)

The testing is done and it yielded some very interesting results.

*Testing Method*
Basically, the application just adds either 1 + 1 or 1.0 + 1.0 for one second and repeats this 10 times.

Not basic...
1) It starts 8 threads which just add in an endless loop.
2) Once all threads have been started, it zeros all their count from 0 to 8.
3) It does nothing for one second while the threads count.
4) It reads the value of each thread, 0 to 8, and zeros it.
5) It repeats step 2-4 nine times for a total count of 10.
6) It adds up all those scores producing the cumulative score ("[C]") and averages the value for each test ("[0]" through "[9]").
7) Repeat steps 1-6 for doubles (1.0)
8) Repeat steps 1-6 for ulongs (1) but only 4 threads.
9) Repeat steps 1-6 for doubles (1.0) with 4 threads.


The app is a light weight in that the mathematical operations it completes are stupefyingly simple; however, it will load your CPU to 100% with those stupefyingly simple calculations. It's kind of like putting a race horse on a treadmill to see how much distance it can cover in a given time (approximately 10 seconds in our case).


*The Results*






*What Do We Learn From This*

*1) Does hyperthreading help?*  Without a doubt.  The Core i7 is a lame duck without it's hyperthreading even in the 4-threaded tests that should have matched in both tests.  Disabling Hyperthreading, even when you need the capability to run just four threads, is a bad idea. 

*2) How does the higher clockspeed of the 955/965 stack up to the lower clockspeed of the 920 in sheer counting prowess?* Not well.  Core i7 920, with or without hyperthreading, is clearly faster clock for clock.  The Phenom II 955 has the lowest counts/clockspeed ratio of those tested.

*3) How does the actual work output compare to the power consumption?* _This is a guesstimate based on TDP which Intel and AMD measure differently so take with a significant portion of salt._ Core i7 920 w/ Hyperthreading is the most efficient with the dual Xeons being last.  The Phenom II 955 makes a relatively strong showing here.

*4) How does the 955/965 fair compared to the 920 at running 8 vs 4 threads?* First, it is surprising to note that all platforms tested did worse with 8 threads versus 4, even a dual Xeon quad core platform.  This discovery baffles me.  Even then, as expected, the dual Xeons had the least decline in performance going from 4 threads to eight while the Phenom II pulls up the rear.  The Core i7 takes a huge loss in this department with Hyperthreading disabled.


*Conclusion*
In this simple test, Core i7 920 w/ Hyperthreading enabled sweeps the floor of all other processors tested except in comparing 8 threads to 4 threads (dual Xeon saw the smallest loss).  If you have a Core i# with Hyperthreading, do not disable it.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Dec 22, 2009)

Hyperthreading should only be disabled for compatibility purposes, but TBH users should be able to enable and disable the ability on the fly.

Core i series was designed for HT to be enabled compared to the Pentium 4.


----------



## wolf (Dec 22, 2009)

yes, the extra money for the i7 920 IS worth it, in my opinion.

hec I use so little of it's power, but its just really nice knowing it's there if you want to tap it.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Dec 22, 2009)

majority feel the same way with the slower processors too.


----------



## wolf (Dec 22, 2009)

Thats probably because the majority buy slower processors, which stands to reason. The OP asked;



> I was wondering if the price difference of the 920 is worth it?



My opinion says hell yeah it is.


----------



## DrPepper (Dec 22, 2009)

wolf said:


> yes, the extra money for the i7 920 IS worth it, in my opinion.
> 
> hec I use so little of it's power, but its just really nice knowing it's there if you want to tap it.



The 920 at 1.6ghz still runs all todays games at good fps.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 22, 2009)

eidairaman1 said:


> Hyperthreading should only be disabled for compatibility purposes, but TBH users should be able to enable and disable the ability on the fly.


I have never encountered a problem with compatibility.  I haven't heard of any reports of problems either.

It would be nice if Hyperthreading could be enabled and disabled as necessary but I think that wouldn't be easy to achieve and may come with pretty severe penalties especially in terms of threads getting cut off entirely.  Since people should leave it enabled, I think it is fine to leave it an option in the BIOS.




wolf said:


> My opinion says hell yeah it is.


I concur.


----------

