# Core i7 or AM3???



## Exeodus (Mar 19, 2009)

This may have been asked before, but I am looking to upgrade the computer listed in my System Specs.  Mainly, upgrade the CPU\MOBO\RAM.  The 4870X2 will stay, as well as the PS.  That being said, would you go i7 or should I wait till April for the AM3 955?

I know that the core i7 will ultimately be faster in benchmarks and encoding, but my primary concern is gaming.  I have been very impressed with how my Phenom II has performed in games, it goes toe-to-toe with my Q9550, and easily beat my Q6600 (R.I.P.).

Based on current prices, I would save about 100.00 going the AMD route.

What are your thoughts?  All opinions will be appreciated.


----------



## niko084 (Mar 19, 2009)

AM3 isn't much improvement over the AM2, as far as the DDR3 vs DDR2.

If you were going to go AMD, you may as well just grab a Q9650 and keep everything else.

Go I7 if you want a heavy upgrade.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Mar 19, 2009)

Amd.


----------



## Darknova (Mar 19, 2009)

Unless you NEED DDR3, then screw the 955. Tbh, I wouldn't get one if I wanted DDR3. I'd grab a 945, the only difference is .2 Ghz, which you can get by overclocking anyway.

If you want the biggest and baddest, definitely i7. Otherwise Phenom II is a good choice IMO.


----------



## niko084 (Mar 19, 2009)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Amd.



Give one solid reason why...

The AMD barely competes with the Q9ks, the cost to swap over to an AMD rig would be very high compared to the cost of a Q9650 which will beat out any Phenom 2.

And for $100ish more he can have an easily 20%+ faster machine.

AMD stepped up to the plate well here, but they are still not in the game.


----------



## crtecha (Mar 19, 2009)

hahah I knew mailmans response but I'm right there with em AMD Baby!!!!


----------



## PaulieG (Mar 19, 2009)

Here is a combo deal for the i7 for $520:

http://www.ewiz.com/detail.php?name=W1333UX4GM


----------



## btarunr (Mar 19, 2009)

If you're buying new, go for Core i7.


----------



## h3llb3nd4 (Mar 19, 2009)

i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, 
 i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7,* i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7,* i7, i7, 
i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7*, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7*, 
i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7,* i7, i7,* i7, i7, i7,* i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7,*
i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7,* i7, i7,* i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, *i7, i7, i7, i7, i7,* 
i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7,* i7, i7, i7, i7, i7,* i7,i7,  
i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7,* i7, i7,* i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7,*, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7*, 
i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, *i7, i7,* i7, i7,i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, *i7, i7, i7, i7, i7,* i7, i7, 
i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, * i7, i7,* i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7,*i7, i7, i7, i7, i7,* i7, i7, i7, 
i7,i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, *i7, i7,* i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, *i7, i7, i7, i7, i7,* i7, i7, 
i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, *i7, i7,* i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7,*i7, i7, i7, i7, i7,* i7, i7, 
i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, *i7, i7,* i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i *i7, i7, i7, i7, i7,* i7, i7, 7, i7,
i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7,  *i7, i7,* i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, *i7, i7, i7, i7, i7,* i7, i7,i7, 
i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7,  i7, *i7, i7,* i7, i7, i7,i7, i7, *i7, i7, i7, i7, i7,*  i7, i7, i7, i7, i7
i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7,  i7, *i7, i7,* i7, i7, i7,i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, 
i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7,  i7, *i7, i7,* i7, i7, i7,i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, 
i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, 
i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7, i7,


----------



## r9 (Mar 19, 2009)

i7


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Mar 19, 2009)

niko084 said:


> Give one solid reason why...


 Because you said i7.



Paulieg said:


> Here is a combo deal for the i7 for $520:
> 
> http://www.ewiz.com/detail.php?name=W1333UX4GM



I built my whole system for 400 bucks man. i7 are WAY to expensive. Plus he already has a Phenom 2. He doesnt need an upgrade. What game NEEDS an i7 to run? I mean COME ON!


----------



## h3llb3nd4 (Mar 19, 2009)

what?!? only that?


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Mar 19, 2009)

h3llb3nd4 said:


> what?!? only that?



That and my avy is cooler than everyones on this forum.


----------



## Exeodus (Mar 19, 2009)

niko084 said:


> Give one solid reason why...
> 
> The AMD barely competes with the Q9ks, the cost to swap over to an AMD rig would be very high compared to the cost of a Q9650 which will beat out any Phenom 2.
> 
> ...



Believe it or not, my Phenom II 940 @ 3.6 runs games just as well if not better than my Q9550 @ 3.4.  

Even though my E8500 is at 4 ghz, and probably has more in it, my other two quad machines just feel much smoother at gaming when the options are all turned up.  And I figure if i'm going to upgrade it, I might as well go for a major upgrade considering it is my main rig that I will use the most.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Mar 19, 2009)

Exeodus said:


> Believe it or not, my Phenom II 940 @ 3.6 runs games just as well if not better than my Q9550 @ 3.4.
> 
> Even though my E8500 is at 4 ghz, and probably has more in it, my other two quad machines just feel much smoother at gaming when the options are all turned up.  And I figure if i'm going to upgrade it, I might as well go for a major upgrade considering it is my main rig that I will use the most.



Of course it does man. Save your money for a flesh-light.


----------



## Exeodus (Mar 19, 2009)

Darknova said:


> Unless you NEED DDR3, then screw the 955. Tbh, I wouldn't get one if I wanted DDR3. I'd grab a 945, the only difference is .2 Ghz, which you can get by overclocking anyway.
> 
> If you want the biggest and baddest, definitely i7. Otherwise Phenom II is a good choice IMO.



Part of what intrigues me about the 955 is that it is supposed to run stock @ 3.2 ghz on only 1.25 volts.  Should make overclocking quite interesting


----------



## PaulieG (Mar 19, 2009)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Because you said i7.
> 
> 
> 
> I built my whole system for 400 bucks man. i7 are WAY to expensive. Plus he already has a Phenom 2. He doesnt need an upgrade. What game NEEDS an i7 to run? I mean COME ON!



How long have you been building? It wasn't more than 4 years ago that an AMD 939 Athlon 4000+ cost $300. Sometimes we take for granted the fact that mainstream prices have come down relative to performance. This doesn't mean that i7 is overpriced. It is an enthusist platform, which you will always pay a bit more for.


----------



## niko084 (Mar 19, 2009)

Exeodus said:


> Believe it or not, my Phenom II 940 @ 3.6 runs games just as well if not better than my Q9550 @ 3.4.
> 
> Even though my E8500 is at 4 ghz, and probably has more in it, my other two quad machines just feel much smoother at gaming when the options are all turned up.  And I figure if i'm going to upgrade it, I might as well go for a major upgrade considering it is my main rig that I will use the most.



I would believe that, but 4+ghz from a Q9650 is CAKE on air, and you don't need a new board...


----------



## niko084 (Mar 19, 2009)

Paulieg said:


> How long have you been building? It wasn't more than 4 years ago that an AMD 939 Athlon 4000+ cost $300. Sometimes we take the fact that mainstream prices have come down relative to performance. This doesn't mean that i7 is overpriced. It is an enthusist platform, which you will always pay a bit more for.



And stepping into reality it's still not really that expensive, price out a Q9650, good mobo to take it to 4.2+ and 4gb of ram.

It's not much cheaper than a i7 920, with a x58 board and ram that will take it to 4ghz and it will stomp all over that Q9650.

I myself have been beating my head back and forth about grabbing an i7, I simply cannot justify the upgrade to a q9550 even with a new board and ram, considering the little price difference to jump to an i7 in reality.


----------



## n-ster (Mar 19, 2009)

NONE!!! DON'T UPGRADE! You won't see a difference between q9xxx PII PIII or i7... your gonna get a performance increase of 0% to be EXACT... your CPU isn't bottlenecking ANYTHING... neither is your gpu actually... WHY THE HELL DO YOU WANT TO UPGRADE!?! let me tell you something, your e-peen maybe will be longer, but it's hidden by your e-pants anyways! How much FPS you get in average? 100? you don't need more... trust me!

Save up your money, put it in a bank account that gives you 5% or somthing... then buy some 2000$ monster in 2 years to satisfy that e-peen of yours


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Mar 19, 2009)

Paulieg said:


> How long have you been building? It wasn't more than 4 years ago that an AMD 939 Athlon 4000+ cost $300. Sometimes we take the fact that mainstream prices have come down relative to performance. This doesn't mean that i7 is overpriced. It is an enthusist platform, which you will always pay a bit more for.



Good point. However I personally do not see the price justified over their previous generation CPU. Its fast. Just not enough for the price. Also AMDs Phenom 2 may not be near as fast but as a gaming machine (which is what he wants) an i7 is over kill. 

Now if time is money (professional) then i7 all the way.


----------



## niko084 (Mar 19, 2009)

n-ster said:


> NONE!!! DON'T UPGRADE! You won't see a difference between q9xxx PII PIII or i7... your gonna get a performance increase of 0% to be EXACT... your CPU isn't bottlenecking ANYTHING... neither is your gpu actually... WHY THE HELL DO YOU WANT TO UPGRADE!?! let me tell you something, your e-peen maybe will be longer, but it's hidden by your e-pants anyways! How much FPS you get in average? 100? you don't need more... trust me!



Maybe you should check back on FPS results in some games, Crysis, Farcry 2, SupCom, the I7 destroys the Q9ks!


----------



## PaulieG (Mar 19, 2009)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Good point. However I personally do not see the price justified over their previous generation CPU. Its fast. Just not enough for the price. Also AMDs Phenom 2 may not be near as fast but as a gaming machine (which is what he wants) an i7 is over kill.
> 
> Now if time is money (professional) then i7 all the way.



For me, my hobby is testing and benching, so I'm always wanting the fastest stuff to play with. However, I did own 3 Phenom II chips, and certainly found them to be on par with my Q9550. So yeah, for his needs, the PII is plenty.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Mar 19, 2009)

Paulieg said:


> For me, my hobby is testing and benching, so I'm always wanting the fastest stuff to play with. However, I did own 3 Phenom II chips, and certainly found them to be on par with my Q9550. So yeah, for his needs, the PII is plenty.



Of course. If you have to have the ABSOLUTE fastest out there then yeah i7. My point was as a "gaming" processor the i7 is "overpriced". I say that because there isn't a game out there that will use everything it has to offer. Why pay that kind of money for no notable difference in games. I guess I should have clarified.

Edit: Exeodus we have the same PSU & case.


----------



## h3llb3nd4 (Mar 19, 2009)

n-ster said:


> NONE!!! DON'T UPGRADE! You won't see a difference between q9xxx PII PIII or i7... your gonna get a performance increase of 0% to be EXACT... your CPU isn't bottlenecking ANYTHING... neither is your gpu actually... WHY THE HELL DO YOU WANT TO UPGRADE!?! let me tell you something, your e-peen maybe will be longer, but it's hidden by your e-pants anyways! How much FPS you get in average? 100? you don't need more... trust me!
> 
> Save up your money, put it in a bank account that gives you 5% or somthing... then buy some 2000$ monster in 2 years to satisfy that e-peen of yours



LOL, I like the saving part... nothing else


----------



## johnnyfiive (Mar 19, 2009)

AMD. Why? Because their awesome. 
Seriously speaking, I completely agree with n-ster. You have a E8500 @ 4GHz and a 4870X2. How in anyway is anything bottlenecking anything? The only game that *needs* a quad is Crysis IMO.


----------



## X-Terminator (Mar 19, 2009)

I was thinking the same thing about 3 weeks ago and went with core i7 920 could not be happier,  and this thing kills almost every CPU out there.  My only concern is that this puppy gets real hot.  Stock heatsink & fan are a joke.  Get a after market Heatsink & fan, and call it a day.  If you don't believe me check other websites for results, the core i7 kills AMDs Phenom 2 in almost every game and app.  Just my thought.


----------



## johnnyfiive (Mar 19, 2009)

X-Terminator said:


> I was thinking the same thing about 3 weeks ago and went with core i7 920 could not be happier,  and this thing kills almost every CPU out there.  My only concern is that this puppy gets real hot.  Stock heatsink & fan are a joke.  Get a after market Heatsink & fan, and call it a day.  If you don't believe me check other websites for results, the core i7 kills AMDs Phenom 2 in almost every game and app.  Just my thought.



It does and should. Its a whole different animal, you can't really compare the two. Phenom II's are great at what they do, which is competing with the Yorkies. i7 vs Phenom II isn't fair at all, only in gaming is it slightly comparable.


----------



## X-Terminator (Mar 19, 2009)

johnnyfiive said:


> It does and should. Its a whole different animal, you can't really compare the two. Phenom II's are great at what they do, which is competing with the Yorkies. i7 vs Phenom II isn't fair at all, only in gaming is it slightly comparable.



Your right but Exeodus is asking what to buy and the AM3 CPU isn't out yet and the best at gaming right now is core i7 and I think AM3 CPU's will not compare either.  Just for the record I am not a Intel only person.  This is my fist Intel machine and I had 4 AMD computers.


----------



## RevengE (Mar 19, 2009)

@ x-terminator, yes the majority know that the i7 is the fastest.

I think you should just upgrade to an amd pII it will do everything you need and more it's very fast and AMD make quality chips. The core I7 is for people like me that have a sickness and want insane amounts of power. I have had AMD since my very first build back in 2004 not until recently have I made the change due to the symptoms of my sickness growing, screaming "matt you need more power" anywise good luck with whatever you choose both are great CPUs.


----------



## PaulieG (Mar 19, 2009)

xRevengEx said:


> @ x-terminator, yes the majority know that the i7 is the fastest.
> 
> I think you should just upgrade to an amd pII it will do everything you need and more it's very fast and AMD make quality chips. The core I7 is for people like me that have a sickness and want insane amounts of power. I have had AMD since my very first build back in 2004 not until recently have I made the change due to the syptoms of my sickness growing, screaming "matt you need more power" anywise good luck with whatever you choose both are great CPUs.



Well said. 



X-Terminator said:


> Your right but Exeodus is asking what to buy and the AM3 CPU isn't out yet and the best at gaming right now is core i7 and I think AM3 CPU's will not compare either.  Just for the record I am not a Intel only person.  This is my fist Intel machine and I had 4 AMD computers.



AM3 CPU's are basically the same as AM2 PII chips. They  simply have a DDR3 memory controller.


----------



## X-Terminator (Mar 19, 2009)

xRevengEx said:


> @ x-terminator, yes the majority know that the i7 is the fastest.
> 
> I think you should just upgrade to an amd pII it will do everything you need and more it's very fast and AMD make quality chips. The core I7 is for people like me that have a sickness and want insane amounts of power. I have had AMD since my very first build back in 2004 not until recently have I made the change due to the symptoms of my sickness growing, screaming "matt you need more power" anywise good luck with whatever you choose both are great CPUs.



Very well put.  Not trying to copy but I think there's something wrong with me to I normally don't try to overclock until it is need but this core i7 920 is begging to be pushed further and further.


----------



## h3llb3nd4 (Mar 19, 2009)

Then do it!! with good cooling of course!


----------



## n-ster (Mar 19, 2009)

niko084 said:


> Maybe you should check back on FPS results in some games, Crysis, Farcry 2, SupCom, the I7 destroys the Q9ks!



Did I say it doesn't? I meant notable difference to the eye... what good is 1 trillion fps when you can't see the difference between that and 150?

IMo, if he had a whole new system to build (like I will need to in june-july... check my dig out) then i7 definitively... because the bang/buck of the i7 is really good! but wtv he has now is much more than enough for his needs and therefore he shouldn't upgrade...


----------



## RevengE (Mar 19, 2009)

Like I have stated before the i7 is like a Porsche 911 turbo, it wants to go faster it begs for you to smash the gas and make the turbo spool.


----------



## X-Terminator (Mar 19, 2009)

not trying to get off topic but how hot is ok for the i7 with good cooling


----------



## Exeodus (Mar 19, 2009)

> Edit: Exeodus we have the same PSU & case.




I love the case, everything pretty much comes apart and is very roomy.  And you can't go wrong with the Corsair 750.  According to AMD, that power supply is certified to run two 4870X2's  I'm not sure I believe that.


----------



## niko084 (Mar 19, 2009)

n-ster said:


> Did I say it doesn't? I meant notable difference to the eye... what good is 1 trillion fps when you can't see the difference between that and 150?
> 
> IMo, if he had a whole new system to build (like I will need to in june-july... check my dig out) then i7 definitively... because the bang/buck of the i7 is really good! but wtv he has now is much more than enough for his needs and therefore he shouldn't upgrade...



Well... I would say going from 35-40fps is definitely noticeable.

If you play a game like Supcom well.... Good lord, you can't play it without a quad in large maps.


----------



## n-ster (Mar 19, 2009)

doesn't he have a Q9... and a PII? Oh and safe temps for i7 IMO max should be 80 to 90


----------



## RevengE (Mar 19, 2009)

The core i7 is made to run hot, once it starts reaching 100c you might want to invest in better cooling.


----------



## X-Terminator (Mar 19, 2009)

xRevengEx said:


> The core i7 is made to run hot, once it starts reaching 100c you might want to invest in better cooling.



Sweet I got it up to 3.8GHz with prime & OOCT running the temp don't go over 71C


----------



## n-ster (Mar 19, 2009)

yea that is sweet  did you check Fit's thread in the OC section? here


----------



## X-Terminator (Mar 19, 2009)

n-ster said:


> yea that is sweet  did you check Fit's thread in the OC section? here



no I didn't see that thread thank You n-ster


----------



## PCpraiser100 (Mar 19, 2009)

The Core i7 is a far better processor than AM3, you get pleny of benefits if you are willing to pay for it. Not as good for gaming as AM3 however the multi-tasking and performance on full load is far better with the i7. I'm gaming while performing f@h sessions while converting media and downloading.

The obvious con however is that it runs hot when OC'ed, but this CPU is inspired from the Xeon line of processors which explains a lot.


----------



## Rapidfire48 (Mar 19, 2009)

There is no way to justify paying all that money for Core i7. I had a Core 2 Duo E8400 and switched to the Phenom 2 940 and i have no regrets at all. I did this for under $400.00. A good X58 mobo is a lot , then you have DDR3 a lot, and then a Core i7 920 is almost $300.00 alone. I don't think it is all about just the CPU because my benchmarks against a much more expensive i7 set up are not far off if not in some cases better.


----------



## Fleck (Mar 19, 2009)

I was looking at benchmarks and the Q9550 with a slight OC (Q9650 level) actually performs on-par with the i7 920 on pretty much everything, and definitely on games.  Intel processors destroy AMD processors in games, which is why I made the switch from several years of using Athlons to a Core 2 Duo.  It's up to you how you go, I would stay with a Q9550 myself, that's what I was planning on doing for my new build which I hope to have running by fall--but that all depends on where the prices of things (i7) go during summer.  The reason people aren't recommending i7 to casual users yet is how new the X58 platform is and the few choices that exist for motherboards.


----------



## RevengE (Mar 19, 2009)

@rapid, better in what aspect?


----------



## niko084 (Mar 19, 2009)

Rapidfire48 said:


> There is no way to justify paying all that money for Core i7. I had a Core 2 Duo E8400 and switched to the Phenom 2 940 and i have no regrets at all. I did this for under $400.00. A good X58 mobo is a lot , then you have DDR3 a lot, and then a Core i7 920 is almost $300.00 alone. I don't think it is all about just the CPU because my benchmarks against a much more expensive i7 set up are not far off if not in some cases better.



decent x58 mobo to take an i7 to 4.0, $250 or less
decent 6gb ddr3, tri channel $100
I7 920 $280, $230 if you live by a microcenter.

Ewiz, has some nice package deals going on that perform quite well also.

It's not that bad.

There is nothing wrong with a Phenom II, it's just still not up to par.

But nobody has come back to me with any real argument...

Why upgrade to a Phenom II, when he can easily toss a Q9650 in his board and match or beat any Phenom II he can buy.
That's a lot cheaper than moving to an AMD rig.

If you want more than that, you are pretty much stuck going to an I7, considering the Phenom II's only compete with the Q9650, not really beat it, in fact in most cases they lose.


----------



## X-Terminator (Mar 19, 2009)

Rapidfire48 said:


> There is no way to justify paying all that money for Core i7. I had a Core 2 Duo E8400 and switched to the Phenom 2 940 and i have no regrets at all. I did this for under $400.00. A good X58 mobo is a lot , then you have DDR3 a lot, and then a Core i7 920 is almost $300.00 alone. I don't think it is all about just the CPU because my benchmarks against a much more expensive i7 set up are not far off if not in some cases better.



Your talking about saving money when you switched from a Core 2 Duo E8400 to a Phenom 2 940 this would be about $400 - $500 upgrade when you could of gotten a Core 2 Quad Q9650 3.0GHz For about $324.99


----------



## RevengE (Mar 19, 2009)

@niko, it's all about preference maybe he likes AMD, not everyone supports intel and vice versa. I hope people keep buying AMD they are a great Chipset, also I don't want intel turning into a monopoly.


----------



## X-Terminator (Mar 19, 2009)

xRevengEx said:


> @niko, it's all about preference maybe he likes AMD, not everyone supports intel and vice versa. I hope people keep buying AMD they are a great Chipset, also I don't want intel turning into a monopoly.



I agree +1


----------



## niko084 (Mar 19, 2009)

xRevengEx said:


> @niko, it's all about preference maybe he likes AMD, not everyone supports intel and vice versa. I hope people keep buying AMD they are a great Chipset, also I don't want intel turning into a monopoly.



AMD isn't going anywhere, they still hold a MASSIVE market, outside of cpu's and chipsets.

Obviously he isn't a hardcore amd guy, or he wouldn't have the system he has to start with.

Point still stands moving from his current system into a Phenom II, would cost a lot more and give equal to less performance increases over a simple processor swap.

Maybe AMD's next round will have what it takes, this one took a pretty massive step, considering their Phenom Quads were barely holding against Core2's, let alone the quads, and now they shot right for pretty good competition with the Q9k's.

Now with Intel pulling this MUST change your board stuff, I have a feeling the Phenom II's are going to beat the i5 platform.


----------



## cdawall (Mar 19, 2009)

Exeodus said:


> I love the case, everything pretty much comes apart and is very roomy.  And you can't go wrong with the Corsair 750.  According to AMD, that power supply is certified to run two 4870X2's  I'm not sure I believe that.




it can easily i ran 2xGTX285+8800GTS 512 (physx card) on my PCP&C 510w i think that 750w can handle 2x4870x2 considering my PCP&C wasn't even warm yet.



Fleck said:


> I was looking at benchmarks and the Q9550 with a slight OC (Q9650 level) actually performs on-par with the i7 920 on pretty much everything, and definitely on games.  Intel processors destroy AMD processors in games, which is why I made the switch from several years of using Athlons to a Core 2 Duo.  It's up to you how you go, I would stay with a Q9550 myself, that's what I was planning on doing for my new build which I hope to have running by fall--but that all depends on where the prices of things (i7) go during summer.  The reason people aren't recommending i7 to casual users yet is how new the X58 platform is and the few choices that exist for motherboards.




intel does not crush AMD in games. this is even more true when you run multiple VGA cards intel chipsets suck with multiple cards PCI-e logic on them is terrible. there top end board uses the same number of lanes as a midrange AMD mobo in fact in the case of the MSI K9A2 platinum intel has less lanes and they wouldn't keep up even past that fact. A phenom II 940 is a great chip that keeps up with the 6mb yorkie chips the 12mb chips beat it in synthetics but in gaming its something in the 3FPS arena and for some reason when your already pushing 100FPS 3% faster really doesn't seem like all that much.




now as for AM3 vs AM2+ i have tried both using my phenom II 945ES and it really shows no massive difference. now some of my own personal effects may be because i compared a topend AM2+ mobo against a midrange AM3 but the performance boost just wasn't there


----------



## RevengE (Mar 19, 2009)

Off topic sorry, any articles on the i5? I don't know to much about it if someone could pm
Me one. Now back on topic


----------



## Rapidfire48 (Mar 19, 2009)

X-Terminator said:


> Your talking about saving money when you switched from a Core 2 Duo E8400 to a Phenom 2 940 this would be about $400 - $500 upgrade when you could of gotten a Core 2 Quad Q9650 3.0GHz For about $324.99



It actually cost less than 400.00 from newegg as a combo deal I spent 363.00 for it all. I also sold my mobo and E8400 for more than what I spent so no money out of pocket and yes it is about what you like.
 When all you guys keep feeding Intel it makes them bigger and prices get out of hand . Look at the X58 motherboard prices they are just stupid. As for the Core 2 Quad Q9650 I thought about it but to me I wanted to see how high I could go with the new Phenom2 and on a stock cooler I have hit 3.8 stable. When I get a better heat Sink i will push it even further. So i think every point posted here is valid and you need to get what you feel is right and in your price range. There is not one valid set of DDR3 memory for $100.00 out there that will do what you want it to.


----------



## X-Terminator (Mar 19, 2009)

I want real innovation, I mean AMD For instance 939 socket was there glory day's The AM1 CPU's are the same as the 939 They tried something new with Phenom CPU's But Core 2 was already ahead at this time

And AM3 is just the same old thing as AM2 - the extra tech in it.

AMD has alot to do if they want to keep up with Intel at this point.

And for real innovation how about a CPU or GPU that doesn't put off alot of heat.  Heck with having gas in your house just build a couple of new systems and let them on.


----------



## niko084 (Mar 19, 2009)

Rapidfire48 said:


> When all you guys keep feeding Intel it makes them bigger and prices get out of hand . Look at the X58 motherboard prices they are just stupid.


Really?

That's laughable, what you need to realize is what the x58 board is!
The x** series chipsets by intel are the leading chipsets, the bleeding edge.
Look at the prices of the x38/x48's at release, they were just as far up there.
It's an enthusiast line, also don't forget SLI AND Crossfire, that's really nice if you want to change teams later. Let's see that from an AMD board.

Compare the x58 to something like this-
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131292
Now bring up the price to it's initial release, and add SAS raid controllers, and crossfire along with it's sli.


> There is not one valid set of DDR3 memory for $100.00 out there that will do what you want it to.



That's laughable.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231225
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820211377
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231247 *That one was $99.99 the other day*

DDR3-1600 6gb Tri Channel kits... Hm, I would say that will hold considering the massive overkill amount of bandwidth.

Anyone here really clock their DDR3 past 1600 yet and get a noticeable difference?


----------



## RevengE (Mar 19, 2009)

The SLI/Crossfire feature on the x58 is one of the best options they put on the new board. One day I'm rocking a 4870x2 the next a GTX-295.


----------



## LittleLizard (Mar 19, 2009)

get an i7. amd is good, but if you can afford the best then why not


----------



## cdawall (Mar 19, 2009)

Rapidfire48 said:


> It actually cost less than 400.00 from newegg as a combo deal I spent 363.00 for it all. I also sold my mobo and E8400 for more than what I spent so no money out of pocket and yes it is about what you like.
> When all you guys keep feeding Intel it makes them bigger and prices get out of hand . Look at the X58 motherboard prices they are just stupid. As for the Core 2 Quad Q9650 I thought about it but to me I wanted to see how high I could go with the new Phenom2 and on a stock cooler I have hit 3.8 stable. When I get a better heat Sink i will push it even further. So i think every point posted here is valid and you need to get what you feel is right and in your price range. There is not one valid set of DDR3 memory for $100.00 out there that will do what you want it to.



as far as the DDR3 thing goes my 2x2GB kit of D9JNL that does 2000 CL7 happens to be $45-55 on the egg. you just have to know what to look for when you buy ram big numbers dont always mean good things look at the current highend 2x1GB kits wont do 1200 without CL5/6 and still cost $75-100 my $10 kit of DDR533 does 1140 4-4-4-12 and can still go higher


now your upgrade was a good deal and is the same way i get most of my stuff. not to mention switching intel to amd and back again is fun and keeps you on the edge of oc know how


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Mar 19, 2009)

You guys have COMPLETELY lost perspective of the OP needs.


----------



## cdawall (Mar 19, 2009)

TheMailMan78 said:


> You guys have COMPLETELY lost perspective of the OP needs.



core i7 is faster/hotter/more expensive
phenom II is slower/cooler/cheap


pretty simple break down there and to prove the point a phenom II+mobo to get it to 3.8ghz will cost a max of $300 (biostar 780G+P2 940)


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Mar 19, 2009)

Exeodus said:


> I love the case, everything pretty much comes apart and is very roomy.  And you can't go wrong with the Corsair 750.  According to AMD, that power supply is certified to run two 4870X2's  I'm not sure I believe that.



Now theres a good idea! Instead of spending the money on an i7 get another 4870x2.


----------



## Rapidfire48 (Mar 19, 2009)

Here is a review of the i7 920, Q9650, and the Phenom 2 940. Tell me is there that mush difference?

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,678693/Intel-Core-2-Quad-Q9650-reviewed/Reviews/


----------



## PaulieG (Mar 19, 2009)

niko084 said:


> Really?
> 
> That's laughable, what you need to realize is what the x58 board is!
> The x** series chipsets by intel are the leading chipsets, the bleeding edge.
> ...



I gotta agree with you for the most part here. Oh, and as for DDR3 sets around $100. I'm running a 6GB set of Super Talent DDR3 1333 that contain Micron D9JNM IC's. I paid $120 for 8GB, and I'm currently testing them at 1800mhz.


----------



## RevengE (Mar 19, 2009)

Rapidfire48 said:


> Here is a review of the i7 920, Q9650, and the Phenom 2 940. Tell me is there that mush difference?
> 
> http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,678693/Intel-Core-2-Quad-Q9650-reviewed/Reviews/



Yeah there is a big difference look at those benchmarks, I don't judge a processor by games to be honest the i7 crushes the pII with encoding/mutitasking not mention this review is prolly when drivers were less mature than they are currently.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Mar 19, 2009)

Rapidfire48 said:


> Here is a review of the i7 920, Q9650, and the Phenom 2 940. Tell me is there that mush difference?
> 
> http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,678693/Intel-Core-2-Quad-Q9650-reviewed/Reviews/


 Rapidfire48 you my friend are about to enter into a world of complete and utter PWNAGE. :shadedshu


----------



## cdawall (Mar 19, 2009)

xRevengEx said:


> Yeah there is a big difference look at those benchmarks, I don't judge a processor by games to be honest the i7 crushes the pII with encoding/mutitasking not mention this review is prolly when drivers were less mature than they are currently.



read the 1st post again. OP asks for a GAMING chip oh and drivers to compare cpu's ummm ok.....


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Mar 19, 2009)

So when am I going to get credit for being right the whole time? Thats what I want to know.


----------



## Rapidfire48 (Mar 19, 2009)

xRevengEx said:


> Yeah there is a big difference look at those benchmarks, I don't judge a processor by games to be honest the i7 crushes the pII with encoding/mutitasking not mention this review is prolly when drivers were less mature than they are currently.


This was not just about i7 and Phenom 2 . It was all of them. The price comparison is insane. Most people still are running DDR2 so if you were to switch to a Phenom 940 you would be set. New board and CPU for under $400.00 is a great deal and if you are a gamer you will not see much of a difference between the Q9650 and the 940 along with the i7 920. Computing yes gaming not really.

 I did not realize this would lead to a fan boy attack of the Intel Clan.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Mar 19, 2009)

Rapidfire48 said:


> This was not just about i7 and Phenom 2 . It was all of them. The price comparison is insane. Most people still are running DDR2 so if you were to switch to a Phenom 940 you would be set. New board and CPU for under $400.00 is a great deal and if you are a gamer you will not see much of a difference between the Q9650 and the 940 along with the i7 920. Computing yes gaming not really.
> 
> I did not realize this would lead to a fan boy attack of the Intel Clan.



See this.


----------



## RevengE (Mar 19, 2009)

cdawall said:


> read the 1st post again. OP asks for a GAMING chip oh and drivers to compare cpu's ummm ok.....



Relax first off. Go read my posts I told him to get a PII. Kthxbye  hahaha I've always wanted to say that.


----------



## RevengE (Mar 19, 2009)

Rapidfire48 said:


> This was not just about i7 and Phenom 2 . It was all of them. The price comparison is insane. Most people still are running DDR2 so if you were to switch to a Phenom 940 you would be set. New board and CPU for under $400.00 is a great deal and if you are a gamer you will not see much of a difference between the Q9650 and the 940 along with the i7 920. Computing yes gaming not really.
> 
> I did not realize this would lead to a fan boy attack of the Intel Clan.



I'm not an intel fan boy i've had all AMDs before my i7, but when you say there is not much difference between a i7 and pII that's not true.


----------



## cdawall (Mar 19, 2009)

xRevengEx said:


> Relax first off. Go read my posts I told him to get a PII. Kthxbye  hahaha I've always wanted to say that.



but again what did drivers have to do with the comparo


----------



## RevengE (Mar 19, 2009)

I meant drivers for all the componets used in the benching rig. Not drivers for the CPU, meaning that with all the new drivers coming out for vista/Gpu drivers etc they will both keep showing better results maybe I just said it the wrong way? I don't know.


----------



## cdawall (Mar 19, 2009)

xRevengEx said:


> I meant drivers for all the componets used in the benching rig. Not drivers for the CPU, meaning that with all the new drivers coming out for vista/Gpu drivers etc they will both keep showing better results maybe I just said it the wrong way? I don't know.



GPU drivers are the same on both rigs so shouldn't show a performance difference between them


----------



## Binge (Mar 19, 2009)

n-ster said:


> NONE!!! DON'T UPGRADE! You won't see a difference between q9xxx PII PIII or i7... your gonna get a performance increase of 0% to be EXACT... your CPU isn't bottlenecking ANYTHING... neither is your gpu actually... WHY THE HELL DO YOU WANT TO UPGRADE!?! let me tell you something, your e-peen maybe will be longer, but it's hidden by your e-pants anyways! How much FPS you get in average? 100? you don't need more... trust me!
> 
> Save up your money, put it in a bank account that gives you 5% or somthing... then buy some 2000$ monster in 2 years to satisfy that e-peen of yours



He's got a point since you have a 940, but I have to interject... the difference between i7 and everything else is NIGHT AND FREAKIN DAY.


----------



## RevengE (Mar 19, 2009)

That's fine but I mean in the future they will keep
Improving? Meaning that the bios for the x58 is still immature and with the new drivers/bios updates it will really pull the i7 ahead even more. I was in no way shape or form attacking AMD like you seem to think, like I said I've always had AMD before my I7 I still have love for my brotha.


----------



## boomstik360 (Mar 19, 2009)

I recently built a new i7 system with a 920 and 6gb of ddr3 1600 and an asus p6t mobo and don't get me wrong it was great but it wasn't a totally insane upgrade from my stock e8400. To me it really wasn't worth the cash so i sold the system and came out even and i just bought a phenom II x3 720 black edition and its great, i even unlocked the 4th core and its stable. I really can't tell the different in anything real world with this, it has a much better value than the i7. Both ways work but if you want to get the most for your money just go amd am2+ or am3 or socket 775 intel but if you don't care about the money get i7. This setup rips and i am very glad i sold my i7, i got the cpu and board for way less than the i7 920 by itself.


----------



## farlex85 (Mar 19, 2009)

Exeodus said:


> This may have been asked before, but I am looking to upgrade the computer listed in my System Specs.  Mainly, upgrade the CPU\MOBO\RAM.  The 4870X2 will stay, as well as the PS.  That being said, would you go i7 or should I wait till April for the AM3 955?
> 
> I know that the core i7 will ultimately be faster in benchmarks and encoding, but my primary concern is gaming.  I have been very impressed with how my Phenom II has performed in games, it goes toe-to-toe with my Q9550, and easily beat my Q6600 (R.I.P.).
> 
> ...



I don't understand. You've gone through all but the most high powered chips, have a 4870x2, are looking to upgrade for gaming, and are worried about $100?  That's silly talk. For games you most definitely do not need to upgrade anything, at all. GPU's are by far the biggest focus in games, so if that's your aimed upgrade path, go to a gtx 295 or add another 4870x2 or 4870 (you're pretty much maxed right now though already). 

Basically, if you can afford a 4870x2, then you can afford i7, and if you can afford it, there's really not a good reason to consider anything else. If you can't afford it, then STOP UPGRADING!  Seriously, "real" gaming performance won't get any better than you have it now (your fps will go up, your experience will remain the same, outside of the obligatory plecebo'd OMG this is so fast....)


----------



## erocker (Mar 19, 2009)

boomstik360 said:


> I recently built a new i7 system with a 920 and 6gb of ddr3 1600 and an asus p6t mobo and don't get me wrong it was great but it wasn't a totally insane upgrade from my stock e8400. To me it really wasn't worth the cash so i sold the system and came out even and i just bought a phenom II x3 720 black edition and its great, i even unlocked the 4th core and its stable. I really can't tell the different in anything real world with this, it has a much better value than the i7. Both ways work but if you want to get the most for your money just go amd am2+ or am3 or socket 775 intel but if you don't care about the money get i7. This setup rips and i am very glad i sold my i7, i got the cpu and board for way less than the i7 920 by itself.



You make wonderful sense, I could not agree more!


----------



## boomstik360 (Mar 19, 2009)

erocker said:


> You make wonderful sense, I could not agree more!



haha thanks  I like both of your setups there, the 750 quad is a great psu i love it. But yes I would definitely buy the amd over the intel again, an amazing bang for your buck.


----------



## Kursah (Mar 20, 2009)

Exeodus quoted from OP said:


> ...I know that the core i7 will ultimately be faster in benchmarks and encoding, but my primary concern is gaming.



TBH I would say if you really want more gaming horsepower, get another X2 for some serious crossfire on that X38. Unless you feel the need to go to a new platform. But if gaming is a primary concern, your current setup is more than sufficient for any game that demands CPU power tbh, and you have plenty of GPU power with one X2, I don't know how well a couple of X2's in cf scale, but I'm sure the end result is still impressive.


----------



## Fitseries3 (Mar 20, 2009)

id say take a look at your entire system and find the weakest component(s) and upgrade them.

you may find something you think is weak or lacking that in my opinion is fine so i really cant say what a good upgrade would be. its going to be a personal preference thing there.


----------



## RevengE (Mar 20, 2009)

I agree fit that's what I tried stating earlier in this thread.it's all about preference.


----------



## cdawall (Mar 20, 2009)

xRevengEx said:


> That's fine but I mean in the future they will keep
> Improving? Meaning that the bios for the x58 is still immature and with the new drivers/bios updates it will really pull the i7 ahead even more. I was in no way shape or form attacking AMD like you seem to think, like I said I've always had AMD before my I7 I still have love for my brotha.



as is the phenom II BIOS.

i'm not attacking you i'm just pointing things out i had an i7 i had LGA775 hell i had socket 423  that thing sucked


----------



## RevengE (Mar 20, 2009)

cdawall said:


> as is the phenom II BIOS.
> 
> i'm not attacking you i'm just pointing things out i had an i7 i had LGA775 hell i had socket 423  that thing sucked



Yes as in both will keep improving.  I love both I just had made the choice to to core i7, I multitask,photoshop and program some too. I'm equal with AMD/INTEL.


----------



## niko084 (Mar 20, 2009)

Paulieg said:


> I gotta agree with you for the most part here. Oh, and as for DDR3 sets around $100. I'm running a 6GB set of Super Talent DDR3 1333 that contain Micron D9JNM IC's. I paid $120 for 8GB, and I'm currently testing them at 1800mhz.



That's sick!

Is that the super talent over at ewiz with all their package deals?


----------



## MilkyWay (Mar 20, 2009)

you dont need an upgrade, buy something non pc related instead

i mean that system is already comparable to an Phenom II rig and the i7 you wont notice any real world difference i mean it wont allow you to do anything different just future proof and by that time something else will be out

just wait for core i5

you dont need another gpu either you have one of the powerful available it would be pointless to add another it wouldnt do anything oh woah my FPS went up to 200fps from 110fps

go water cooling or get a nice new hard drive and try out windows 7 and linux

EDIT: the only thing i would see the point in upgrading would be the cpu to a quad, a good clocking one


----------



## n-ster (Mar 20, 2009)

THAT's what I wanted to say! but he mentionned he had some quads already...


----------



## MilkyWay (Mar 20, 2009)

if you already have quad systems swap the cpus around

quads arnt really needed for gaming at the moment but gives a nice boost in encoding and multitasking, all depends on how the program is coded for multi threads/cores



a new quad is the cheapest and most sensible option, an i7 rig isnt really what you need

i7 in the UK are ridiculously expensive


----------



## Binge (Mar 20, 2009)

boomstik360 said:


> I recently built a new i7 system with a 920 and 6gb of ddr3 1600 and an asus p6t mobo and don't get me wrong it was great but it wasn't a totally insane upgrade from my stock e8400. To me it really wasn't worth the cash so i sold the system and came out even and i just bought a phenom II x3 720 black edition and its great, i even unlocked the 4th core and its stable. I really can't tell the different in anything real world with this, it has a much better value than the i7. Both ways work but if you want to get the most for your money just go amd am2+ or am3 or socket 775 intel but if you don't care about the money get i7. This setup rips and i am very glad i sold my i7, i got the cpu and board for way less than the i7 920 by itself.



I can't say I agree with that statement based on the non-gaming use I get out of my PC and the speed at which an i7 with encode/decode and multitask.  If you are comparing core power each of these systems Core2Duo/i7/AMD 2+/3 then their single cores operate at much the same power, but to say that your dual or quad core could do more than 1/2 the computational power of an i7 in multicore/multithreaded game or applications is a complete farce.


----------



## farlex85 (Mar 20, 2009)

Binge said:


> I can't say I agree with that statement based on the non-gaming use I get out of my PC and the speed at which an i7 with encode/decode and multitask.  If you are comparing core power each of these systems Core2Duo/i7/AMD 2+/3 then their single cores operate at much the same power, but to say that your dual or quad core could do more than 1/2 the computational power of an i7 in multicore/multithreaded game or applications is a complete farce.



It's a subjective thing though. He may not do any encoding/decoding, and in basic windows/internet browsing and games there would be very little subjective difference b/t all those platforms you listed. Sure if you time how long it takes to encode an .mpg2 file your gonna be amazed at how short of a time it accomplishes that. Then again, you could just be a little more patient and lose a minute but save a few hundred bucks.  This, however, is likely to change in the future though, as more and more things take advantage of multiple threads effectively a cpu like the i7 will just get better and better. Right now though we've reached somewhat of a crecendo where for many many users the difference b/t a core 2 and a i7 (or phenom I and II) is very small.


----------



## Binge (Mar 20, 2009)

That's the entire point of my post.  I'm not being a hypocrite.  Earlier I told him to stay with his 940 because he will be disappointed by changing, especially to AMD3.  That will be true unless he's doing what I mentioned above and in which case those mentioned tasks will be done in half the time.


----------



## RevengE (Mar 20, 2009)

Binge said:


> I can't say I agree with that statement based on the non-gaming use I get out of my PC and the speed at which an i7 with encode/decode and multitask.  If you are comparing core power each of these systems Core2Duo/i7/AMD 2+/3 then their single cores operate at much the same power, but to say that your dual or quad core could do more than 1/2 the computational power of an i7 in multicore/multithreaded game or applications is a complete farce.


Thank you binge. What I don't get is why a certain few
Of you are jumping on the guy for wanting to upgrade? Is it your money? No. The title of the thread is i7 or am3 not should I upgrade. Every member here wants or has different needs please respect that, it's all about preferences or what he wants out of his rig. They are both great CPUs with of course the i7 leading the way. If you choose an i7 you won regret it or if you choose a phenom II you will be just as happy for what your using it for, so enough with this your crazy you don't need to upgrade, maybe he does not maybe he does. It's all about what he wants so let's keep it that way it's not about what YOU want him to do or if you think he's silly for wanting to upgrade. /end


----------



## farlex85 (Mar 20, 2009)

Binge said:


> That's the entire point of my post.  I'm not being a hypocrite.  Earlier I told him to stay with his 940 because he will be disappointed by changing, especially to AMD3.  That will be true unless he's doing what I mentioned above and in which case those mentioned tasks will be done in half the time.



Ah, well then I suppose a little reiteration never hurt. 



xRevengEx said:


> Thank you binge. What I don't get is why a certain few
> Of you are jumping on the guy for wanting to upgrade? Is it your money? No. The title of the thread is i7 or am3 not should I upgrade. Every member here wants or has different needs please respect that, it's all about preferences or what he wants out of his rig. They are both great CPUs with of course the i7 leading the way. If you choose an i7 you won regret it or if you choose a phenom II you will be just as happy for what your using it for, so enough with this your crazy you don't need to upgrade, maybe he does not maybe he does. It's all about what he wants so let's keep it that way it's not about what YOU want him to do or if you think he's silly for wanting to upgrade. /end



I don't think anybody jumped on him for upgrading, just made it clear that there would be little subjective difference in doing so. To me, upgrading in that case (for the sake of upgrading) pretty much supports going w/ the best available (i7).


----------



## RevengE (Mar 20, 2009)

I said a certain few  your not one of them. I agree with it not being a huge upgrade but hey if it makes him happy do it so I support it fully.


----------



## n-ster (Mar 21, 2009)

certain few is me huh?  I don't want a fellow TPU to be disappointed  I'm just clearly stating that it is useless for gaming IF that is what is does most... which he did say right? he said it was for gaming, and for gaming he won't see a damn difference then his PII or Q9xxx, which are both very good CPU already on top of that...


----------



## Exeodus (Mar 23, 2009)

Well, thanks to all that responded.  Some good points were brought up.  But I decided this past weekend to go ahead and get a i7.  I am lucky to have Fry's, Tigerdirect and Micro Center locally, and the 920 was 229.00, the P6T was on sale for 235.99, and they matched Newegg's price for 6 gigs of Corsair 1600 for 100.00.  I think what swayed me was Tri-SLi and Crossfire on the same board.  Plus it makes it more interesting to have a PhenomII, a Core2Quad, and a i7 for comparsion.


----------



## Pete1burn (Mar 23, 2009)

This thread has almost convinced me to forget a 955 and just get a 940BE.


----------



## RevengE (Mar 23, 2009)

n-ster said:


> certain few is me huh?  I don't want a fellow TPU to be disappointed  I'm just clearly stating that it is useless for gaming IF that is what is does most... which he did say right? he said it was for gaming, and for gaming he won't see a damn difference then his PII or Q9xxx, which are both very good CPU already on top of that...



I'm not upset man haha I was just saying it's all good


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Mar 23, 2009)

So whats the final verdict? AM3 or i7? OR did he go with my suggestion?


----------



## farlex85 (Mar 23, 2009)

TheMailMan78 said:


> So whats the final verdict? AM3 or i7? OR did he go with my suggestion?



Post #99


----------



## jfurterer (Mar 23, 2009)

Not sure if this has been mentioned but AM3 isn't slated to compete directly with Core i7.  Think of the AM3/DDR3 platform as competing against the higher end Core2Quads rather then Core i7 and price accordingly.  The Core2Quads still out perform the AM3 cpus clock for clock and have similar OC potential and lower voltages.  Core i7 on the other hand is a step above both of these platforms.

For gaming the Phenom 2 x3 720 seems to be the best choice at this point by a wide margin.

Benches:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/socket-am3-phenom,2148-10.html
http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.p...sk=view&id=296&Itemid=63&limit=1&limitstart=4
http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/phenom_ii_x3_720be/10.html

Also their are confirmed reports of some batches of 720's with a particular mobo combo that allows you to unlock the 4th core:
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/page-258421_28_300.html

So the Phenom 2 x3 720 is by far the best choice not only in price but also in performance for a gaming rig at this time.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Mar 23, 2009)

^^^
LoL


----------



## OzzmanFloyd120 (Mar 23, 2009)

Your machine is fine. Go spend your money on something constructive, like taking a girl on a date.


----------



## RevengE (Mar 23, 2009)

^^^ LOL that's  great.


----------



## MilkyWay (Mar 23, 2009)

and what taking a girl on a date is everything then thats the be all and end all of life, to pass on ones seed isnt it? i mean talking to a girl getting your hole man! woah!(large quantaties of sarcasm)

i mean a date come on think of some other original insult if your going to bother, its not like it actually insults any body any more, no one could care less and it makes you look stupid, rather than tell the mods you are attempting an insult i thought man just tell you thats not acceptable

now i think i posted previously but your system is perfectly fine, sure a quad might help out a little but its not totally necessary but certainly an i7 rig wont do much it wont do anything your current rig cant

keep the cash spend it one something else a nice piece of furniture, a big tv, put it towards the bills i dunno spend it on something a little useful, a mobile phone perhaps? wtf i dunno but that pc is more than adequate


----------



## jfurterer (Mar 23, 2009)

You can pick up a  Phenom 2 x3 720 with a HD4870 1GB GPU and DDR2-1066 machine for around $550 at the egg.  Probably the best gaming rig available.  Spend and extra $150 bucks or so and go Xfire or a HD4870X2.  Compared with a Core i7 920 rig that under performs in most games your paying around half the price.

As for the "Go spend your money on something constructive, like taking a girl on a date." comment, it was funny! Get a sense of humor!


----------



## MilkyWay (Mar 23, 2009)

look at the users specs and youllfind they already have a 4870x2 and have a comparable rig to a x3 720be, how does a core i7 rig under perform to me it dosnt it over performs to the point in this case its a waste of an upgrade i mean as i said it wont do anything the current rig cant 

no i dont find them type of comments funny its just stupid, be a little mature

life of brian/friday is funny not go get a date remarks get over it ive heard and seen 10,000 posts of that and further more there is no more discussion from me about this ive doen that to many times i never get anywhere and seem to take all the flak


----------



## OzzmanFloyd120 (Mar 23, 2009)

MilkyWay said:


> and what taking a girl on a date is everything then thats the be all and end all of life, to pass on ones seed isnt it? i mean talking to a girl getting your hole man! woah!(large quantaties of sarcasm)
> 
> i mean a date come on think of some other original insult if your going to bother, its not like it actually insults any body any more, no one could care less and it makes you look stupid, rather than tell the mods you are attempting an insult i thought man just tell you thats not acceptable



It's called a "point". Some people have them and tend to add something rhetorical from time to time to help make it clearer. Kinda like you did in the first paragraph of your post.
Do you understand how it works yet instead of just pulling out the flame stick?


----------



## jfurterer (Mar 23, 2009)

MilkyWay said:


> look at the users specs and youllfind they already have a 4870x2 and have a comparable rig to a x3 720be, how does a core i7 rig under perform to me it dosnt it over performs to the point in this case its a waste of an upgrade i mean as i said it wont do anything the current rig cant
> 
> no i dont find them type of comments funny its just stupid, be a little mature
> 
> life of brian/friday is funny not go get a date remarks get over it ive heard and seen 10,000 posts of that and further more there is no more discussion from me about this ive doen that to many times i never get anywhere and seem to take all the flak



Benches:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...m,2148-10.html
http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.ph...1&limitstart=4

720 out performs the Core i7


----------



## OzzmanFloyd120 (Mar 23, 2009)

jfurterer said:


> Benches:
> http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...m,2148-10.html
> http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.ph...1&limitstart=4
> 
> 720 out performs the Core i7



Interesting. I didn't think that a 940 would better a e8500.

2nd link didn't work by the way.

HOWEVER!
I don't like how sites never test OCed speeds against eachother, it's always stock vs stock, because honestly I think at 3.5ghz, (for the chips capable of clocking that far at least) that the results would be completely different.

Edit:
It's also pretty intesting that the i7 920 was dead last in the Vantage Performance bench.
After looking at most of the charts though, it's pretty obvious that anywhere that conversion or math is involved the i7 ate all the rest of the cpus, but in terms of gaming it was dead last.


----------



## jfurterer (Mar 23, 2009)

http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.p...sk=view&id=296&Itemid=63&limit=1&limitstart=4

link2

There is actually be allot of discussion over on Tom's Hardware about the under performance of the Core i7 in Games when using a single GPU.  The i7 shows gains when in SLI/CrossFire mode but for nearly all single GPU applications the 720 out performs it quite handedly in some applications and is even or slightly above in the rest.  The addition of that third core also gives you a multi tasking boost when your farting around the web surfing or xfiring or whatever it is you do.

Also I should mention that I'm not harping on the i7s.  I do allot of Video/3D work and would love to pick one up (don't have the budget).  For allot of specific tasks the i7 is hands down the best chip available unless you build a multi CPU workstation.  But the i7 is not the end all be all of mainstream enthusiast CPUs and clearly has some hang ups when it comes to gaming.

I agree some OC testing would be nice.  However it's pretty clear Intel still holds the lead in performance clock for clock.  So I think you'd see the C2D and C2Q's out performing the AMD equivalent at the same clock speed.


----------



## OzzmanFloyd120 (Mar 23, 2009)

jfurterer said:


> http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.p...sk=view&id=296&Itemid=63&limit=1&limitstart=4
> 
> link2
> 
> There as actually be allot of discussion over on Tom's Hardware about the under performance of the Core i7 in Games when using a single GPU.  The i7 shows gains when in SLI/CrossFire mode but for nearly all single GPU applications the 720 out performs it quite handedly in some applications and is even or slightly above in the rest.  The addition of that third core also gives you a multi tasking boost when your farting around the web surfing or xfiring or whatever it is you do.



True, but the fact is that all of the systems were consistant across the board. I'm not convinced that the results would have changed that drastically by only having a second GPU.


----------



## jfurterer (Mar 23, 2009)

It's actually quite significant.  While other CPUs tend to limit the multi-GPU configurations the Core i7's really allow them to scale up well.

Benches:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i7-gaming,2061-7.html
http://www.guru3d.com/article/core-i7-multigpu-sli-crossfire-game-performance-review/19

The Fry Cry 2 bench in the second link is a good tell tale sign of how the CPU eventually limits the performance of the GPUs as you can see with the E8400, 52FPS across the board.  The GPUs just arn't fed enough data from the Core2Duo.  In the Crysis Warhead bench the Core2Quad hits the wall at 56-57FPS.  So I guess what I'm saying is the Phenom 2 x3 720 is the best gaming CPU on the market TODAY.  The Core i7 maybe the better future gaming option as GPUs get more powerful and need allot of CPU power to feed them.


----------



## OzzmanFloyd120 (Mar 23, 2009)

jfurterer said:


> It's actually quite significant.  While other CPUs tend to limit the multi-GPU configurations the Core i7's really allow them to scale up well.
> 
> Benches:
> http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i7-gaming,2061-7.html
> http://www.guru3d.com/article/core-i7-multigpu-sli-crossfire-game-performance-review/19



Are you sure, because that first link you posted shows me at a higher res that the C2 chips are stale-mating the i7 chips. (and I don't consider 3 fps when you have three GTX285s a leap in performance)

Edit:
I'm seeing the same thing in the Guru3d link, with the exception of the e8400, in FC2 and Brothers In Arms... and I'm thinking that's more of a game engine thing than a cpu thing.


----------



## jfurterer (Mar 23, 2009)

Crysis: Warhead is a good example in the TH benchmarks.

The i7 with 2xGTX280 performs on par with the QX9770 running 3xGTX280s

Also Company of Heroes shows that the 2xGTX280s hit the wall at 134 FPS but when you and a third card you get a 12fps jump from the Core i7 over the QX9770.  However without a 4xGTX280 test we don't know if 162.5FPS is the wall for 3xGTX280s.  It may very well be and the Core i7 still has head room over the three way SLI.

Also in the second benchmark link the difference is striking in i7-C2Q-C2D comparisons.


----------



## OzzmanFloyd120 (Mar 23, 2009)

I just don't see it. I know that most people don't game with their res that high, but at 1920*1200 there's always a 5-10 fps difference. Like I said I don't consider that a leap in performance when we're already talking about fps's that are already post 150.
I'm not hating the i7, hell with as much HD editing I do I would love to have it, but when it comes to gaming it's apples to apples.


----------



## farlex85 (Mar 23, 2009)

I would take anything you see in Tom's hardware w/ a grain of salt. See if you can find someone else who finds the same thing, then you may be on to something. They are sometimes full of crap though. But yes, in games you'll see sometimes the i7 coming in behind core 2s and PIIs by a couple of frames. I would say this doesn't make it a worse gaming cpu though, at least not significantly, it's just that the cpu isn't very important in gaming these days, you just don't need to invest that much into that category to play games. You could certainly say you can get similar gaming performance for much less money by going w/ a PII, but really you could almost always say that in the case of cpus (my e6750 is still pretty great for gaming, a PII 720 really isn't that far above it, and I probably wouldn't notice at all), it's all about the gpu baby.


----------



## jfurterer (Mar 23, 2009)

The Crysis Warhead, which clearly one of the most cutting edge games in graphics, shows just how much more bandwidth the Core i7 can push then the rest of the pack.  I think 1600x1200 (1680x1050 is a very common resolution) tells the tail.  I don't take much stock in the COD4 or UT3 benchmarks because these aren't envelope pushing games.  Who would bench on a Blizzard game for example?  But when it comes to the cutting edge, crazy graphics games, the Core i7 pushes allot more data to the GPU then other processors.  20fps on Crysis Warhead at 1600x1200 is a very significant boost.


----------



## Exeodus (Mar 23, 2009)

OzzmanFloyd120 said:


> Your machine is fine. Go spend your money on something constructive, like taking a girl on a date.



Actually, I'm engaged.  Don't have to waste my time with that stuff anymore


----------



## OzzmanFloyd120 (Mar 23, 2009)

Exeodus said:


> Actually, I'm engaged.  Don't have to waste my time with that stuff anymore



In that case buy your fiance something nice. Get her all soggy and have the "Remember when I was going to upgrade my computer, but instead I decided to buy you a gift with the money" card.


----------



## n-ster (Mar 23, 2009)

I wanted to state that Exeodus has already chosen or gotten an i7...

ANY BENCHMARK THAT SAYS AN i7 GETS BEATEN BY A 720 IS BS! I'm no fanboy here... you got to understand what the i7 is before even thinking i7 gets beaten ... and substantially at that? by a 720...

Oh and I lost all my respect for Tom's Hardware 

EDIT: Nvm this post


----------



## jfurterer (Mar 24, 2009)

I think people get stuck on the notion that because something is proclaimed the "best" that it's the best in all applications.  It's not just TH that is showing the performance problem with a single GPU on the Core i7 it's all over the web.  Do some googling around and you'll find the same results on dozens of hardware review sites.  

No let me say again.  The Core i7 is out performed, is some cases significantly (meaning it's not able to obtain the 60fps standard while the x3 720 is well above it), on a number of current video game titles when only a single GPU is used in the test rigs.  Why is this? I'm not 100% sure.  Some of it has to do with game optimization, some of it has to do with raw clock speed, some of it has to do with most games not being multi-threaded.  The point I'm trying to make, and the benchmarks support, is that for "whatever" reason a Core i7 hits a wall with single GPU systems and because of this faster clocked, lower core, older architecture chips out perform it in this scenario.

Why then is the Phenom 2 x3 720 the choice over say a high clocked dual core?  Because of the L3 cache, integrated memory controller and the third core that helps out when a game is multi-threaded.  That's all I'm saying.  Rip on TH all you like, but that's one benchmark site out of dozens.  Google it and find out for you self.  Feel free to post any benchmarks you find that show an across the board, single GPU gaming performance win for the Core i7.  That is, if you can find any.


----------



## farlex85 (Mar 24, 2009)

jfurterer said:


> I think people get stuck on the notion that because something is proclaimed the "best" that it's the best in all applications.  It's not just TH that is showing the performance problem with a single GPU on the Core i7 it's all over the web.  Do some googling around and you'll find the same results on dozens of hardware review sites.
> 
> No let me say again.  The Core i7 is out performed, is some cases significantly (meaning it's not able to obtain the 60fps standard while the x3 720 is well above it), on a number of current video game titles when only a single GPU is used in the test rigs.  Why is this? I'm not 100% sure.  Some of it has to do with game optimization, some of it has to do with raw clock speed, some of it has to do with most games not being multi-threaded.  The point I'm trying to make, and the benchmarks support, is that for "whatever" reason a Core i7 hits a wall with single GPU systems and because of this faster clocked, lower core, older architecture chips out perform it in this scenario.
> 
> Why then is the Phenom 2 x3 720 the choice over say a high clocked dual core?  Because of the L3 cache, integrated memory controller and the third core that helps out when a game is multi-threaded.  That's all I'm saying.  Rip on TH all you like, but that's one benchmark site out of dozens.  Google it and find out for you self.  Feel free to post any benchmarks you find that show an across the board, single GPU gaming performance win for the Core i7.  That is, if you can find any.



Interesting argument and I've seen the same trend. But by that same token find me somewhere where the x3 720 wins out across the board. Or the e8600. Or the PII 940. Or any proc. The fact of the matter is, especially at high res, cpu's just don't matter very much, and your going to get sparratic results depending on the game and the set-up. You won't find a clear winner in cpu's when it comes to gaming b/c it's a gpu sport, the cpu is just there for support. That's why I think for the most part gaming benches are largely irrelevant in the cpu reviews now and days, that just isn't what you're paying for.


----------



## jfurterer (Mar 24, 2009)

This is sorta off topic but I would actual say the CPU can have allot to do with performance at any resolution if the CPU becomes your limiting factor.  As I mentioned in an earlier post when multiple GPUs are in play and the graphics of a cutting edge game are pushed to the max the CPU more often then not becomes the limiting factory.  The QX9770 hits the wall in Crysis Warhead with 3 way SLI of the GTX280 at 56FPS.  How much more GPU power do you want?  Yet with that same GPU set up a Core i7 pushes over 80FPS at the same resolutions the 9770 stalled out at 56FPS.  That's a big difference simply from the CPU.  As games and GPUs become more and more advanced it becomes necessary to have a higher performance CPU simply to take advantage of your GPU hardware.  

If you have a low level C2D throwing in a crazy GTX295 won't suddenly give you amazing graphics at all resolutions.  It probably won't perform much better then a 9800GTX in the same system because the CPU can't feed the data to the GPU fast enough... so it stalls at 40-50FPS.  CPU's do matter.  This "apples to apples", they are all the same it doesn't matter maybe true for a number of titles on the market today.  But if Crysis and Mirror's Edge and other high end graphical eye candy games are the future of gaming then simply throwing a $500 GPU into a $50 CPU set up won't get you nearly as much as you'd hoped.  It's a new dawn for gaming and GPU-CPU relations and it DOES matter what kind of CPU your running with your high end GPU.


----------



## farlex85 (Mar 24, 2009)

jfurterer said:


> This is sorta off topic but I would actual say the CPU can have allot to do with performance at any resolution if the CPU becomes your limiting factor.  As I mentioned in an earlier post when multiple GPUs are in play and the graphics of a cutting edge game are pushed to the max the CPU more often then not becomes the limiting factory.  The QX9770 hits the wall in Crysis Warhead with 3 way SLI of the GTX280 at 56FPS.  How much more GPU power do you want?  Yet with that same GPU set up a Core i7 pushes over 80FPS at the same resolutions the 9770 stalled out at 56FPS.  That's a big difference simply from the CPU.  As games and GPUs become more and more advanced it becomes necessary to have a higher performance CPU simply to take advantage of your GPU hardware.
> 
> If you have a low level C2D throwing in a crazy GTX295 won't suddenly give you amazing graphics at all resolutions.  It probably won't perform much better then a 9800GTX in the same system because the CPU can't feed the data to the GPU fast enough... so it stalls at 40-50FPS.  CPU's do matter.  This "apples to apples", they are all the same it doesn't matter maybe true for a number of titles on the market today.  But if Crysis and Mirror's Edge and other high end graphical eye candy games are the future of gaming then simply throwing a $500 GPU into a $50 CPU set up won't get you nearly as much as you'd hoped.  It's a new dawn for gaming and GPU-CPU relations and it DOES matter what kind of CPU your running with your high end GPU.



Yes your cpu needs to be fast enough not to severely bottleneck your gpu. A low end C2D suffices in most cases, but it varies case to case. If you have the most powerful gpu on the market, logic would dictate you're not simply throwing a single core processor at it and hoping it will perform like it's supposed to. Sorry if I over-simplified, my point is that a cpu is not the driving force in games, and you can't say one is better at playing games than another, b/c it's secondary not primary. The relationship between cpu and gpu is important, but too varied to make any concrete determination about one being significantly better than another in all cases.


----------



## Binge (Mar 24, 2009)

Show me a benchmarked single gpu game environment with an overclocked i7 920 4.2ghz and HT off being beat by a phenom II.  I freaking dare you to find me one.  So much talk for having no backup for your claims.  Go ahead... give me a clock for clock scenario and show me the 4-5 fps difference.  I don't care.  It's all margin of error.  Who knows... their amd install may have been cleaner.  So many variables in a gaming situation where CPUs aren't even the deciding factor.   fanbois.  SCENARIO TIME!!! Come let's see the difference in encodomg say a wedding video in HD and have it all done by the time you finish doing something for your wife so when she comes home you've got a surprise ready, and you had time to lightscribe the disk with pics of you and the wife on the beach during your honeymoon.  i7 wins every time.


----------



## OzzmanFloyd120 (Mar 24, 2009)

Binge said:


> Show me a benchmarked single gpu game environment with an overclocked i7 920 4.2ghz and HT off being beat by a phenom II.  I freaking dare you to find me one.  So much talk for having no backup for your claims.  Go ahead... give me a clock for clock scenario and show me the 4-5 fps difference.  I don't care.  It's all margin of error.  Who knows... their amd install may have been cleaner.  So many variables in a gaming situation where CPUs aren't even the deciding factor.   fanbois.  SCENARIO TIME!!! Come let's see the difference in encodomg say a wedding video in HD and have it all done by the time you finish doing something for your wife so when she comes home you've got a surprise ready, and you had time to lightscribe the disk with pics of you and the wife on the beach during your honeymoon.  i7 wins every time.



Sorry Binge, we already discussed that a couple pages ago.
Stock vs stock some AMD chips beat the i7 in gaming, but OCed it's a different game.
Realistically though they all get the same damn job done in gaming, but like you said, HD encoding the i7 eats the other chips.


----------



## Binge (Mar 24, 2009)

OzzmanFloyd120 said:


> Sorry Binge, we already discussed that a couple pages ago.
> Stock vs stock some AMD chips beat the i7 in gaming, but OCed it's a different game.
> Realistically though they all get the same damn job done in gaming, but like you said, HD encoding the i7 eats the other chips.



Why are you sorry?  What was relevant a couple pages ago is relevant now.  Thank you for agreeing with the point of my post.


----------



## jfurterer (Mar 24, 2009)

farlex85 said:


> Yes your cpu needs to be fast enough not to severely bottleneck your gpu. A low end C2D suffices in most cases, but it varies case to case. If you have the most powerful gpu on the market, logic would dictate you're not simply throwing a single core processor at it and hoping it will perform like it's supposed to. Sorry if I over-simplified, my point is that a cpu is not the driving force in games, and you can't say one is better at playing games than another, b/c it's secondary not primary. The relationship between cpu and gpu is important, but too varied to make any concrete determination about one being significantly better than another in all cases.



Ultimately I think it boils down to price/performance. When it comes to selecting a CPU for gaming.  I can't, in good conscience, recommend a Core i7 for gaming, as the primary application, in any scenario other then multiple GPUs and future proofing.  In that case I think that a 720 out performs (in both performance and price/performance) a Core i7 920 in a gaming rig UNLESS you have multiple GPUs.  I think we've boiled it down now.  I understand where you make the distinction between the GPU being the "key" piece of hardware and the CPU as secondary.  But my point and I think the benchmarks and the recent gaming titles support me on this, is that that may soon, no longer be the case as the CPU becomes equally important as the GPU for gaming applications.  There is allot of talk of off loading graphics controllers to CPU not to mention the push towards greater physics which would likely be off loaded to the CPU (unless nVidia figures out a way to get AMD/ATI to swallow PhysX).



			
				Binge said:
			
		

> Show me a benchmarked single gpu game environment with an overclocked i7 920 4.2ghz and HT off being beat by a phenom II. I freaking dare you to find me one. So much talk for having no backup for your claims. Go ahead... give me a clock for clock scenario and show me the 4-5 fps difference. I don't care. It's all margin of error. Who knows... their amd install may have been cleaner. So many variables in a gaming situation where CPUs aren't even the deciding factor.  fanbois. SCENARIO TIME!!! Come let's see the difference in encodomg say a wedding video in HD and have it all done by the time you finish doing something for your wife so when she comes home you've got a surprise ready, and you had time to lightscribe the disk with pics of you and the wife on the beach during your honeymoon. i7 wins every time.



Huh?  I think you are being sarcastic but I'm not really sure wtf your talking about here and how, if at all, it relates to the discussion farlex85 and I were having.


----------



## jfurterer (Mar 24, 2009)

jfurterer said:


> Also I should mention that I'm not harping on the i7s.  I do allot of Video/3D work and would love to pick one up (don't have the budget).



To the "fanboy" post.


----------



## Binge (Mar 24, 2009)

This thread is open to the public of TPU and I fail to see where you figured I was even acknowledging your posts.  To me it seems like conjecture and opinion of reviews which is as good as seeing who can create an in depth philosophy about spitting into an empty can of beans at 3 meters.


----------



## SystemViper (Mar 24, 2009)

the i7 kills,* stock who runs stock here*.,.... common stop hiding behind speculation, i7 rocks , no doubt!

and talk price , i there are great deals on motherboards and the i7's are selling under 225 on the forums and at MC. how cheap do you want it?


----------



## OzzmanFloyd120 (Mar 24, 2009)

Binge said:


> This thread is open to the public of TPU and I fail to see where you figured I was even acknowledging your posts.  To me it seems like conjecture and opinion of reviews which is as good as seeing who can create an in depth philosophy about spitting into an empty can of beans at 3 meters.



Not really sure what you mean... but I'll buy it.


----------



## jfurterer (Mar 24, 2009)

I think we've gone off topic here, but if anybody wants to create a speculation thread on the future of gaming and application development be my guest!  Of course you don't have to provide any links to out side resources yourself, feel free to bash whatever ones are posted and demand that the poster of said resources provide additional resources for some impossible scenario before you will acknowledge them!  Sounds like some gripping debate to me!  Be sure to tell your friends twice!  Because I'm on my way!


----------



## n-ster (Mar 24, 2009)

Let me state this first... I'm no fanboy of anything...

Now, for gaming, maybe the 720 is a better price / performance, but to say it is better? fine, maybe stock vs stock, but WHO CARES ABOUT STOCK? Isn't this an enthusiasts' forum? are we not very good at OCing here? i7 reaches EASILY 4 to 4.2 HT off... and if you don't OC an i7, the price / performance is not nearly as good...

I on one hand, am hesitating what to buy... because obviously, the 720BE setup will cost me about 300 to 350$ less... but I want an i7 not only for optimum performance now, but for great performance later (very multi-threaded games are comming out too!)... i7 is a great buy, 250$ for the chip 250$ for a great board and 50$ for nice ram.... but the only con to me is price, though it is already low for it's performance...

jfurterer, "futureproofing" and multiple GPU setups for later are usually the case for many ppl in TPU, AND the fact that i7 never gets outperformed OCed... and this is a well known fact that oced i7 are better than oced 720... We still understand you in saying 720 is a great price/performance, because it is!


----------

