ozziesironmanoffroad

so i am getting a bit bored with my ancient AMD Athlon X2 2.8GHz... am ready to build a new computer. i just wonder.... i will mostly play games... left 4 dead 2, world of warcraft.. etc.

which processor would be a better choice for me? i know i7s are the best for serious multitasking, but how are they for games?

dark_fairytales

tell you the truth, the i7's are total overkill for games at the moment. any ix series is overkill. i could only recommend and ix series for some one doing a lot of vide editing.

any quad core will fit the bill, if the most demanding thing you will be doing is games. dual cores would do just as good as the quad, but the quads are so cheap now. there is not reason to go dual.

if your wanting to update to the next stable platform such as DDR3 then go for an i5 that is manufactured in the 45nm prosses.

hopefully that helps

ozziesironmanoffroad

So a core 2 quad would be fine for me huh?
I thought that series was dead? It doesn't really make sense building a computer using seriously outdated components, does it?

scuba

I figured Travis would have jumped on this thread ASAP

ozziesironmanoffroad

Ha. And I call myself a computer geek...

More than likely I'll go with an i7 cuz I can get the i7 2.8ghz and an asus motherboard for under 400 bucks. Which I know is a screaming deal. I just wish I could afford the 3+ ghz i7 chips... Lol.

And I decided against a C2Q cuz it's a dead socket type, and I'm done building outdated computers. (my amd was already outdated when I built it)
and I will have a budget of maybe 800 bucks, so why not go with an i7 if I can afford it?

Any thoughts?

iamsuperbleeder

I'm a little slow today



I have to agree about the i7 series being overkill... It's not that I don't use my 920 to it's full advantage (I actually DO do a good bit of video editing, converting, and compiling), it's just that most programs and/or games are still not optimized yet to make use of all the cores. The higher end games will still only use 4 cores, so yeah a Core 2 Quad is still PLENTY powerful to handle most every game. The i7's have 4 physical cores, and then another 4 virtual cores, so the PC sees it as 8 cores. But even during video editing and converting, or heavy gaming like Oblivion, Crysis, or Flight Simulator X, the PC still only uses 4 cores; the other 4 simply stay at idle (or at least near idle; at least Windows 7 makes use of the left over processor power to keep background programs running without a hitch).

If I hadn't have blown $400 of my processor, I could have spent more money on a better graphics card Honestly, the GPU is what makes a gaming rig. I'd save a little money and go with a Core 2 Quad, and put some money down on a good GPU, or pair of GPU's

Throw in at least 6GB of memory, and you should be good to go for some time.




My reason for going with the iX series during the build was to make it as current as possible, so I wouldn't have to do a major upgrade in the near future just to make it current again. It's been almost 2 years, and it's still a killer rig IMO, so I think I succeeded But even though it's still "current", it's still overkill, lol





BUT, if you're wanting to make this rig a Hack-Pro Hackinosh, then the i7 is your friend

ozziesironmanoffroad

Hack pro is also what I am going for

dark_fairytales

i agree on the best graphics card you can buy, it will go a lot further with games.

let us know what are part you end up getting.

Magnusian

Actually, I'd suggest waiting a few months because the new Intel chips will be coming out soon and then i7s will price drop. Also it is possible that the lower-end next gens will fit the same socket as i7s (or so the rumour mill churns) and that'll be a nice little upgrade in the future if it's true. Honestly, right now is not the best time to be building a new system from scratch, in a few months the Jan-Feb-Mar price drops will roll out with the new generation of hardware and that's a great time to build.

Get the i7, here's why: more cache, higher data-rate quickpath. Don't get a core 2 if you have the option for an i7, they perform a little better. Hyper-threading is still little more than a gimmick unless you do a lot of database work, so don't worry about not "using your cpu to it's fullest," the virtual cores don't really do much for performance. Also, price-wise core 2s are not as cheap as they oughta be considering their age, don't do it. Sure it might be "overkill" now (it's not, trust me, my i7 is my gaming rig's bottleneck), but new games come out all the time, why build for today when a few better choices will let you build for tomorrow too.

Don't buy the best graphics card on the market, it's freakin' expensive, and for the same cost you can have almost double the performance if you go with something like two 5770s in crossfire (only outperformed by 5870s in crossfire, by about 3% for twice the cost).

6gb of ram, at the very least. 12 would be better if you do a lot of multitasking (which you likely do more of than you might think), but 6gb is more than enough for most things.

Here's what you should build:

i7920/940/960 (depending on what you want to spend)
6gb of DDR3 in 3x2gb stick configuration, ram clock-speed isn't as important as a lot of folks would make you think, it's tighter timings that are more important.
AMD 5770 for video (make sure you get a motherboard that can support crossfire and then in the future you can grab another 5770 and get a nice upgrade without breaking the bank). I'd prefer to recommend nVidia, but Fermi (the 400 series) was a complete and utter flop and the present HD Radeons are the superior cards atm. Saphire or XFX are good brands.
SSD if you really want to reduce game loading times and windows boot times, not really necessary (actually, don't go for it unless you want to spend lots of money).
2tb hdd, at least one. These should be going down in price soon too since 3tb models have been announced.
800W PSU, 80+ Bronze rated minimum (or Platinum rated if you run the system 24/7), should be an OCZ, Corsair, Antec, or Thermaltake, I have never had issues with those four brands and right now OCZ actually makes the best PSUs. I say 800W for future upgrades, but in reality you can get away with a 600W. If you plan on going the crossfire route in the future, get the 800W.
ASUS or MSI for motherboard, avoid Gigabyte like the plague.

ozziesironmanoffroad

amd 5770? you mean ati... i still get mixed up when someone says amd about graphics... i keep forgetting that amd bought ATI.. lol. still used to AMD only making processors.

i was thinkin about starting the build this payday; but doing some thinking... (plus what magnusian said i had thoughts about before he said them) that the first couple months of the year is when they roll out new computer hardware and current prices drop. so im kind of thinking maybe tax season....

to be perfectly honest, its not that my AMD is slowing down or anything (bottle neck is the graphics card, a geforce 7950GT) its just that im bored with it. its even overclocked almost 1GHz... its rated at 2.8GHz and its sitting at just under 3.6GHz, totally stable, and it doesnt get more than 5-6 degrees hotter than at idle. so its not a matter of 'i NEED it...' its a matter of 'i want the newest and the best'.. lol.

so im getting everyones opinions, and when i do build it, will hopefully be a monster.

Magnusian

AMD has axed the ATI brand, pretty soon you'll never see "ATI" on a card.

iamsuperbleeder

it's never a "good time" to build a new system... something newer and better is always around the corner and about to come out that's how technology works...

Magnusian

Not exactly, the best times to build a computer are late Q1 and late Q3 every year, usually right after the "next-gen" hardware releases, which corresponds with "present-gen" price drops. Nobody really needs to be bleeding edge, it's expensive, and a few months of waiting can really pay off.

dark_fairytales

sandybridge will not lower the price of the i7 for some time. sandybridge will come out as vary high end hard ware with the price to match. that will keep the i7's price point were it is. only when the lower end sandybridge chips come out will the i7 drop. that dose not happen till June. Also the sandybridge socket is different on high end and low end, due to the ringbus. so the sandybridge will not fit on the on the 1366LGA socket.

it is also always better to buy after die shrink. all the bugs are worked out by then and the cpu is even more efficient. As stated before, the graphics card will take you further. Only after you make that choice should you build your comp. around that choice.

JAvendan

i thought i read an article that said they were able to overclock an i5 processor faster then an i7 and was very stable... after upgrading the processor's heat sink and fan.

the i7 with similar upgrades didn't take to the overclocking as well as the i5.

search - lol.

joel

ozziesironmanoffroad

Correct me if I'm wrong... But isn't the i5 just a stripped down, cheaper i7 without hyperthreading? If so, why should the frequency of the processor matter, if all cores aren't even being used? Plus correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the processors natural, factory set speed normally the best? I know certain apps I have work better with my amd at the stock 2.8ghz, and tend to mess up if overclocked.

If I read rght the i7 can be a single core at something near 4ghz or a dual core (if the application utilitizes multiple cores) somewhere around 3ghz? Do I have my math right?

dark_fairytales

the speed of the core has to do with the manufacturing posses its self. each chip is tested and sorted by speed.

the i5 is a dumded down i7. almost identical.

ozziesironmanoffroad

so an i5 quad core is essentially an i7 without hyperthreading, other than that, identical. right?

iamsuperbleeder

lol, why even bother to overclock an i7? I mean really, what the hell are you trying to prove? there's really no reason... 2.6ghz on 4 physical cores is plenty at least for me, I have NO need to overclock. I have the bottom of the line 920 that you can't even purchase any more, and I'd never have the need for anything more at least not now, and not for a few years probably; that's why I went i7 to begin with

Magnusian

^^^^ Yep, there's not a single good excuse to overclock a multi-core, especially a quad, sure you can eek out a little more, but the chips are generally tied to their clock-speeds for a reason, because there was a defect preventing stable operation at the higher clock (or the bus couldn't support the full data rate, or one of an assortment of problems), ALL i# series chips are the exact same die (for their process node), if there's a defect on the chip, they burn out the section with the defect and market it as lower-end. Overclocking an i5 will not make it perform better than an i7, there are SIGNIFICANT portions of the chip that are no longer connected up, and all you'll have is a fast cheap processor that is gimped while an i7 at the same clock will not be gimped and perform better. You'd get better performance just by managing your process affinities instead of letting the OS do it, having the entire system running on one core frees up process time on the other 3 for applications, for example.

Also, an i7 950 can easily reach about 4.3GHz with the stock air cooler. The 930 can push almost as high too. While hyperthreading is a gimmick, there is no i5 that can outperform an i7.

Uh.... okay. I only work in the hardware industry and as an enthusiast have watched these price drops happen for over a decade, I guess I really don't know anything about it. I guess you didn't see the bit about my hearing that the low-end sandy's will fit the high-end i's sockets as a RUMOR MILL thing (ps ringbus is not as new as intel would have you think), not that it was likely to happen. Socket changes don't always happen.