i5-750 vs. i7-860 vs. i7-930

[hierovision]

The i7-930 is more of an investment. See if you can get your local shop to match the Microcenter price If not, ask if they have any open-box or returned 930's.

 

The X58 chipset will allow you to upgrade less components over the years. For example:

If you go with P55 and an i5-750 you may feel like your computer is struggling in 2-3 years as application developers more widely implement multi-thread support. To upgrade you will either have to get a P55 compatible processor with hyperthreading, which may only marginally improve your performance. Or to guarantee extra performance you'll have to upgrade to the X58/X58 CPU/DDR3 Memory (or whatever the best chipset-based components are at the time). This could run you 500-600.

 

If you go with an X58 and an i7-930 you already have 8 threads and a higher memory standard to start with. When you feel the need to upgrade in 3-4 years you'll have higher-core and equal or lower thermal design processors available that are compatible with the motherboard you bought 3-4 years before All you will have to upgrade is the processor and/or the quantity of memory. This might set you back 100-400.

 

Once you upgrade the X58 after 3-4 years, you should be set for another 2-3 years. Ideally, the X58+i7-930 can last you a max of 7 years with an occasional upgrade that will keep your performance at a very comfortable level.

 

The P55+i5-750 (or even the i7-860) might last you 2-3 years before DDR2 becomes obsolete and you feel the urge/need to upgrade. It might last you a maximum of 5 years if you really push your clocks.

 

Of course all of this is just my best guess, but I think the i7-930 has at a minimum a 2 year advantage over the i7-860 or i5-750.

Edited May 7, 2010 by hierovision

[Miek]

I'm trying to save some money, so I am really considering the i5. Would it be a decision I'd regret? I don't really know that I do very much CPU intensive stuff... I mostly game and browse the web. I can't say I do much video editing or converting (though I do a little here and there, mostly for school).

 

However, there is one more thing I'm pondering: I am headed to university for computer sciences in September... Do you think there'd be a any "homework" projects that would require a good PC?

[GabrielT]

I'm trying to save some money, so I am really considering the i5. Would it be a decision I'd regret? I don't really know that I do very much CPU intensive stuff... I mostly game and browse the web. I can't say I do much video editing or converting (though I do a little here and there, mostly for school).

 

However, there is one more thing I'm pondering: I am headed to university for computer sciences in September... Do you think there'd be a any "homework" projects that would require a good PC?

Hey I can say that my i5 750 really kicks butt, and if you ever do feel like you need to upgrade the 1156 variant i7's kick even more butt. At 3.8GHZ the i5 750 beats all stock clocked i7's but the Extreme editions and 6 cores.

[Miek]

I there's a good chance of me going with the i5. It'll save me some money, and down the road I could drop in an i7.

 

Quick question: Other than SLI/CF @ 16x/16x (vs 16x-8x), how much performance difference is there from the P55 to the X58?

*Note: I'm only using one video card in my upcoming rig, so SLI/CF doesn't much matter to me.

Edited May 9, 2010 by Miek

[Chuckles]

I think the only other major difference would be the dual channel vs. triple channel memory. I would get the i5-750 if money is a concern. I don't really see the i5-750 starting to struggle in 3 years. I wouldn't buy an X58 just to avoid the MB upgrade. Who knows what will be going on in 3-5 years?

[Miek]

Another question: Would the Noctua NH-U9B keep the i5-750 within a safe operating temperature/allow room for a bit of an overclock?

[GabrielT]

Another question: Would the Noctua NH-U9B keep the i5-750 within a safe operating temperature/allow room for a bit of an overclock?

I can't see why it wouldn't, I use a Cooler Master Hyper 212+ on mine and I believe the Noctua out performs the 212 so yeah I would say it would.

[Miek]

Surprise! Another question.

 

I know that when all four cores of the i5-750 are in use, it gets clocked to 2.66GHz. I know that when only a single core is in use, it clocks up to 3.2GHz.

 

However, what speed does it run at when two cores are in use? What about three?

[GabrielT]

Well good question, well I set everything back to default to find out. When I am just doing web browsing and things it turns down the v-core to .8v and the multiplier down to 9 for a clock speed of 1.2Ghz.

Running 1 thread of prime95 gives me a clock of 3.183Ghz.

Running 2-4 threads give me 2.8-2.9Ghz. That seems weird to me, that even with fail safe defaults mine runs at 21x multi to 22x. Weird.

I'm going to mess around in bios some more.

 

Edit: Well I set the bclock to 145 on stock volts and it can still downclock itself to 1.3ghz and Turbo to 3.45Ghz. Im going to play around with this a little more. Oh and full load is around 3.1Ghz

Edited May 13, 2010 by gabrieltessin

[hierovision]

I can't see why it wouldn't, I use a Cooler Master Hyper 212+ on mine and I believe the Noctua out performs the 212 so yeah I would say it would.

 

I'm pretty sure this is the laziest statement I've seen on the boards in a while. Just looking at the naming conventions of the 212 vs. the U9B it kind of hints at different sized coolers.

 

The U9B is a 92mm cooler that comes with two ~38CFM fans and costs $58. The 212 is a 120mm cooler that comes with one 78CFM fan and costs $30. There are a bajillion tests of both. The 212 outperforms the U9B

 

Edit: There are 63 coolers separating the two on the CM 212+ LGA775 chart on Frostytech. The 212's 150W thermal test scored 19C rise over ambient, while the U9B scored 27.1C.

Edited May 13, 2010 by hierovision

[GabrielT]

I'm pretty sure this is the laziest statement I've seen on the boards in a while. Just looking at the naming conventions of the 212 vs. the U9B it kind of hints at different sized coolers.

 

The U9B is a 92mm cooler that comes with two ~38CFM fans and costs $58. The 212 is a 120mm cooler that comes with one 78CFM fan and costs $30. There are a bajillion tests of both. The 212 outperforms the U9B

 

Edit: There are 63 coolers separating the two on the CM 212+ LGA775 chart on Frostytech. The 212's 150W thermal test scored 19C rise over ambient, while the U9B scored 27.1C.

I am lazy, I honestly thought the Notctua was the better coolermaster. Thank you for googling that for me. I do admit I was feeling quite lazy then.

I looked on frosty tech before I posted and honestly didn't see the 212. I assumed it hadn't been tested by them... but I saw the Noctua outperform a few that I thought were better.

Well, I atleast checked out the Turbo for the guy.

 

Edit:My 212+ doesn't perform nearly that well. Not even close in fact.

Re-edit, if you look I posted that at 1:05am...

Re-re edit, If you look on frostytech the are 34 coolers that seperate them , still a lot I admit. But that is the 212 not the 212+ which I understand only have minor differences but had a different fan and in my honest opinion a smoother better base than the 212+ direct heatpipe design. Anyways I admit defeat and you are the better... advice giver.

Edited May 13, 2010 by gabrieltessin

[Speedway]

Well good question, well I set everything back to default to find out. When I am just doing web browsing and things it turns down the v-core to .8v and the multiplier down to 9 for a clock speed of 1.2Ghz.

Running 1 thread of prime95 gives me a clock of 3.183Ghz.

Running 2-4 threads give me 2.8-2.9Ghz. That seems weird to me, that even with fail safe defaults mine runs at 21x multi to 22x. Weird.

I'm going to mess around in bios some more.

 

Edit: Well I set the bclock to 145 on stock volts and it can still downclock itself to 1.3ghz and Turbo to 3.45Ghz. Im going to play around with this a little more. Oh and full load is around 3.1Ghz

 

 

If you "Disable" the "Intel EIST" in the BIOS, then you won't have that auto downclock! When I am Benching, I always turn it off, then whatever clock you set, that will be the 24/7 speed that your cpu runs @! However for just normal everyday use, it is good to leave the EIST enabled, if you don't need the extra power/clock then let it auto idle!!!!

 

Hope this helps

 

IMO Though, I agree that the I7 on the 1366 roadmap is a better choice! You just leave yourself more "Outs" this way down the road