Core i7 870 Tested

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

08-03-2009, 10:11 PM
Blackbird_CaD_

Who cares if 870 beats 920 when both are running in default speed?
They should overclock both CPU's to max and then compare, and overclock both CPU's to the same speed and compare clock for clock.
08-03-2009, 10:47 PM
villa1n

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glow9

This is absolutely stupid. I am not going to be one bit surprised to see i7 get chopped. Q9550 and Q9650 which can perform almost as good as their high end i7's it just seems like they are fighting against themselves not to mention pricing. Now adding a 3rd socket into the mix.

Who's the brains behind this one? Hey I got an idea! lets create a line of overpriced niche cpu's that perform about as well as our highend affordable ones! But just wait it gets better! Now lets add a 3rd socket which is between the two already and make that one perform as good if not better than the high end overpriced niche ones too!

Anyone ever see Robin Williams how golf got created standup? This comes to mind.

That third socket = reduction in power usage, and overall platform efficiency increases... which for any threaded applications beat out the core2 by a decent margin, only in gaming are things close, and that is either a gpu bottleneck or lack of threaded coding that keeps things close. :/ They are not really niche items, they are a methodical tick tock progression..
08-03-2009, 11:13 PM
Glow9

Quote:

Originally Posted by villa1n

That third socket = reduction in power usage, and overall platform efficiency increases...

So doesn't that make the highend well not so high end? Why dish out $600 for an i7? Too much Inventory = bad. Seems odd to me I guess why they just didn't change architecture instead of put out new socket. Seems like a step backwards? I guess I'm overall just really confused by their strategy here.
08-04-2009, 03:15 AM
Hornet331

moar :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana:ing and moaning pls... can't get enough every time socket switches (don't matters which manufacturor)... :rolleyes:
08-04-2009, 04:09 AM
BulldogPO

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blackbird_CaD_

Who cares if 870 beats 920 when both are running in default speed?
They should overclock both CPU's to max and then compare, and overclock both CPU's to the same speed and compare clock for clock.

920 is faster for C2C.
I still wonder why Intel wanted to name 870 to i7 series.
08-04-2009, 05:11 AM
Xoulz

Quote:

Originally Posted by saaya

thats not true, i upgraded from a cheap athlonxp system to a cheap 754 system and the performance boost was quite noticeable... and going from 939 to c2d was quite a boost as well...

going from p3 to athlon or p4 was a big boost
going from athlon to athlonxp was a minor boost
going from athlon xp to k8 was a big boost
going from k8 to k10 was a minor boost
going from k10 to k10.5 was a minor boost
going from core2 to corei7 was a minor boost

lately the perf boosts by new cpus are smaller and smaller... cause they push for more and more cores which dont help in most scenarios, and most software is now written for mainstream, to run on as many systems as possible, even 5 year old ones... i guess those are the reasons...

there was a notable performance boost in my experience...
but yes, its not like you ever needed the latest gen cpu to really do something you couldnt do before...

yeah but what will sata3 and usb3 be good for i ask you... running several ssds in raid maybe, but who does that? and will it really make a notable diference?
and usb3... faster external hdds, but do we really need that?

LOL... define "boost" :rolleyes:

saaya, you always seem to be jaded and argue from a max/max point of view, instead of the more logical and generalized min/max aspect.

Bro.... it's gets old. If we are talking strictly about PERFORMANCE, then yes. But we are not. We are looking at the whole package and there is nothing shameful or wrong with the P55/57 platform. Dollar for Dollar, it out performs the X58.

But again, thats all before you touch the bios.... (again) which 99% of the people have no idea what that is.

I just don't understand your arguments against the LGA1156. Look at some of the benches... the i7 850 performs!

And yes, it's cheaper... so what?
08-04-2009, 05:16 AM
villa1n

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glow9

So doesn't that make the highend well not so high end? Why dish out $600 for an i7? Too much Inventory = bad. Seems odd to me I guess why they just didn't change architecture instead of put out new socket. Seems like a step backwards? I guess I'm overall just really confused by their strategy here.

The i7 is still highend, and for absolute performance it still reigns king. When has price and performance ever scaled linearly?..ever? lol.
08-04-2009, 05:19 AM
geo

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xoulz

LOL... define "boost" :rolleyes:
saaya, you always seem to be jaded and argue from a max/max point of view, instead of the more logical and generalized min/max aspect.
Bro.... it's gets old. If we are talking strictly about PERFORMANCE, then yes. But we are not. We are looking at the whole package and there is nothing shameful or wrong with the P55/57 platform. Dollar for Dollar, it out performs the X58.
But again, thats all before you touch the bios.... (again) which 99% of the people have no idea what that is.
I just don't understand your arguments against the LGA1156. Look at some of the benches... the i7 850 performs!
And yes, it's cheaper... so what?

i think his point was... the same setup was available last year for like $150 more. not that there is something wrong with p55/i5.
08-04-2009, 11:49 AM
Kingcarcas

Quote:

Originally Posted by flopper

People still comparing 3ghz cpu?
who runs a 3ghz cpu here?

4ghz+ and anything else is for the sister forum averagejoe.com

we get a dimishing return on cpu upgrade, that isnt new.
and p5 is kinda 2008.

So anyone who doesn't have a watercooled i7 920 should leave, lol whut?
08-04-2009, 02:14 PM
zalbard

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kingcarcas

So anyone who doesn't have a watercooled i7 920 should leave, lol whut?

Don't need to watercool i7 to get to 4 Ghz.
08-04-2009, 02:24 PM
SubZero.it

Quote:

Originally Posted by zalbard

Don't need to watercool i7 to get to 4 Ghz.

+1 :)
08-04-2009, 03:15 PM
initialised

I got my hands on one of these today:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2522/...e159c6571f.jpg

Not a bad little CPU, but the mounting holes are a pain, almost half way between 775 and 1366 holes so the only cooler I could get to fit was an OEM 5-pipe core contact HPC. I should be able to get a bracket from XSPC for their Delta V3 block fairly quickly. The HPC cooler did a decent job, keeping it to 52C (32 idle) while running Prime95, i7 920 on the same cooler runs at 65-70C on P6T-SE so it is either underutilised by not having HT or it is a more efficient architecture. The board is on a pre-release BIOS (version 9999!) and there are none posted on ASUS site yet (anyone got a different BIOS?). I couldn't get it to OC yet and I had stability problems at stock settings. I'll be shooting for 3.6GHz to compare it to Ph2, C2Q & i7. Results to follow NDA dependent.

The voltage section of the BIOS is laid out like the CrosshairIII with voltage readings under each voltage setting and the rest of it looks very similar to the P6T series and OC Profile has been revamped to be like the MxA series and CrosshairIII with a number of slots for different profiles. I like this board already!
08-04-2009, 03:43 PM
sholvaco

^
Which SKU is that? Only the i5 750 lacks HT. The drop in temps could also result from the lack of QPI and dual vs triple channel IMC.
08-04-2009, 03:58 PM
initialised

Quote:

Originally Posted by sholvaco

^
Which SKU is that? Only the i5 750 lacks HT. The drop in temps could also result from the lack of QPI and dual vs triple channel IMC.

True, it's an i5 750
08-04-2009, 05:11 PM
Hornet331

Quote:

Originally Posted by initialised

The HPC cooler did a decent job, keeping it to 52C (32 idle) while running Prime95, i7 920 on the same cooler runs at 65-70C on P6T-SE so it is either underutilised by not having HT or it is a more efficient architecture.

It's the first one. Thats the main purpose of HT, to increase the utilisation of the execution untis. Disable HT and see how temps drop, usually around 10°C.
08-04-2009, 07:14 PM
onethreehill

Quote:

Originally Posted by OBR

about consuption - exactly, platform consume less not CPU

Core i7 800/Core i5 700 is not today upgrade fo Core 2 Q users, but great platform for good money for new customers ... Core i5 750 cost here 195 dolars its like Q8200, if i will decide between P55+Ci5 750 and P45+Q8200 for the same money, i will take P55+Ci5 750 ...

i5 750 price is closer to Q9400 ($183)
http://files.shareholder.com/downloa..._1ku_Price.pdf
08-04-2009, 08:03 PM
saaya

Quote:

Originally Posted by sholvaco

^
Which SKU is that? Only the i5 750 lacks HT. The drop in temps could also result from the lack of QPI and dual vs triple channel IMC.

there is still qpi actually :D
its connecting the pciE block with the uncore block... weird huh? :D
08-05-2009, 01:28 PM
initialised

I got the clock up to 3.6GHz without much hassle and only gained ~9C on the hottest core (peaked at 61C). With that I'm thinking this could be the ideal CPU for a powerful media centre or modest quad core gaming rig.
08-05-2009, 01:51 PM
doompc

Quote:

Originally Posted by saaya

there is still qpi actually :D
its connecting the pciE block with the uncore block... weird huh? :D

Intra-core QPI? Why? :(
08-05-2009, 02:56 PM
geo

Quote:

Originally Posted by initialised

I got the clock up to 3.6GHz without much hassle and only gained ~9C on the hottest core (peaked at 61C). With that I'm thinking this could be the ideal CPU for a powerful media centre or modest quad core gaming rig.

air? and is 4ghz possible? *easily*
08-05-2009, 03:02 PM
initialised

Quote:

Originally Posted by geo

air? and is 4ghz possible? *easily*

Should be, will give it a go.
08-06-2009, 12:45 AM
SubZero.it

This is a test of lynnfield with anno 1404 :) enjoy

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,6...overy/Reviews/
08-06-2009, 12:51 AM
FlanK3r

Quote:

Originally Posted by initialised

Should be, will give it a go.

Think OC limits are similar as Nehalems CPUs, right? Or a bit whorse? Thx ,-)
08-06-2009, 01:02 AM
Chri$ch

Retail Core i5-750 OC Test at the different clocks (3.6, 3.8 and 4Ghz)....

Quote:

http://www.abload.de/img/dsc_45563uxa.jpg

http://www.abload.de/img/dsc_4519y5tp.jpg

http://www.abload.de/img/dsc_4523s2ze.jpg

http://www.abload.de/img/voltish2.jpg

(Source: playwares.com)

Game Test with 6 different CPUs at the same clock (3.6Ghz)

Quote:

Intel Core i7-920 (3.6Ghz @ 1.176v)
http://www.abload.de/thumb/i7-920lrhw.png

Intel Core i5-750 (3.6Ghz @ 1.296v)
http://www.abload.de/thumb/i5-750ksie.png

Intel C2Q Q9550 (3.6Ghz @ 1.192v)
http://www.abload.de/thumb/q95505p4r.png

Intel C2D E8400 (3.6Ghz @ 1.192v)
http://www.abload.de/thumb/e8400buoq.png

AMD Phenom II X4 955 (3.6Ghz @ 1.408v)
http://www.abload.de/thumb/pii-955dorhx.png

AMD Phenom II X2 550 (3.6Ghz @ 1.392v)
http://www.abload.de/thumb/pii-5504ulj.png

A.V.A
http://www.abload.de/thumb/ava-1giof.jpg http://www.abload.de/thumb/ava-2wh0q.jpg

Biohazard
http://www.abload.de/thumb/biohazard-1gght.jpg http://www.abload.de/thumb/biohazard-2hes0.jpg

Call of Juraz
http://www.abload.de/thumb/callofjuraz-1jeuu.jpg http://www.abload.de/thumb/callofjuraz-2xix4.jpg

Crysis
http://www.abload.de/thumb/crysis-1xh81.jpg http://www.abload.de/thumb/crysis-25gk2.jpg

FarCry 2
http://www.abload.de/thumb/farcry-1sdi5.jpg http://www.abload.de/thumb/farcry-2cfw8.jpg

Grid
http://www.abload.de/thumb/grid-1ie2f.jpg http://www.abload.de/thumb/grid-2zhfy.jpg

H.A.W.X
http://www.abload.de/thumb/hawx-1jdsx.jpg http://www.abload.de/thumb/hawx-2gh2u.jpg

Prototype
http://www.abload.de/thumb/prototype-1rewd.jpg http://www.abload.de/thumb/prototype-26fff.jpg

3DMark Vantage
http://www.abload.de/thumb/vantage-1yikq.jpg http://www.abload.de/thumb/vantage-2qfzp.jpg

(Source: playwares.com)
08-06-2009, 01:22 AM
kl0012

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chri$ch

Retail Core i5-750 OC Test at the different clocks (3.6, 3.8 and 4Ghz)....

(Source: playwares.com)

Game Test with 6 different CPUs at the same clock (3.6Ghz)

(Source: playwares.com)

Thanks. Using 295GTX perfectly illustrates why faster CPUs are required for today's games.

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page