Core i7 - a very bad investment for most people

With the benchmark results now available, it becomes -yet again- evident that the CPU performance that is relevant to most end users is struggling to increase to justify the price.

That Core i7 delivers significant performance gains for work loads which can be efficiently multi-threaded is of course something significant.
But are end users really benefiting of this?

I highly doubt that most people encode video/music or compress gigantic archives in a frequent manner and I doubt that you really do care if it takes 10 or 15 minutes to do this once a week.

What most end users care about in the high-end market is performance in games.
Nearly all games available on the market do not show any relevant performance gain by Core i7 at typical real life settings.
It is no news that the GPU is by far the most significant bottleneck for games.

Buying a new Core i7 system would cost you a huge pile of money.
Most people would see a much greater performance if this money is being spend into an additional GPU and/or a fast SSD instead.


Yes, this is no groundbreaking new finding, but I just thought that it is worthy to discuss about.

Btw.:

Here is a good review that shows the minimum frame rate for games.
You can clearly see the lack of performance improvement with Core i7 in games, even though the tests were made at low screen resolutions.

Of course, I agree with everything you say. The problem is just that you can't, in most cases, get any faster than a single 4870X2 at the moment. Core i7 is pretty much the only way to get any added performance, even if it's only a little. Furthermore, here on XS a lot of people well get a Core i7 "just because".

Buying new computer hardware has never been a rational decision, just like buying an expensive car.

In the end, it's a step forwards, not backwards, and that's what really matters.

Gamewise its about even, some improvements on newer games, but if you look at the other performance its a win win, no reason not to buy an i7 today over any other cpu. AT has a great review up, I skimmed over Toms and stopped reading after their first paragraph so i'd look around for some better reviews if thats where you were seeing your numbers.

Actually, i encode about 1-2hrs of video every month (currently still SD, but soon HD). For me every minute gained from the encoding time is a minute won. I was the happiest when i changed from E2160 (oc 3,2ghz) to Q6600 (oc 3,3Ghz), wich was in a different league. If i can get a i7 920 to 3400+ mhz i think ill be a happy camper.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inCore

Of course, I agree with everything you say. The problem is just that you can't, in most cases, get any faster than a single 4870X2 at the moment. Core i7 is pretty much the only way to get any added performance, even if it's only a little. Furthermore, here on XS a lot of people well get a Core i7 "just because".

Buying new computer hardware has never been a rational decision, just like buying an expensive car.

---

For example Nvidia is going to offer their new cards with two GPUs pretty soon, which will offer new performance grounds.
Also the new SLC SSDs from Intel, Micron and FusionIO deliver huge performance gains for many work loads.

So there is definitely a lot of new stuff to invest into that really matters.

Quote:

---

In the end, it's a step forwards, not backwards, and that's what really matters.

---

Unfortunately Core i7 IS as step back in performance for quite a list of games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Striph

Gamewise its about even, some improvements on newer games, but if you look at the other performance its a win win, no reason not to buy an i7 today over any other cpu. AT has a great review up, I skimmed over Toms and stopped reading after their first paragraph so i'd look around for some better reviews if thats where you were seeing your numbers.

---

Except motherboards costing an arm and a leg? And expensive memory? And expensive CPU?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anubis

Actually, i encode about 1-2hrs of video every month (currently still SD, but soon HD). For me every minute gained from the encoding time is a minute won. I was the happiest when i changed from E2160 (oc 3,2ghz) to Q6600 (oc 3,3Ghz), wich was in a different league. If i can get a i7 920 to 3400+ mhz i think ill be a happy camper.

---

So you are paying over a thousand dollars just to not wait a few minutes on a video encoding process to finish once a month?

I rather invest into another GPU, so I will have a ~80% higher frame rate in nearly all games - all the time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Katzenschleuder

Unfortunately Core i7 IS as step back in performance for quite a list of games.

---

only the 920 @ stock is a step back and only by a tiny bit over a 3.2 ghz core2quad

The ones switchin right after realease are always the ones paying an-arm-or-leg for hardware. In six months the prices of memory and motherboards will come down, so if you can wait - wait. If you cant - pay :) Its always the same...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anubis

The ones switchin right after realease are always the ones paying an-arm-or-leg for hardware. In six months the prices of memory and motherboards will come down, so if you can wait - wait. If you cant - pay :) Its always the same...

---

the only problem with that is that the only motherboards that any of us here are interested in are the very expensive x58, I dont think they will decrease in porice very much, $100 tops... there will be no budget p55 thats a beast for overclocking :\

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Katzenschleuder

So you are paying over a thousand dollars just to not wait a few minutes on a video encoding process to finish once a month?

I rather invest into another GPU, so I will have a ~80% higher frame rate in nearly all games - all the time.

---

I dont think im EVER gonna pay 1000$ for HW. If i buy a new CPU/MoBo/RAM in 6 months I wont pay more than 600$ for it.

And you can always get used HW for lot less $$$

And i dont game :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SNiiPE_DoGG

only the 920 @ stock is a step back and only by a tiny bit over a 3.2 ghz core2quad

---

Not that I can see.
Please read the review I have linked in my second post. You should focus on the minimum frame rate.
Even the fastest Core i7 is often slower than the E8600 at many games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Striph

blah blah blah, no reason not to buy an i7 today over any other cpu. blah blah blah.

---

They are overclock disabled based on how much power they are pulling 130Watts and the chip starts to throttle it self back "that was from Tom's FYI". This is why, NOT get it.

It trottle back only on intel mb ;)

Power Consumption gains are huge if you one use pc 24/7 on

http://www.lostcircuits.com/mambo//i...1&limitstart=8

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ghigo

Power Consumption gains are huge if you one use pc 24/7 on

http://www.lostcircuits.com/mambo//i...1&limitstart=8

---

This test can't be right.
These results greatly contradict all other tests as far as I can see.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Katzenschleuder

Unfortunately Core i7 IS as step back in performance for quite a list of games.

---

Can we please not misinform people ?
In real-life scenarios ( obviously no-one with a Core i7 will have such a pity-full graphics card and monitor to game at 1024x768 / 1280x1024 NoAA NoAF and with the game set at medium to low details ).
In real-life scenarios, like 1680x1050 2xAA 4xAF Full Details ( a mainstream resolution and detail settings for today's PCs and gamers ) there's no difference between a Core i7 and a Core 2 Duo/Quad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by truehighroller

They are overclock disabled based on how much power they are pulling 130Watts and the chip starts to throttle it self back "that was from Tom's FYI". This is why, NOT get it.

---

They're not overclocking disabled as you say.
Actually they overclock pretty well, even on air, even with the stock heatsink.
They do throttle when operating at 75C+... but you have to supply them with some crazy high Voltages and stock or even worse than stock cooling.

I like the I7 cpu's from what I've seen so far. I wasn't expecting much more gaming performance since s775 cpu's have no problem handling modern games.
I don't even think the CPU prices are bad, but I just don't like the expensive x58 boards. When conroe came on the market, I was one of the first to order one.
For me at that time there was no good motherboard I would have been pleased with, so I just bought a 50 euro Asrock board to hold out for a few months till the "real" motherboards came available (130 - 160 euro). We know there won't be cheaper chipsets for s1366, so screw this expensive BS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BenchZowner

In real-life scenarios, like 1680x1050 2xAA 4xAF Full Details ( a mainstream resolution and detail settings for today's PCs and gamers ) there's no difference between a Core i7 and a Core 2 Duo/Quad.

---

:mad:

P4 --> C2D was more nioticable here

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BenchZowner

Can we please not misinform people ?
In real-life scenarios ( obviously no-one with a Core i7 will have such a pity-full graphics card and monitor to game at 1024x768 / 1280x1024 NoAA NoAF and with the game set at medium to low details ).
In real-life scenarios, like 1680x1050 2xAA 4xAF Full Details ( a mainstream resolution and detail settings for today's PCs and gamers ) there's no difference between a Core i7 and a Core 2 Duo/Quad.

---

That is what I have actually said.
All I have said in addition to that is that Core i7 is also sometimes slower, which has been proven by tests.

That the performance differences with Core i7 do not matter with practical gaming is the whole point of my thread.

[QUOTE=

They're not overclocking disabled as you say.
Actually they overclock pretty well, even on air, even with the stock heatsink.
They do throttle when operating at 75C+... but you have to supply them with some crazy high Voltages and stock or even worse than stock cooling.[/QUOTE]



Sorry if I said that wrong. Tom's states that the chips them selves are hard wired,,,, to not go over 130Watts without throttling them selves back apparently, on the extreme chips you can change the limit to whatever you want but all other chips,, 130Watts.. It says nothing about on Intel Mother Boards only..

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...px?i=3448&p=19

looks like far cry 2, fallout 3, and age of connan like core i7 better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaredpace

:mad:

P4 --> C2D was more nioticable here

---

P4 sucked.
Back then we moved from a "suck" platform to a "monster" platform.
Now Intel goes from a "monster" platform to an even better platform.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wiggy McShades

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...px?i=3448&p=19

looks like far cry 2, fallout 3, and age of connan like core i7 better.

---

Do you play at 1024*768 medium quality NoAA or 1280*1024 medium quality noAA and would buy a Core i7 for that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wiggy McShades

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...px?i=3448&p=19

looks like far cry 2, fallout 3, and age of connan like core i7 better.

---

yah 8% - 10% better for 300% more ca$h :p:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Katzenschleuder

That is what I have actually said.
All I have said in addition to that is that Core i7 is also sometimes slower, which has been proven by tests.

That the performance differences with Core i7 do not matter with practical gaming is the whole point of my thread.

---

I agree, it looks like it's sometimes faster, sometimes slower, on average about the same. Given the cost of entry, it's probably not worth it if you only game. However, some of the early multi-gpu tests show better scaling on the new platform with both ATI and NVIDIA cards.

You might want to change the title of the thread from "most people" to "most gamers", which is a more accurate description of what this thread is about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaredpace

yah 8% - 10% better for 300% more ca$h :p:

---

well the core i7 cpu priced in the 300 range is outperforming a 1000+ core 2 quad, that doesn't seem like a terrible investment.

Its new so we like it :D

so yet again we are being ask to pay through the nose for this
we are talking about between $1200-$2000 for new kit
it is not that much beter than we allready have
i think that in 6 months it will be 25% less in cost
with this down turn we cant buy it at this price and they will be hard pressed to make the sales

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by loc.o

Its new so we like it :D

---

:clap::yepp:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaredpace

:mad:

P4 --> C2D was more nioticable here

---

Once upon a time... the processors were the limiting factor even in slightly GPU Limited scenarios due to some weaknesses of the processors and the chipsets.

But after the Athlon 64 and Core era, this is no longer a reality.

And of course, you're not comparing a "crappy" CPU against a brutal force CPU, you're comparing a very good CPU ( the Core 2's ) with a even better CPU ( enhanced if that's what you'd like to hear ).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Katzenschleuder

That the performance differences with Core i7 do not matter with practical gaming is the whole point of my thread.

---

Everybody, in or out of "the know" knew that already.
Only some die-hard "overclocking/CPU helps in every scenario" fans didn't ( or didn't want to believe that ).
The way games work and are coded, no CPU can make a difference now when compared to a Core 2 Duo/Quad.
Let's say that Intel releases a real Octa-Core Nehalem or Penryn if you like, operating at 20GHz.
Do you think that it'd make your computer's gaming performance any better in real-life gaming scenarios ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Katzenschleuder

That is what I have actually said.
All I have said in addition to that is that Core i7 is also sometimes slower, which has been proven by tests.

That the performance differences with Core i7 do not matter with practical gaming is the whole point of my thread.

---

Thats half true.

If you game with single GPU you may stick with Core2, but if you have a powerfull MultiGPU system, then core i7 is a must have.

The big issue here is the wattage cap on the non-extremes. Whether its just on Intel MBs, or it is on all MBs but just not on the test models - can't find a definitive answer.

Do you has a bank?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NBF

Thats half true.

If you game with single GPU you may stick with Core2, but if you have a powerfull MultiGPU system, then core i7 is a must have.

---

I (and most other people) didn't buy SLI because I want to get 100 FPS instead of 60 FPS, but because I can run 1980*1080 4*FSAA 16*AF at 60 FPS instead of 1980*1080 0*FSAA 0*AF at 60 FPS.

Core i7 simply does not improve game performance in practice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Katzenschleuder

I (and most other people) didn't buy SLI because I want to get 100 FPS instead of 60 FPS, but because I can run 1980*1080 4*FSAA 16*AF at 60 FPS instead of 1980*1080 0*FSAA 0*AF at 60 FPS.

Core i7 simply does not improve game performance in practice.

---

You are generalizing too much, there are games that cant be maxed with >30 min fps with just one card.

YOUR workloads may not benefit from Nehalen but there are many who does.

The nehalen sticky has many reviews showing big improvements in many games, the few who runs slower are the exceptions.

It has just released, so yes, it is expensive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flegg

The big issue here is the wattage cap on the non-extremes. Whether its just on Intel MBs, or it is on all MBs but just not on the test models - can't find a definitive answer.

---

That is one thing I want to know as well. Reading toms review, seems to imply "it is hardwired into cpu", but who knows if it takes a bios to support it/activate it or not.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...em,2057-7.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tonucci

You are generalizing too much, there are games that cant be maxed with >30 min fps with just one card.

YOUR workloads may not benefit from Nehalen but there are many who does.

The nehalen sticky has many reviews showing big improvements in many games, the few who runs slower are the exceptions.

---

I don't see your point.

Nearly all games run more than 30 FPS or even 60 FPS with Core2.
Everything beyond this frame rate simply doesn't matter because the GPU is the bottleneck.

I agree with you, Katzenschleuder! Core i7 are not good investment for games. Save Money for your next graphic card. I believe AMD will come out HD 5870 X2 soon.

Why did you title the thread "bad investment". All computer parts are a bad investment. You will never get an increase on your money, thus its a purchase. Just like a car, as soon as you drive off the lot you lose money. Computer parts are there for people to enjoy, so stop looking at it like its a home purchase. Computer parts are recreational spending for most people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by veedubfreak

Why did you title the thread "bad investment". All computer parts are a bad investment.

---

Agreed. Poor choice of words for the thread title, but a reasonable assesment of value of the new CPU to gamers...

Unless you're not making any money out of your PC, everything but a E2180, a cheap-a*s Asrock LGA775 board, a nVIDIA 8400GS, 2GB's of DDR2 value RAM, the cheapest 500GB HDD, a DVD+/-RW ( not Plextor :p: ), a Chieftec 350W PSU, a cheap computer case ( TA-8x entry level cases from Asus for example ), a M$ OEM Mouse & Keyboard set, is a bad investment.

Computers aren't investments, unless you're using them for your work ( and make money from ).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sdsdv10

a reasonable assesment of value of the new CPU to gamers...

---

:up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BenchZowner

Unless you're not making any money out of your PC, everything but a E2180, a cheap-a*s Asrock LGA775 board, a nVIDIA 8400GS, 2GB's of DDR2 value RAM, the cheapest 500GB HDD, a DVD+/-RW ( not Plextor :p: ), a Chieftec 350W PSU, a cheap computer case ( TA-8x entry level cases from Asus for example ), a M$ OEM Mouse & Keyboard set, is a bad investment.

Computers aren't investments, unless you're using them for your work ( and make money from ).

---

hahaha......that is the sad truth about it all too.:ROTF:

Well said:up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by veedubfreak

Why did you title the thread "bad investment". All computer parts are a bad investment. You will never get an increase on your money, thus its a purchase. Just like a car, as soon as you drive off the lot you lose money. Computer parts are there for people to enjoy, so stop looking at it like its a home purchase. Computer parts are recreational spending for most people.

---

I think that's a very over-simplified view on things...

There are plenty of students(like myself) and other people with low income, who can't afford nothing but low-end or used parts for their rig.

So for example, purchasing an 6-series Core 2 was a great investment if you had a P4. Purchasing a Q6600 now is a great investment if you have Core 2 or lower.

Why?

Because chips like the first Core 2 and the Q6600 are great value, and will last you a long time, especially with the great overclocking in the picture.

So when you're forced to be very selective about your upgrades due to financial issues, purchasing a basically unsupported CPU at a horrible price/performance ratio probably isn't the best idea...

I will hang on to my 4GHZ quad till 32nm comes, then i will upgrade.

Isn't it all a bit to soon to judge like this... Intel is going into a new direction and things have to be adapted (way of OC'ing, new rams, maybe better implementation by game coders and programs,...)
Not everybody here's a gamer, I game too, but I fold, encode and bench for fun... and if I have to buy a new system, I7 could tempt me alot... but I'm awaiting some price drops on rams and hopefully mobo's... but 250 euro's for a high end mobo is doable to me...
This is a launch man, prices will settle ( hopefully we will get this financial crisis sorted as prices have gone mad here in Belgium, +30% on some hardware ) newer CPU's will appear, cheaper mobo's, better overclockability, etc...

I agree it could have been a revolution but it's more of an evolution , but give it time and the die hards will find the sweetspot(s) for sure...

And if you want to have the latest and the best, prepare to cash out : when core2 duo was launched not many could afford an E6600/6700 most users went for E6300 and E6400... and really for 300 bucks you get loads of power here... too bad it's DDR3 only...

I'm following GAR's motivation... with my current hardware I don't have anything to worry about and can easily wait till mid/end next year to step up... we are spoiled by so much powerfull hardware... thing is you have to ask a g33k to know what's best for your needs...

Why are people so hung up on gaming? That is not where the real money is so you can't always expect a new architecture to be tailored for gamers and show drastic improvements. We knew all this before the NDA lifted yet people are still shocked. If you have a Wolfdale or Penryn there is no point upgrading. It is that simple.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MomijiTMO

Why are people so hung up on gaming? That is not where the real money is so you can't always expect a new architecture to be tailored for gamers and show drastic improvements. We knew all this before the NDA lifted yet people are still shocked. If you have a Wolfdale or Penryn there is no point upgrading. It is that simple.

---

Amen. :p:

People are arguing for the sake of arguing and being shocked because they want to be.

I'm hung up on gaming because that's what I do, but I'm not shocked or arguing :p:

I seen this coming a mile away. There is only so much that you can achieve with how lazy coders are these days. Intel developed the fastest single threaded processor to date, now they are expanding into the multi threaded segment even more. Once 8+ core processors are available then the improvements of this architecture will start to show its face.

Quad vs Quad isnt where the difference is going to be noticed, its when you look at 8+ core chips then you will see it. Which would get bottlenecked sooner, (Theoretical) 12 core Peryn or a 12 Core Nehelam?

Its good/Its bad. Everyone happy now? :D This is XS and most of us build extreme systems regardless of price/performance ratios in search of the powa. Im sure a few new records are on the way real soon. It is a step forward.

Have any of you read Guru3D's SLi/xFire review. According to them Ci7 makes a whole heap of sense if you run more than two GPUs.

I have seen so many systems where multi GPU setups are castrated by a poor choice of processor or lack of OC. Then when we send out the system and it comes back for an OC or CPU upgrade.

Finally we have a platform that can do both SLi and xFire and show very good scaling with additional GPUs. So do Ci7 is not a disappointment for gamers, but is not necessary until multiple GTX280/4870 levels of performance are mainstream (6-12 months).

The thing is Guru managed to get a cpu limit from an 8400 @ stock @ <1920x1200 resolution. Let's see them try to find one on a Yorkfield @ 3.6+

for gamers, there needs to be multicore benefits, just how much is actually possible i dont know. a 4 or 8 core cpu will never be a larabee, but it's about cpu being a bottleneck isnt it?

when you know that sooner or later a cheaper better cpu will come along...or at least is only a fraction behind in performance...

just curious but does anyone have any info on the lga1066 socket stuff that's rumored to be released mid 09 ?
I may wait till there is a game that actually forces me to upgrade :/

Read a few reviews today, I think its plainly obvious whats going on. i7 is for multi threading, GPU's will take over shortly doing those computational tasks 10 to 100 times faster than the CPU's we have now.So as apps are ported more to multi thread i have a feeling multi thread CPU's will control individual GPU's as we all know GPU's are going 2 on die then 4 on die etc soon.

i7 is a good move forward, no FSB (thank god) good power saving and as good performance as what we have already...but its not p4 to core when you look at performance.

GPU is the way forward, Intel know this now, AMD know it and we all know Nvidia has been crowing about it for months.

Did Fugger ever get Pi32m running on Nv cards? i bet 32m runs sub 30 secs ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tony

Read a few reviews today, I think its plainly obvious whats going on. i7 is for multi threading, GPU's will take over shortly doing those computational tasks 10 to 100 times faster than the CPU's we have now.So as apps are ported more to multi thread i have a feeling multi thread CPU's will control individual GPU's as we all know GPU's are going 2 on die then 4 on die etc soon.

i7 is a good move forward, no FSB (thank god) good power saving and as good performance as what we have already...but its not p4 to core when you look at performance.

GPU is the way forward, Intel know this now, AMD know it and we all know Nvidia has been crowing about it for months.

Did Fugger ever get Pi32m running on Nv cards? i bet 32m runs sub 30 secs ;)

---

hi Tony;
I've been playing with the 965 for 2 weeks and there's definately some potential in there.
One of the things that jumped out at me was when I ran 2SMP installs of Folding at home on it.
The fastest machine doing that app over at the FAH team here is a Yorkie on water at 4000mhz..
He makes 3300 points a day/
The Nehalem at 3733 was pulling 4991 points a day.
No rhyme or reason for this as there isn't a benchmark involved, all based on how much time it takes and how much you can produce in a day.
The WU have an assigned value that everyone gets so it's just faster makes more points a day. I never expected to see that great an increase.

So, I went in @ Tom and then looked on the forums. Apparently, some random Intel employee said that there's a setting on the mobo to release the overclock limits ... I don't even know if it's actually "hardwired"

Anyway, here's the killer:

Intel's X58 + Multi-GPU = around 20 fps gain on like 1280x1024 ...

Source: guru3d

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tony

i7 is a good move forward, no FSB (thank god) good power saving and as good performance as what we have already...but its not p4 to core when you look at performance.
GPU is the way forward, Intel know this now, AMD know it and we all know Nvidia has been crowing about it for months.

---

Hit the nail on the head imo.
I was not expecting a huge performance increase from the i7 just a change in direction with the technology.
Future incarnations will most likely reap better performance but I doubt we will see another "P4 to core" performance jump until the GPU becomes the main processing unit.
Remember the original core was based off a already known architecture.
Future improvements are from the unknown and so I would have to assume the improvements will be incremental as well.

I'm still on my E6600 and see no need to upgrade still (Gamer).
2-3 year old hardware (can't remember now) still going strong and performance difference is little once the machine is over clocked (Gaming).

Now that was a good investment.

How do all you people get these chips sent to you?? I want some chips darn it. I have just as much pottential as any over clocker here except the rich ones :p:

Well many things come to mind after reading the "official" results, that we here have known for weeks were going to add up to what we are seeing today.

• The mobile sector is still an area where bandwidth starvation hurts cpu performance. Nehalem "may" show more gains when it comes to that arena, because of the differential to current chips.
• 32nm chips are likely to up the L2 cache. This cache is still important, just there was a budget on what could be built at what cost and L2 lost to the other priorities.
• I look at my first gen Conroe and still find it a bit hard to consider I7. I didn't think this would be the case, but it is. That now "old" Conroe still does a good job.
• I don't think the I7 makes sense for those with 3+ghz quads now. But those of you who have these cpu's have a practically brand new cpu. Were you honestly expecting a huge jump?
• I'm not sure yet, but the I7 EE version may well hit a better price point than the 9770. I suspect the I7 is cheaper to produce, but that's a guess.
• 32nm may well just bring more cores and not any more speed. Bear that in mind if you, like me, are considering just "making do" with what you have now till those chips come.

So those who are arguing that it's not really a "move up" from a Core 2 quad were destined to be dissappointed. Intel classically offers a 15% improvement on new chips over old (meaning new designs) and we were all spoiled by the Core 2. But that was because we grew to hate the P4. Intel beat the 15% in some applications, and the bulk of the applications affected are forward thinking ones, that use multiple cores or treat memory bandwidth like it grew on trees, which now it does. Tomorrow's apps aren't going to give a hoot as to their memory footprint. Need more memory? Buy higher density chips. 12gb on a home desktop is great and insane at the same time :) Need more bandwidth to that memory? Well I7 is for you.

Fact is a current Core 2 quad is plenty! Run it at 4ghz and it is ginormously plenty. That should make current owners proud! That's not a reason to naysay the I7. It is a reason to be happy that Intel has already made you a happy owner. Users of older dual core chips or, hopefully not, P4's can well consider the I7. I certainly don't think that a high end Core 2 Quad is a better "new purchase" than a I7 at this point, given similar pricing. I7 is what software will make use of in the future.

Quick question... I keep seeing people saying "Ill just wait for 8 cores"... will there even be an improvement between that and lets say, the current quads?

From PD to C2d to C2Q, from 2005 to 2009 and that's 4 years of improvement.
Now Nehalem is starting on a new ground and a new journey into something that's worth considering, innovation.
Pricing is of course but ex. in the 1st place with newer technology and New research will gains ground. :clap:
To buy is one thing, affordability is an issue to some. Be happy with what you have, or wait for reasonable amount of time to be affordable to move on.
Is a never ending pursuit to buy newer technology, a much have for some...new toys to play with, itchy hands to ground their urge for higher ground with new world record to chase. Or simply hardware enthusiast.
Buy with Budget in mind.:p:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flesheatinvirus

Its good/Its bad. Everyone happy now? :D This is XS and most of us build extreme systems regardless of price/performance ratios in search of the powa. Im sure a few new records are on the way real soon. It is a step forward.

---

I could not say it better myself , i completely agree with you :D this is XS,not Gamers Hell lol

since when were the ppl at XS buying hardware as an INVESTMENT? :shrug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Katzenschleuder

With the benchmark results now available, it becomes -yet again- evident that the CPU performance that is relevant to most end users is struggling to increase to justify the price.

That Core i7 delivers significant performance gains for work loads which can be efficiently multi-threaded is of course something significant.
But are end users really benefiting of this?

I highly doubt that most people encode video/music or compress gigantic archives in a frequent manner and I doubt that you really do care if it takes 10 or 15 minutes to do this once a week.

What most end users care about in the high-end market is performance in games.
Nearly all games available on the market do not show any relevant performance gain by Core i7 at typical real life settings.
It is no news that the GPU is by far the most significant bottleneck for games.

Buying a new Core i7 system would cost you a huge pile of money.
Most people would see a much greater performance if this money is being spend into an additional GPU and/or a fast SSD instead.


Yes, this is no groundbreaking new finding, but I just thought that it is worthy to discuss about.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by guru3d.com

You could also look at this processor as a good investment for future (much faster) graphics cards.

---

http://www.guru3d.com/article/core-i...ance-review/19

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

hi Tony;
I've been playing with the 965 for 2 weeks and there's definately some potential in there.
One of the things that jumped out at me was when I ran 2SMP installs of Folding at home on it.
The fastest machine doing that app over at the FAH team here is a Yorkie on water at 4000mhz..
He makes 3300 points a day/
The Nehalem at 3733 was pulling 4991 points a day.
No rhyme or reason for this as there isn't a benchmark involved, all based on how much time it takes and how much you can produce in a day.
The WU have an assigned value that everyone gets so it's just faster makes more points a day. I never expected to see that great an increase.

---

what you need to do now is run FAH on GPU and compare again, I have a feeling you will see another huge jump in performance.

Overall im loving what i7 is bringing to the table, I do now feel co processor/GPU is the way forward now though.
Just look at the gains in speed people have reported running apps on NV cards over the past 6 months, some are just incredible overall.

Do not get me wrong here...we need fast CPU's,but I feel the power of the GPU has not been fully tapped into yet.

Where do all you people get these samples?? How do I sign up?? I want samples.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aldy402

since when were the ppl at XS buying hardware as an INVESTMENT? :shrug:

---

Never :), we buy it because we want push it to limits and force nuclear power plants to over limits just because we are power hungry.

Anyway ill buy i7 920 Nehalem and 32nm Nehalem when it comes out, if you think nehalem as bad investment then you shouldnt be in here at XtremeSystems.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by truehighroller

Where do all you people get these samples?? How do I sign up?? I want samples.

---

I wish i would know.

If the software could only catch-up with the hardware, you'll see what a performance horse nehalem really is; the imc alone is a major improvement. I say take a look at hwbot a month from now and you'll see how efficient the enhanced architecture is; I think this thread is a bit premature, and ironically rather points to the strength of the newer chips since they're doing better against the older chips in many categories. As for performance/price, its a no-brainer, wait a year and upgrade.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by truehighroller

Where do all you people get these samples?? How do I sign up?? I want samples.

---

It takes a lot of projects (successful projects), getting your name out there, setting a few records; that's all before you even get discounts. It still takes quite awhile after that before you're looking at early freebies.

As to the whole i7 debate we've got raging around here... since when has new hardware not been expensive (and since when have people not whined about it? :rolleyes:) like a top-level virgin concubine?

The point is most of us are in this for the hardware, for the power, and for of course pushing said hardware to its earthly limits. If you're not turned on by a quicker SuperPi time, or a massive crunch, then what are you doing here? :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BiTsCrEaM

It takes a lot of projects (successful projects), getting your name out there, setting a few records; that's all before you even get discounts. It still takes quite awhile after that before you're looking at early freebies. :)

---

Thank you that's what I was wondering. By projects what do you mean? Sorry, and thank you so very much for answering me. :up:.

Projects as in buying new hardware and tweaking/OCing the hell out of it, maybe phase change/LN2, distributing your results.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BiTsCrEaM

Projects as in buying new hardware and tweaking/OCing the hell out of it, maybe phase change/LN2, distributing your results.

---

Thanks :up:. I will begin working towards building a Phase change then. I have been wanting to get some recognition for a little while now. I just wasn't sure how to go about doing it.

Well now just to be clear I'm not saying just setting up phase change is going to bring recognition; it was an example of how you want to consistently push barriers with new hardware.

That being said: go for it!

To get freebies, essentially you have to already be rich enough to blow stupid amounts of money overclocking on ln2 and buying extreme parts. So when the new stuff comes out you already have enough money to buy it anyway, but instead get it free. Its one of those catch 22's. If you can afford to get free stuff, you dont really need it for free. If you cant afford it, well you wont get it. Sucks having to slum it.

First, Sorry OP I don't want to jack your thread.
Good thread :up:

@BiTsCrEaM

Right, I understand. I have been wanting to build a phase any way though so, the time is right for me to act upon it I guess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by veedubfreak

To get freebies, essentially you have to already be rich enough to blow stupid amounts of money overclocking on ln2 and buying extreme parts. So when the new stuff comes out you already have enough money to buy it anyway, but instead get it free. Its one of those catch 22's. If you can afford to get free stuff, you dont really need it for free. If you cant afford it, well you wont get it. Sucks having to slum it.

---

I don't have all the money in the world that is for sure. Atleast not yet, :hehe:.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by truehighroller

Where do all you people get these samples?? How do I sign up?? I want samples.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BiTsCrEaM

It takes a lot of projects (successful projects), getting your name out there, setting a few records; that's all before you even get discounts. It still takes quite awhile after that before you're looking at early freebies.

As to the whole i7 debate we've got raging around here... since when has new hardware not been expensive (and since when have people not whined about it? :rolleyes:) like a top-level virgin concubine?

The point is most of us are in this for the hardware, for the power, and for of course pushing said hardware to its earthly limits. If you're not turned on by a quicker SuperPi time, or a massive crunch, then what are you doing here? :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by truehighroller

Thank you that's what I was wondering. By projects what do you mean? Sorry, and thank you so very much for answering me. :up:.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BiTsCrEaM

Projects as in buying new hardware and tweaking/OCing the hell out of it, maybe phase change/LN2, distributing your results.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by truehighroller

Thanks :up:. I will begin working towards building a Phase change then. I have been wanting to get some recognition for a little while now. I just wasn't sure how to go about doing it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BiTsCrEaM

Well now just to be clear I'm not saying just setting up phase change is going to bring recognition; it was an example of how you want to consistently push barriers with new hardware.

That being said: go for it!

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by veedubfreak

To get freebies, essentially you have to already be rich enough to blow stupid amounts of money overclocking on ln2 and buying extreme parts. So when the new stuff comes out you already have enough money to buy it anyway, but instead get it free. Its one of those catch 22's. If you can afford to get free stuff, you dont really need it for free. If you cant afford it, well you wont get it. Sucks having to slum it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by truehighroller

First, Sorry OP I don't want to jack your thread.
Good thread :up:

@BiTsCrEaM

Right, I understand. I have been wanting to build a phase any way though so, the time is right for me to act upon it I guess.





I don't have all the money in the world that is for sure. Atleast not yet, :hehe:.

---

This thing has been discussed in the past already.
If you want to keep this kind of conversation going, then go ahead and read and post in the appropriate thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BenchZowner

This thing has been discussed in the past already.
If you want to keep this kind of conversation going, then go ahead and read and post in the appropriate thread

---

Thank you sir,

it comes down to this.

you get i7 either because you do need it, (DC computing), computers is a hobby (90% of all of us reading this forum), or you just like bleeding edge (HC Gamer).

The guys that are complaining are the ones who:

1. Cant afford it in some way.
2. Dont want other people on it because they cant afford it
3. view it as financial sucidie <well to others, its cheaper then 1 month going out>
4. Dont want others to ruin there little utopia in inferior technology.

Any computer right now, yorkfield, wolfdale class, is already overkill.

I dont have i7, However i have Gainestown.
So bite me. :rofl:

Well Im not into i7 side because the performance gain is not worth it (for me), but I dont say "it sucks".
Maybe for somebody stepping up from an Pentium D, Allendale, first conroes etc

i7 is definitely a step forward. I don't think there is much to argue about there. It may not be a compelling upgrade for gamers already on current hardware, but for anyone looking for something new it should be considered.

Core i7 isnt as revolutionary as Intel have been spouting for months, but luckily the price will now fall on the QX9770 and for 5% less perf than the i7 Extreme its a bargain!

Ya, i'm still sitting on a 1 year old q6600, so i'm looking forward to the new chips. Especially that i can get an evga board without the hassle of nvidia chipsets and the improvements that x58 is bringing to SLI.

Quote:

---

4. Dont want others to ruin there little utopia in inferior technology.

---

:lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by veedubfreak

Ya, i'm still sitting on a 1 year old q6600, so i'm looking forward to the new chips. Especially that i can get an evga board without the hassle of nvidia chipsets and the improvements that x58 is bringing to SLI.

---

Guessing the 66 isn't a gold chip then? :p:

This new chip seems to like Folding as well.:)

Couldn't agree more. The thread title is really not appropriate.

And, BTW, what you consider a bad investment, may be an excellent investment for other people.
If for example you work with 3D rendering, I'm sure Core i7 is an excellent investment.
Are you into Folding (like me)? From what I've been reading this CPU's are monsters!

Last Thursday I attended an ICC (Intel Channel Conference) and saw live a comparison between a QX9770 based system and a Core i7 965 one.
Both run at the same clock (3.2GHz) but the Core i7 has less cache.
It kicked the QX9770 in the ass! :D
Cinebench 10 showed a significant difference between both platforms.
4 cores + hyperthreading definitely will be useful for some types of computing.
Of course that GPU's are still a bottleneck, but with this platform allowing for nVIDIA and ATI multi-GPU scaling, I predict a good future for Nehalem.

Early adopters will obviously pay the premium price, and IMO if they have the money to do it, why not?
Don't forget that this "elite" will push for more motherboards and memory to be released, bug corrections, experiences, improvements, revisions, etc.

I personally will wait for applications to be optimized for this new platform, and for motherboard manufacturers to get more experienced.
If I was to buy one as soon as it's available, I would buy Intel's DX58SO motherboard as it seems not to have some design and thermal issues that other brands/models are experiencing.
Well, Intel developed the CPU and the chipset... shouldn't they know what they're doing? :p:

Core i7 will sooner or later (probably later) do to Core 2, what Core 2 did to Pentium 4/D, etc.
Intel is definitely not sleeping anymore.
They admitted that Pentium 4 lasted way to long... now that they're leading (with a huge margin) I don't believe that they want to throw their leadership away.

Sorry for all this blah. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by veedubfreak

Why did you title the thread "bad investment". All computer parts are a bad investment. You will never get an increase on your money, thus its a purchase. Just like a car, as soon as you drive off the lot you lose money. Computer parts are there for people to enjoy, so stop looking at it like its a home purchase. Computer parts are recreational spending for most people.

---

This is very strange. So if the highest end i7 CPUs are about the same performance(in games) as current CPUs whats gonna happen when the socket 1160 CPUs come out.?? They would have to perform less than the socket 1366 CPUs right? Are gamers forced into the pricey highend just to game?

This will be very interesting.

i7 looks like a winner, but I'll be waiting for the Xeon variants...after using Skulltrail, going back to a single socket seems wrong...

What I'd really like is for someone like Supermicro or Tyan to do a good workstationy Beckton...that has at least one 16x PCI-E and an 8x for a RAID card.:yepp:

The specs on Beckton looks absolutely sick...8 cores, 24MB of L3...the only downside will be how much it's clocked down to accomodate the second die on the package. The socket is a fair bit larger than Nehalem, so hopefully this will permit larger heatsinks and allow the clocks to remain high, so hopefully they won't drop more than 1 Bin below the normal Quads.

32 cores in one system, with another 32 virtual cores....:slobber:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buggalugs

This is very strange. So if the highest end i7 CPUs are about the same performance(in games) as current CPUs whats gonna happen when the socket 1160 CPUs come out.?? They would have to perform less than the socket 1366 CPUs right? Are gamers forced into the pricey highend just to game?

This will be very interesting.

---

why should it run slower?

Games are not bandwidth starved, if there is a LGA 1160 proc that has 3ghz it will be on par with the 940.

Maybe even faster cause the pci-e controller is ondie and not on a chipset. :yepp:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hornet331

Maybe even faster cause the pci-e controller is ondie and not on a chipset. :yepp:

---

Only the MCH is in the die. The PCIe controller is still in the chipset. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brama

Only the MCH is in the die. The PCIe controller is still in the chipset. ;)

---

He's talking about Lynnfield.
Lynnfield will have a embedded PCI-Express controller.

looks like a nice step forward for me
i'll jus wait till price drop alil

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NaeKuh

The guys that are complaining are the ones who:

1. Cant afford it in some way.
2. Dont want other people on it because they cant afford it
3. view it as financial sucidie <well to others, its cheaper then 1 month going out>
4. Dont want others to ruin there little utopia in inferior technology.

Any computer right now, yorkfield, wolfdale class, is already overkill.

I dont have i7, However i have Gainestown.
So bite me. :rofl:

---

Haha best post in the thread! Especially the bold bit had me laughing :D
Well said, mate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BiTsCrEaM

Guessing the 66 isn't a gold chip then? :p:

---

Not sure what you mean here. But a 1.2vid q6600 capable of 4ghz is pretty close to gold :)

Since when are CPU's investments? Where can I buy one of these suckers.

waist of money just look ak 3 way sli sli review and cfx jump from 50 fps to 80 90 fps at the biggest resolution come on
if the fps was low maybe but the test is with an e8400 not overclocked lol
i dont know a lot of pepps that got cf or sli and dont oc lol
http://www.guru3d.com/article/core-i...rmance-review/

I like the platform, but since i have a 4.12ghz q9550 right now, i wont be upgrading till 32nm comes out next year, by then more board will be out, better bios's etc.... plus i am a gamer and i7 right now gives me no benefit.