Intel i5 6XX and i3 5XX Reviews

**flippin_waffles** · 01-04-2010, 12:02 AM

Originally Posted by ajaidev

Based on several reviews:-

Performance
Intel Core i5-660 + P55 "$196 + $85" ~ Athlon II 630 + 785 "$113 + $80"

Total $281 vs $193
Difference = $88

Gaming "Discreet"
Intel Core i5-660 + P55 "$196 + $100" ~ Phenom II X4 955 C0 + 785 "$175 + $90"

Total $296 vs $265
Difference = $31

Yeah, pretty underwhelming. More lower performing parts for higher price from intel here. But hey, don't let that stop ya folks! lol I must say though, i'm a little surprised by the igp, performs better than I thought it would. It's the other part of the MCM that is the underperforming/overpriced part IMO.

**Razzz** · 01-04-2010, 12:15 AM

Works best with Firefox!
http://translate.google.com/translat...n&tl=sv&swap=1

From 16x190 up to 25x190 frequency.
QPI scaling
iGPI Scaling
and so on...

**ajaidev** · 01-04-2010, 12:28 AM

Originally Posted by flippin_waffles

Yeah, pretty underwhelming. More lower performing parts for higher price from intel here. But hey, don't let that stop ya folks! lol I must say though, i'm a little surprised by the igp, performs better than I thought it would. It's the other part of the MCM that is the underperforming/overpriced part IMO.

Ya but still Intel Pentium G9650 seems like a good deal.

Intel Pentium G9650 + cheapo P55 "$87 + $85" - $172

Alternatively the i5 750 is a better choice instead of dual core i5's

i5 750 + P55 "$195 + $100" - $295

The only AMD alternative in performance is Athlon II 620 + 785 E51 Which would cost around $180. But getting a quad instead of a dual core i3 without HT would perform quite well.

But in games "discreet" the 620 would not be able to keep up at higher freq.

Originally Posted by dartaz

1- Core i5 660 performs better than Athlon X4 630, you should put Core i3 530 instead of 660 for Performance

2- As far as I know, you need H55 or H57 to use the Integrated GPU. At the moment we don't know the prices of these motherboards.

Recheck the real world benches !!

I wrote Discreet there...

Originally Posted by kl0012

Not to mention dual-stream decode and Dolby TrueHD and DTS HD-MA bitstreaming over HDMI which 790gx simple miss.

Yep the dual-stream decode and and Dolby TrueHD and DTS HD-MA is very useful, specially the Dolby TrueHD and DTS HD-MA. The only way AMD can get in the same boat is by using a ATi 5 series low end card.

**dartaz** · 01-04-2010, 01:47 AM

Originally Posted by ajaidev

Recheck the real world benches !!

I wrote Discreet there...

For same prince of i5 660 you can get i5 750

I don't see the point of i5 6xx unless you want to use Intel GPU

**ajaidev** · 01-04-2010, 02:03 AM

Originally Posted by dartaz

Why are you linking games, Athlon II cant do good in them u need a juicy L3 for that.

Other than that Microsoft Excel always favors Intel, Sonar is single threaded. The Benchs that matter from all those you have posted are:

http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/c...5346/21153.png
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/c...5346/21133.png
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/c...5346/21167.png
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/c...5346/21162.png

Now see the post i made above

**Razzz** · 01-04-2010, 02:13 AM

Originally Posted by flippin_waffles

Yeah, the higher frequency will def help in older games.

As far as these reviews go, it seems the majority of these so called journalists lack any sort of intergrity whatsoever. Now they premise their articles and base their conlcusions on core count. lol How bloody ridiculous is that. It's a great product because it tries to compete with only 2 cores. Well news flash, that's the way intel designed their architecture. The part that means absolutely anything is the price point they are targeting, and that puts them in the league of pretty high end quad cores, so no it's not cmpetitive in the least whether it's 1,2, 40, or 599 cores.

Do we compare graphics cards on the basis of cores? The 5870 blows donkey balls because it uses 1600 cores? I mean, why not just get intel to write the reviews for ya? I LOL

Not ours

"Core i5 661 is a very nice combination of CPU and GPU. Unfortunately, the price of 2000SEK unacceptably high in relation to performance. We see no reason to buy this CPU as long as the price is up there, then we can look for a Core i5 750 processor with a graphics card for the same money. With that combination, you get four cores instead of two, better band width, indeed an overall better system simply. A Core i5 is in the disk of moment of 1800SEK and for additional 300SEK you get a passive video card. The price of this package is then 100kr more expensive than buying Core i5 661 but you get the right considerably much better performance, which justifies the purchase. A bit more attractive price for the Core i5 661 was the price tag had been a bit under the Core in i5 750"
google translated...

The QPI scales really well:
http://www.techsweden.org/bilder/mxUt/s/qpi-oc.png
Skriv: Write
Läs: Read
Kopiera: Copy

**dartaz** · 01-11-2010, 12:33 AM

Originally Posted by ajaidev

Why are you linking games, Athlon II cant do good in them u need a juicy L3 for that.

Because there are way much more that play games than people who use 3d rendering

Other than that Microsoft Excel always favors Intel, Sonar is single threaded. The Benchs that matter from all those you have posted are:

http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/c...5346/21153.png
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/c...5346/21133.png
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/c...5346/21167.png
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/c...5346/21162.png

Good

Not to mention that Core i3 consume less power and have much Bitlocker Performance because of the new AES instruction, which I didn't mention

Now see the post i made above

1- the 7-zip bechmarks you posted is a not real world benchmark
In real world Core i3 530 outperformed Athlon X4 630 in 7-zip
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/c...5346/21133.png

2- Not many people do 3d rendering

3- In video encoding, the Athlon X4 630 performed better. Video encoding might be important, but personally I would rather have better gaming and winrar performance than better video encoding.

And sorry for my late respond

Thread: Intel i5 6XX and i3 5XX Reviews

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Rate This Thread

Display

Hybrid View

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions