The great processor and chipset discussion thread

[anant_xinix]

Before I start My Post I would like to say that in no way am I a supporter or fanboy of Intel . I like AMD a lot. For example my daddy is going to buy 6 PCS out of them 5 would be AMD based machine and the one left will be i7. And currently I have two laptops both based on AMD.

The i7 machine is for my elder brother. He is also doing B tech(Computer Science) and has just gone into his 3rd year. He also wants it for the same work as mentioned by "sheroanjs24".

Now as for your suggestions I have a few question:-

i7 are the only ones there which are not beaten up yet but prices for 1333mhz cl9 rams is just not worth it. Anyways I given the config except the rams on the above post.
Just as an FYI- many reported i7's temperatures upto 56 degrees on load itself @ stock settings even with thermalright 120extreme+ tuniq tx2 thermal paste.

What about if someone like me was able to get a 4GB OCZ 1600MHZ (5-5-5 latencies) for 2.5k(from US).

Its true that i7 has no competition in performance.
But it offers no performance increase in gaming. i7 doesn't help much in gaming. If your technical knowledge according to you is really infact 6~8, then you should be aware of this fact. For all other purposes you have mentioned, true than nothing will beat i7 920...yet!

I think he was aware of the fact. But what u didnt pay attention to was that he has qouted in his first post that he would be using it more for CPU intensive applications. And why is it that you all directly start linking a processors cabability to its gaming performance. After all being so knowledgeable u should know that CPU doesnt play the most important role in gaming, its the GPU. As for the applications he mentioned i7 920 outshines every other AMD offerings. As for the "YET!" part there is always going to be a better performing proc in the future. So what does that mean that we shouldnt by anything at all?????!!!!!!!

Besides i7 920 OCed consume around 300w on load alone. But pretty suprised a B tech student made that comment however.

Well the proc consumes 300W because it gives the maximum performance(excluding higher priced i7). And u are saying that AMD are power efficient. But do they even get close to perform as well as i7(check this link again http://www.cpubenchmark.net/common_cpus.html ) . Performance and Power are directly related(BTW they can never be indirectly related :lol: ).Also like u said "if u cant buy a equally good PSU then dont buy an equally good system" :P . For the heat issues everybody knows that more the power consumed more the heat generated. Also how many ppl OC their system. Even though I will myself be buying AMD BE processors. I may never OC them. coz it is a very risky process for ppl with less info abt bios and other things.Though software OC is relatively easier.
BTW what comment were u reffering to?
Maybe the power problem will only be solved when the basic design of the chips will change like this one :- viewtopic.php?f=5&t=39906&start=930

Step down from i7, & your sentence that i have quoted, fails miserably. Its a fact. Whether you like it or not, it is still a fact.
Its not than AMD is cheaper than intel counterparts. Its about performance-per-buck. Its about value-for-money.

You also forget performance-per-buck as well.

What performance are u talking about? Performance per buck factor comes into play only when another product has equal performance and comes at less price. But are there any similar performing products from AMD to consider from? The only close anything can get are the C2D's extreme. Which have almost zero Performance-per-buck now. Dont pull out the gaming card again coz even if there is a lag in performance it might be about 7-9fps which hardly any eyes can notice. Leave that beyond 40 fps nothing much difference can be seen.And why are you all disregarding it in terms of gaming. Is it so slow that even if paired with a good GPU it produces jerky frame rates???? Also the games are performing badly even on C2Ds coz they are not yet optimised for more than 2 cores.

@Sorcerer

If you are reffering to that post made by sheroanjs24 where he said that AMD generate more heat. Then that misconception may have arrived due to the fact that AMD based Laptops generate a lot of heat and are generally much hotter than their Intel counterparts. Both of my laptops touch 80-90C when on load. I dont know much about Intel in laptops though. And Since everyone in a college generally uses a laptop he might have thought that AMD has a heat problem. Even I had the same misconception before I joined this forum. Though its resolved now.

That'll be all from me. I didnt mean to be in anyway rude to you all. If i may have been rude I apologise for that :oops: .

BTW I still like AMD and seriously hope that they soon come up with something which can maul i7. Though wouldnt want something like that to come in the next 6 months coz i would have alread bought the i7 rig. :twisted:

[The Sorcerer]

^^ Let him go for intel i7 rig- where have I denied. I am not making this thread into intel vs amd. People have silly superstitions which need to be cleared out. By all means he can afford and he does need that much processing power. Or if its some guy who is only into gaming and just wants an i7 rig with ati 4850 card then he will be seriously question about his theory.

Well the proc consumes 300W because it gives the maximum performance(excluding higher priced i7).

Yeah that's what I said. But i5's platform will consume lesser power and give the same performance. On top of it the boards will cost much lesser. And by the time that comes to India, we should have acess to many rams, ICs, lower latencies. Prices wont fall that fast, but once there's lot of options prices eventually fall

What about if someone like me was able to get a 4GB OCZ 1600MHZ (5-5-5 latencies) for 2.5k(from US).

Its already mentioned on the 4th post. FYI You dont get cl5 latencies on ddr3.

What performance are u talking about? Performance per buck factor comes into play only when another product has equal performance and comes at less price.

So what you are trying to say spending Rs. 8000 on ddr3 1333mhz cl9 rams alone is justified? In that case, people like you who say this can go ahead and enjoy the theoratical boost over 1066mhz cl5. FYI- dont mix pricing behaviour of India with U.S.
Are we talking about desktops or laptops btw? Desktops right? So let's talk about desktops alone.

[erif]

If you are reffering to that post made by sheroanjs24 where he said that AMD generate more heat. Then that misconception may have arrived due to the fact that AMD based Laptops generate a lot of heat and are generally much hotter than their Intel counterparts. Both of my laptops touch 80-90C when on load. I dont know much about Intel in laptops though. And Since everyone in a college generally uses a laptop he might have thought that AMD has a heat problem. Even I had the same misconception before I joined this forum. Though its resolved now.

Laptops are a different thing - I/my dad never bought an Intel desktop CPU, and on the other hand, I/my dad never bought an amd based laptop.

What about if someone like me was able to get a 4GB OCZ 1600MHZ (5-5-5 latencies) for 2.5k(from US).

Where exactly? Give me link where 1600mhz 4GB DDR3 RAM with 5-5-5 latencies is being sold for an equivalent of 2.5K?

[imported_zoombas]

What about if someone like me was able to get a 4GB OCZ 1600MHZ (5-5-5 latencies) for 2.5k(from US).

lol!

what u didnt pay attention to was that he has qouted in his first post that he would be using it more for CPU intensive applications.

I did. I am a B.Tech engineer myself. I know the syllabus of engineering colleges.
No college till date offers anything so high that you need an i7 for it.

After all being so knowledgeable u should know that CPU doesnt play the most important role in gaming, its the GPU.

<sarcasm>Wow, you're a genius man. Thank you for enlightening me.</sarcasm>

As for the "YET!" part there is always going to be a better performing proc in the future. So what does that mean that we shouldnt by anything at all?????!!!!!!!

Easy on the exclamation mark genius. Even a single exclamation mark is also sufficient.

Well the proc consumes 300W because it gives the maximum performance(excluding higher priced i7). And u are saying that AMD are power efficient. But do they even get close to perform as well as i7(check this link again http://www.cpubenchmark.net/common_cpus.html ) . Performance and Power are directly related(BTW they can never be indirectly related :lol: ).Also like u said "if u cant buy a equally good PSU then dont buy an equally good system" :P . For the heat issues everybody knows that more the power consumed more the heat generated. Also how many ppl OC their system. Even though I will myself be buying AMD BE processors. I may never OC them. coz it is a very risky process for ppl with less info abt bios and other things.Though software OC is relatively easier.
BTW what comment were u reffering to?
Maybe the power problem will only be solved when the basic design of the chips will change like this one :- viewtopic.php?f=5&t=39906&start=930

Another lol!

What performance are u talking about? Performance per buck factor comes into play only when another product has equal performance and comes at less price. But are there any similar performing products from AMD to consider from? The only close anything can get are the C2D's extreme. Which have almost zero Performance-per-buck now. Dont pull out the gaming card again coz even if there is a lag in performance it might be about 7-9fps which hardly any eyes can notice. Leave that beyond 40 fps nothing much difference can be seen.And why are you all disregarding it in terms of gaming. Is it so slow that even if paired with a good GPU it produces jerky frame rates???? Also the games are performing badly even on C2Ds coz they are not yet optimised for more than 2 cores.

@Sorcerer

If you are reffering to that post made by sheroanjs24 where he said that AMD generate more heat. Then that misconception may have arrived due to the fact that AMD based Laptops generate a lot of heat and are generally much hotter than their Intel counterparts. Both of my laptops touch 80-90C when on load. I dont know much about Intel in laptops though. And Since everyone in a college generally uses a laptop he might have thought that AMD has a heat problem. Even I had the same misconception before I joined this forum. Though its resolved now.

That'll be all from me.

Thank god. I was growing tired of reading your stupid post.
BTW, its not C2D extreme genius, its the C2Q extremes that are close to i7.
AMD doesn't need to come up with something equally good as the i7 to maul the i7.
They're doing it in their own fashion, slow & steady.

Performance-per-buck is a term that you have NO IDEA of. I thought differently of you before i read this bafoonery.

[coolpcguy]

No college till date offers anything so high that you need an i7 for it.

correction: no college offers anything so high that even a Pentium 4 would be taxed. Heck during my final sem, my project - was dealingwith artificial neural networks - we used Athlon 64's - and heck even that wasnt even stressed

[erif]

I did. I am a B.Tech engineer myself. I know the syllabus of engineering colleges.
No college till date offers anything so high that you need an i7 for it.

good one. :lol:

beleive me,you are a AMD boy.i don't know why,but may be coz you have a AMD rig.have you?

Well, he upgraded his Q6600 to 940 BE, so.....

[The Sorcerer]

We seem be having lot of discussions about processors and GCs on threads where people ask for configurations. Some people are cool with everything whereas some people are fanboys. In any case its best if we have a neutral ground where people can have healthy discussions. I am pretty sure we are all civilised people so we have a healthy debate here and I am sure no matter how hot a debate comes, we will still have good line of friendship with each other rather than some people around the forums who have just crawled out of a cave since stone age. If one cant be civilised, his post will be reported and mods will take care of it as they have till now. For people who make stupid comments without any logical reasoning will be reported as well- provided one is proved that he is wrong on the thread itself. This way it will be easier for mods to taken a suitable action against the person who's intention is to troll/post pumping.
Remember, when you are making a point, make sure its with solid evidence and links from a proper source or with screenshots with your own benchmarks. This way it will easier for people to understand. FYI to people try to keep queries away from this thread. Queries are handled on pc build guide and price guide. Such posts will be reported so that we can have clean and unadulterated debate like civilised beings.

Let's keep queries out of the threads. Queries are handled in pc build guide and the price guide anyways, I dont see why we should use this thread for asking queries as well.

[rchi84]

ok. to kick things off: Is the Phenom 2 X3 720 processor a good buy @ 7.5 K? i mean should one rather buy a cheaper dual core (like the 550 BE) and OC it to near 4 Ghz which offers tremendous performance in most applications or spend a bit more and get a 920 or 940 processor which will offer better performance in specific applications like video editing, rendering and GTA 4?

[dvijaydev46]

ok. to kick things off: Is the Phenom 2 X3 720 processor a good buy @ 7.5 K? i mean should one rather buy a cheaper dual core (like the 550 BE) and OC it to near 4 Ghz which offers tremendous performance in most applications or spend a bit more and get a 920 or 940 processor which will offer better performance in specific applications like video editing, rendering and GTA 4?

That's really a good point indeed. But my question is while you can overclock a dual core near 4Ghz, you can also overclock a quad 940 upto 3.6 easily and with some hard work you should be able to hit 3.8Ghz. Will that 200Mhz make a big difference in gaming? I'm not sure. And we see more apps and games take advantage of extra cores these days and given that the price of quads fall and user adaption increases, what if near future games and apps are well optimised for multi-core processors -- wouldn't the quads be better?

[The Sorcerer]

AMD did dominate when ddr1 was around. Maybe when ddr3 will become affordable if they come up with something good. BTW, when AMD won the anti-competitiveness case, did intel give the money to amd or did they pay to the government for violating laws or something.