Stepped up the FSB again today.
Getting close to the 3.8GHz goal.
However, they are going to release the new i5’s soon. Which will be quite a bit cheaper than the i7’s.
And the new i7s. Which will both use the 1156 socket rather than 1366.
Needs moar vcore.
If it doesn’t crash why add vcore?
You always need moar vcore.
ALWAYS.
Back in my day we overclocked processors that needed 2.5V just to boot up. And it was uphill both ways! /oldmanrant
Old Dothan overclocking fun.
I’m going to shoot for a P55mobo. Word is those Corei5s may match current i7 performance, or even surpass. Only drawback is no triple channel support.
So do i7’s have multiple cores, or are they just using really high clock speeds?
i7’s are quad core but they also have hyperthreading. This gives gives them 2 threads per core, basically giving you 8 threads. The i5’s won’t have hyperthreading so they won’t be much different from the current core2quads.
They will have a totally different architecture, and have an integrated memory controller. That is pretty damned different. No more cooling the northbridge for overclocking because there won’t be a northbridge anymore either.
Alright, so if I were to build a computer that’ll lost me a long time, an i7 would be a good choice? Under the assumption that price is no object.
If price is no object, yes, go for the fastest one available, except the highest priced one I found was around $1500 CAD or $2000.
Timing isn’t great right now, but they are fairly good. However performance per dollar is lacking in the i7s right now. The Phenom II 965 black is going to be priced around 250bucks, and from performance comparison is about on par or better than the 920, or the 940 from intel ( depending on the task ) . However, price of the 940 being what it is…well, lets just say it’s not 250bucks. In real life you probably will not notice any difference really. The only thing really real world differing is winzip, and nero encoding. You MAY notice slightly better performance from an i7 if you do a lot of photoshop work. But for general tasks and video encoding AMD has better performance per dollar. That will change quite shortly though…
There’s no reason to buy anything more than the 920 (2.66 ghz stock), it costs ~ $290. As the stock clocks increase, the price increases practically exponentially. The higher end models do add unlocked stuff in the bios, but that doesn’t justify the $999 you’d put down for it. Especially when you can get an average 920 to 3.5ghz on air cooling with almost no effort.
I’d go for a 920. Unless price really aint an issue. [And you feel like blowing your money] Then the 965 would be your choice.
If you overclock it a bit [Cooler’s 50 euros], you can easily pump it up from 2,66 to 3,8/4. I’ve even seen people with 920’s at 4,5ghz.
Even if you only oc it to 3,8, which even a noob like me managed, it’s still faster than a 200 dollars more expensive 940.
I wasn’t looking at the $1,000 one that’s clocked at 3.30 ghz or so. I’m looking at the 2.66 like many have suggested. I don’t really have a preference between AMD and Intel, I’ve just used Intel more often than AMD.
Like max was saying before, don’t buy it yet, it’s still new and damn expensive.
I’m not going to for a few months, it’s just something I’ve been looking at lately, 'cause I want a computer that’s gonna last me a while.
A good and fast quad core will last you a while, and it’s less expensive then an i7 right now. I’m going to pick one up in the next month, and I expect it to last me a few years.
Core i5 was just spotted with a P55 mobo in stores, so it definitely won’t be long until we start seeing what they do, and how they effect Corei7 prices.