|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 |
|
Member (6 bit)
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 37
|
Which processor is "better"?
I'm debating about the new i5
Newegg.com - Intel Core i5-2500 Sandy Bridge 3.3GHz (3.7GHz Turbo Boost) 4 x 256KB L2 Cache 6MB L3 Cache LGA 1155 95W Quad-Core Desktop Processor BX80623I52500 and the AMD Phenom II x6 Newegg.com - AMD Phenom II X6 1100T Black Edition Thuban 3.3GHz, 3.7GHz Turbo 6 x 512KB L2 Cache 6MB L3 Cache Socket AM3 125W Six-Core Desktop Processor HDE00ZFBGRBOX Both are about the same price. I'm trying to build the best gaming computer I can for my buck, and will most likely be using a superclocked GTX 570 as my video card. If I went with the AMD processor, would I also get to go with a cheaper motherboard? Also, what are the major differences between processors if any? In any case, which processor would you guys recommend? |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Administrator
Staff
Premium Member
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Joplin MO
Posts: 37,766
|
Gaming? The i5. The 2 extra cores don't do anything for you in games. AMD processors are only better gamers than Intel in the lower price brackets.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Member (5 bit)
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 20
|
It's also worth noting that Tom's Hardware doesn't even recommend the non-K i5-2500 processor. If you are looking to maximize and not overclock, you can downgrade to the i5-2400 and save a few bucks to spend on your video card instead.
Best Gaming CPUs For The Money: March 2011 : March Updates I expect an update for April to come out shortly too, but I doubt the recommendations would be much different. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Member (6 bit)
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 37
|
I might just go with the i3 2120, it has the same clockspeed as the 15 2400.
Unless you guys think the extra 2 cores are worth another 40 dollars. Im using this pc for gaming, and i don't do video editing, so I don't see why I need 4 cores right now or in the near future. Maybe im wrong though and need enlightenment haha. What do you think? |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Administrator
Staff
Premium Member
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Joplin MO
Posts: 37,766
|
I'd stick with a quad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Member (9 bit)
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: from here to enternity
Posts: 398
|
I hardly think you need a quad core for gaming. Stick with a dual core and divest the savings into the most powerful gpu you can afford.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Techphile.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: San Francisco Bay
Posts: 5,959
|
You never mentioned an overall budget but if it is tight then go cheap on the processor and sink your money into the graphics card. For a gamer it's mostly about the graphics card.
__________________
Asus P8P67 WS Revolution | Intel 2600K @ 4.7 GHz | Win 7 Pro 64 |8 gigs Corsair 1600 | Two Diamond 6990's in Crossfire| Corsair AX1200 | Thermalright Silver Arrow | Western Digital Black 2TB 64 meg cache | Lian-Li PC-A71B | Logitec Z-5500 | Three Asus 26" VW266H monitors running under Eyefinity | |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Graham, TX
Posts: 600
|
If you can afford it get the i5, it actually makes a pretty sizable difference in modern games that can take advantage of more than 2 cores. The list of games that can use 4 cores is fairly large now and is only going to grow.
The Sandy Bridge Review: Intel Core i7-2600K, i5-2500K and Core i3-2100 Tested - AnandTech :: Your Source for Hardware Analysis and News Here is a short list I have found, it is however about a year old. List of Quad Core optimized games. ~ Grand Theft PC - The PC Gaming Blog
__________________
Case: Thermaltake V9 Blacx Motherboard: Intel DP55WB Processor: I7 875K OC 4.0ghz Cooler: Zerotherm Core92 Ram: Kingston 4gbx2 PSU: CUG-950B(oops) HDD: Intel X-25 40gb SSD, 2 Seagate 1tb drives |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Member (6 bit)
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 37
|
i5 it is then. I thought it was more about clock speed than number of cores, but I guess not.
My question then becomes, can I get away with getting the GTX 570 instead of the 580? This is going to be a heavy gaming computer, although I will only be using 1 monitor. I don't really have a budget, other than not wanting to pay for what I don't need. Like I saw the price for the GTX 590 and "it wasn't in my budget". The main games I am going to be playing for sure are Mass Effect 3, Elder Scrolls 5: Skyrim, and Shogun 2. Thanks again guys |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Graham, TX
Posts: 600
|
What resolution is your monitor? A gtx 570 will play any current game maxed out up to 1080. If you want to go higher than that resolution, or just want some extra headroom then a 580 will crush any game at 1080 except for metro 2033.
GeForce.com - Get the Most Out of Your GPU |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Member (6 bit)
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 37
|
I actually dont have a monitor yet, in fact the only component I have for the PC I will build is the mouse. What is the difference between:
1080p and these measurements (1680x1050, 1920x1200, 2560x1600)??? |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Administrator
Staff
Premium Member
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Joplin MO
Posts: 37,766
|
1080p is 1920x1080.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Graham, TX
Posts: 600
|
It all depends on the monitor your going to get, if your gaming at 1050 then a 560 would do you fine, at 1080/1200 a 570 will be fine, and at 1600 I would go with the 580 even though a 570 would probably work fine for you. Find the monitor your going to get, or at least decide on a resolution, and then we can help with a graphics card.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Techphile.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: San Francisco Bay
Posts: 5,959
|
Go with the highest resolution monitor you can afford. You can always cut back on game settings, resolution settings and your frames per second. Different games of course have different demands on the graphics card and you don't want to sell yourself short on your monitors native resolution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 | |
|
Member (11 bit)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 1,388
|
Quote:
4:3, 16x9, and 16x10 are the common ratios It depends on the monitor you pick and what ratios are supported by that monior. Your basic WS LCD is based on 16x9 (1920x1080) or (1280x720), but they do come in vareties. ie 16x10 I think 2560x1600 is a is a 4:3 ratio.
__________________
Gigabyte 880GA-ud3h / 3.1 Phenom II x2 550 BE Callisto(4 cores and OC to 3.4) / Corsair Vengence 2x4gb DDR3 1600 / 640gb WD Black 2ea./HIS 6870/ 650 EarthWatts / Win 7 64bit Last edited by rwest; 05-04-2011 at 10:09 AM. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Techphile.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: San Francisco Bay
Posts: 5,959
|
2560/1600 = 1.6 = 16:10 ratio
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Member (11 bit)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 1,388
|
Thanks David.
![]() I know the concept, but I suck at the math. ![]() BTW Its a balance between clock speed, cache, # of cores, cost, and what you want to do with your PC. Last edited by rwest; 05-04-2011 at 10:16 AM. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|