21 replies to this topic

[hoofhearted4]

ill just PM my response. i have no desire to hijack this thread and turn it into another Intel v AMD thread.


haha i guess i wont PM it, since Thor cant receive any new messages lol

Edited by hoofhearted4, 25 January 2013 - 01:30 AM.

[Thor.]

MWUA HA HA HA HA HA

i cleaned it up now, funny i didn't notice it being full. it was at zero mail notification, although when i checked it, it was chalk full. glitch.

Edited by Thor., 25 January 2013 - 04:09 AM.

[hoofhearted4]

nope still cant send anything Thor haha (sorry OP for using your thread to solve our problem. something i was trying to avoid haha)

[Rennn]

Intel cpus will perform better, but they'll also cost more. In most games, you won't see a noticeable difference from a good AMD cpu to a good Intel cpu, because the graphics card is most important. That said, an i7 or i5 would be the safest option if you're looking for the best performance. Like I said, the difference in most games will not be very noticeable. The exceptions would be cpu-intensive and poorly optimized games, like Oblivion or perhaps Miasmata. As Fmod said below, an i5 will have an advantage in games incapable of using several cores effectively.

Edited by Rennn, 26 January 2013 - 09:21 AM.

[FMod]

i5 has a considerable edge in Skyrim with uGrids modded up (which is not a good idea). Or other single thread intensive games. You're looking at as much as a 20% advantage.

i7 isn't worth the price, it's the same CPU with an extra feature that has no use in games or really most home applications.
They exist:
1) For a few professional applications
2) As a "DONATE" button if you want to thank Intel for a job well done and think your CPU should cost a little more.

[LenaMarie]

Thanks for the replys. The I5 sounds great, especially since Im looking for a major boost to skyrim mostly. That Xeon E3 1230v2 sounds really good as a I7 alternative, over the I5. I have read I7/Xeon reads as a 8 core in Windows and works like one too, which if next gen consoles do end up with 8 cores as the rumors suggest, wouldnt an 8 core intel be more future proof? As in it would be many, many years till I need a CPU upgrade if I go for the "8 core" Xeon?

I definatly do not need to pay a premium for OC ability and dont need a spare vid card in my chip to use up more power, so if I'd go for a I7 class, I'd go for that Xeon.

Still sorry to Thor but, It seems an overwhelming number of people here and according to the internet say Intel has all but murdered AMD and if you need a new Mobo too its a waste of money to get AMD.

[FMod]

AMD CPU are currently ahead in the budget and midrange segments (<$150), esp. APU range, and ahead in professional applications (FX8350, Opteron). A lot of what people say on the internet is based on brand image, just like offline. AMD is also expected to supply CPU/GPU/APU for next-gen consoles.
But for Skyrim specifically, which only uses 2 cores, single core performance is what matters, and that is where Intel is ahead by as much as 40%.

I have read I7/Xeon reads as a 8 core in Windows and works like one too, which if next gen consoles do end up with 8 cores as the rumors suggest,

With HT on it reads as 8 cores, but works as 8 cores each half the power of a full core. There is no point for games. They run faster with HT off. The ability to turn HT on is the only substantial difference between i5 and i7 (or Xeon).

Overclocking, even slightly, is always more productive than HT. Next-gen consoles are most likely to use AMD Trinity chips, or possibly Kaveri. Both are quad-core, not 8-core. Also, see above: if all you want is to match a next-gen console, you can do that with a $100 FM2 mobo and a $120 A10-5800K chip.

[kalikka]

Xeon should cost the same as 3570k, so its a pretty good deal for the price.

I think the biggest upgrade to the next-gen consoles is the real full-HD graphics.
Till now it has been 720p or similar. Good example is dark souls on PC, doesnt have 1080p resolution without modding....
So that means todays PCs can run tomorrows console-games easily.

Heck, my PC can run emulated (wii) Xenoblade@1080p easily. And emulations take 2-5x more power than the original.

[FMod]

I suppose it's a good idea if you want an i7 for HT. Much cheaper while the same on the inside with the same features.

But still - it's $10 more than 3570K, while being slower for games and only barely faster for pro apps. Warranty's the same 3 years, the chip's the same. Just because it's called Xeon doesn't mean anything except that o/c is locked. 3570K is still better for Skyrim.

You'll want to overclock it, it's basically a one-click process. 4.5 Ghz is tough for Ivy (while easy for SB), but 4.2 or so is easy. Just raise the turbo multipliers.

[LenaMarie]

I know people think anyone who does not overclock is crazy, but as easy as it is, its also risky, It also tends to involve spending more $$$ for aftermarket coolers and all, and thus a hassle. I'd rather my processor last longer then be faster, its why they still sell locked cpus not everyone believes in OCing.

Still, the Xeon sounds good, but what gets me is that the quality must be good. I've read Xeons are made to run at 100% load, at high temps, 24/7 and last for years. Doesnt sound like that would die easy and I dont really want to have to replace my CPU for another several years. Actually, in my perfect world I never want to have to build a new PC again and instead when the CPU finally gets outdated just make the switch over to full PC units in a tablet, ala Windows Surface Pro. (of course far enough in the future these PC Tablets are powerful enough to run Skyrim and the like) which it sounds like all the hardware companies are working on for 2-3 years ahead.