![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
when will i7 prices start to drop?
- Thread starter DarkDonut
- Start date
I suppose I'm looking at the more multithreaded apps for things such as rendering and what not. If you look at those benchmarks you see that Core 2 is far behind i7 because of it's support for 8 threads and much quicker memory access. Since i5 will have those same 8 threads and IMC, I see no reason why i5 won't be significantly ahead of a C2Q in those same applications.
Now obviously if the OP indicates that his computer is for gaming and he won't be using any heavily multithreaded apps then ya I would say just get a C2 now. But I haven't seen any indication as to what he will be doing anyways.
Keep in mind, i5 will be always slower then i7, so any benchmark that shows i7 beating Core 2 Quad, take that result down a bit and you have a good idea of i5. Intel will NOT allow i5 to eat into the i7 performance. Because of that, it will be hard to feel any difference between a Core 2 Quad and an i5 machine except in the most heavily threaded apps. Since there are not many of those, on average they (C2Q, i5) will be strikingly similar in performance overall I expect.
absenceoftruth
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2009
- Messages
- 74
I hope they go down in price soon. I'm thinking of buying one sometime in the future.
Obviously it won't be the same as the i7, but I find it very hard to believe that in a well multithreaded rendering app that a Core 2 would even come close to an 8 threaded processor. In my opinion, common sense tells you that the processor that can handle twice as many threads will out perform the one that can't.
that of course assumes that the app even knows how to use all 8 threads, in all honesty having 8 threads is more of a novelty, a "hey check out my rig" kind of a feature, by the time that apps catch up to that we will all be talking about the next gen architecture or revisions to the current i7
How many well multithreaded apps are there? Not many. Most apps are poorly multithreaded (wasteful code being the worst offender) to not multithreaded at all. Even many of the well threaded apps don't scale above 4 threads. Most don't scale above 2.
And you cannot count the 4 virtual cores as full cores.They are not. Your assuming that Core i7 performs like an 8 core CPU when it does not in any way. It SIMULATES an 8 core CPU, but the total performance would be closer to 6 cores then 8 in the very few apps that can actually use more then 4 threads.
I really think you shouldn't set yourself up for dissapointment on this one. You should take my attitude on it since if I'm wrong, it's a GOOD thing, if your wrong, you'll be bummed out. You don't wanna be bummed out, do you?
Nenu
[H]ardened
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2007
- Messages
- 20,315
I havent found the need to upgrade from my non hyperthreaded dual core E8400 yet.
Can you name the apps you think we would benefit from an i7 with?
How many well multithreaded apps are there? Not many. Most apps are poorly multithreaded (wasteful code being the worst offender) to not multithreaded at all. Even many of the well threaded apps don't scale above 4 threads. Most don't scale above 2.
And you cannot count the 4 virtual cores as full cores.They are not. Your assuming that Core i7 performs like an 8 core CPU when it does not in any way. It SIMULATES an 8 core CPU, but the total performance would be closer to 6 cores then 8 in the very few apps that can actually use more then 4 threads.
I really think you shouldn't set yourself up for dissapointment on this one. You should take my attitude on it since if I'm wrong, it's a GOOD thing, if your wrong, you'll be bummed out. You don't wanna be bummed out, do you?
First off I never said a single thing about it acting like a 8 core cpu so I see no reason for your comments on such, and I'm not really setting myself up for anything as you can see by my sig I currently use a E8500 and don't have any future plans for upgrading yet as I don't see a need for it. I'm just going off the past information that I have looked up on the subject, and I know there aren't many applications that will even use more then 4 threads, but with i7 being out, it seems logical that there will be more by the time i5 is released.
I'm not going to start naming apps, look at my sig, I have an E8500, I don't do any rendering or any thing else that would potentially use over 2 threads. My information just comes from what I have read in reviews. You can easily find this information on your own with google.
Nenu
[H]ardened
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2007
- Messages
- 20,315
I am calling the advice you gave earlier into repute.
You havent backed it up in any way so I advise the readers to ignore it as it is of no practical value unless doing specific tasks only.
jonneymendoza
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2004
- Messages
- 6,395
well go and stick with your core 2's while us i7 users have fn with ours. this thread aintr about how useful a fucking i7 is. its about WHEN it will drop it price. way to go out of topic as per usual.
i think the PII 955 will cause the price of the 920 to drop as it will start to impinge on i7 territory.
intel will say however that the price adjustment results from the introduction of new i7 models that happened at the same time as the PII 955 release.
intel will say however that the price adjustment results from the introduction of new i7 models that happened at the same time as the PII 955 release.
Nenu
[H]ardened
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2007
- Messages
- 20,315
Hmm so i7 owners can talk about what they like and no one is allowed to pull them up when they post useless info?
I wasnt the one off topic to start with, I was correcting someone that already was.
If you are going to pull people up on the posts they make, at least get the fundamentals right..
jonneymendoza
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2004
- Messages
- 6,395
everything that has nothing to do with price drops is pointless. if u wanna debate wether its worth getting a i7 then go search another thread about it.
There is also a "who loves there i7" Thread too
There is also a "who loves there i7" Thread too
Well, you got part of that right. You are fully correct to defend yourself as you see the need. But now you'll need to retract your statement about calling Camero into "repute". You see, the fact is, many desktop daily use apps make great use of i7 over C2D or C2Q. Blackberry Desktop Manager is one of them. I regularly convert and load movies onto my Blackberry. Core 2 Quad @3.6Ghz takes over 10 minutes to convert a 2 hour movie. On my equally clocked i7, it takes less then 6 minutes. That 4 minutes is the difference between me getting out the door on time in the morning or being late to work.
Further evidence is found in specific RTS games I play alot of. World in Conflict is well known for quad core support, but also for showing i7 920 at stock outperforming a QX9770. That's horsepower if I've ever seen it. Other games I play have situations that bring Core 2 Quad to it's knees as well. Company of Heroes does great on C2Q, right up until you get a single player skirmish going against 4 AI's on the map called TheRhine. The game play seem identical on both platforms, C2Q and i7, through the first few hours of play on that map. But, by the time you've taken the center of the map, after dozens of artillery barrages have reduced the center town to rubble and deep craters, the C2Q can no longer scroll through that area at anything higher then single digit frame rates. This is on a 3.6Ghz C2Q, so clock speed isn't being held back on. Core i7 won't magically give you the 30 fps silver bullet for that scenario, but what it DOES give you is the ability to scroll through that destroyed area and select units on your first click and give them orders with reasonable smoothness, around 15 or so fps. This makes that scenario remain playable till the end unlike Core 2 Quad.
I run into these situations all the time. I push my RTS game engines to their limits and beyond with mods and the largest maps I can find for these games. Supreme Commander on an 80km x 80km map with 7 modded hard AI's is insane, but also impossible to finish a game with any kind of playability. i7 allowed me to finish World Conquest, a massive map, that Core 2 Quad couldn't handle just under 80k units on (10K per side, 7 AI's + my units).
Nenu
[H]ardened
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2007
- Messages
- 20,315
Thats a decent answer, one of the better ones I have seen to validate i7.
Useful applications are limited but at least people can now decide if the above applies to them and thus if i7 is of benefit.
Thanks for your time to answer properly
Perhaps CamaroZ28 can add his experience to cover his earlier comments?
Useful applications are limited but at least people can now decide if the above applies to them and thus if i7 is of benefit.
Thanks for your time to answer properly
Perhaps CamaroZ28 can add his experience to cover his earlier comments?
Thats a decent answer, one of the better ones I have seen to validate i7.
Useful applications are limited but at least people can now decide if the above applies to them and thus if i7 is of benefit.
Thanks for your time to answer properly
Perhaps CamaroZ28 can add his experience to cover his earlier comments?
I already told you that I don't own an i7, so therefore I can't provide any information based on experience, the info I provided was based on reviews. I could sit here and link a bunch of reviews all day, but the fact that 99.9% of the people who read this thread won't bother to click them makes it a pointless use of my time. I have no need to "defend" myself or "cover" my comments when I know myself that I bring factual advice. On that note I'm unsubscribing this thread as obviously the OP has no intention of replying.
i7 can actually compete (surprisingly, on price) with Intel C2Q (except for the lower-end) right now because of falling prices for both LGA1366 motherboards and DDR3 tri-packs, feature for feature. The error most folks are making when comparing motherboards (LGA1366 vs. LGA775) is that they are not comparing motherboards with similar, let alone identical, feature sets. To be honest, because the only LGA1366 motherboard chipset is the X58, they should be compared with LGA775 motherboards with CrossFire or SLI support, as no LGA775 mobo supports both (whereas most LGA1366 mobos DO support both). For that reason alone, LGA1366 motherboards vs. LGA775 motherboards are otherwise mostly break-even (in some cases, especially mATX, LGA1366 is actually less expensive than an LGA775 motherboard with similar features).
Processor pricing? Please; look more at features than price; the only Q9xxx comparable to the i7 920 is the Q9550, which costs more by at least $50
Yes; X58 requires three sticks of RAM compared to only one or two with LGA775; however, given RAM prices today, the impact of that upon the total build cost is minimal and dropping.
The rest of the build would be identical (for either Q9xxx or i7), so that is basically a wash.
The biggest issue with i7 is that it doesn't really allow skimping on *software*; a minimum i7 system will have 3 GB of RAM (throw in graphics, and you're pretty much blowing past the ceiling for a Windows-based x86 operating system). LGA775 lets you get away with 2 GB or less; however, for other reasons, I refuse to recommend a 32-bit OS for any 64-bit-capable processor, regardless of what socket it uses or how many cores it has.
Lastly, once you go beyond 6 GB of RAM (and decidedly so beyond 8 GB), the advantages of i7 become all the more obvious (primarily because few, if any, LGA775 motherboards have a RAM capacity of greater than 8 GB, while even the few mATX LGA1366 motherboards support at least 12).
Actually, X58 boards support dual and single channel modes. What they do require is DDR3.
Taking what I said above, an i7 system can have as little as 1GB. Not that it's reasonable (or advisable!) to, but it's completely possible.
jonneymendoza
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2004
- Messages
- 6,395
And pointless
While X58 requires DDR3, there are DDR3-supporting LGA775 chipsets (specifically, Intel's own X48), so, if you're going to be fair, even that difference is pointless.
It's just that the majority of build comparisons between LGA1366 and LGA775 are NOT between boards with similar features; invariably, the LGA775 motherboard skimps somewhere, or DDR2 memory is used, or both. When you make a tilted comparison like that, to me, it then becomes apples vs. oranges, and, IMHO, loses merit.
needmorecarnitine
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2004
- Messages
- 4,609
the 920 is $200 at Microcenter today only
Surprised no one posted it yet (not even in hot deals forum)
Sold out in Tustin, CA
Surprised no one posted it yet (not even in hot deals forum)
Sold out in Tustin, CA
BanDeodorant
Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2007
- Messages
- 521
Get the cheapest X58 mobo you can find.. problem solved! Otherwise, cpu and ram are pretty reasonable.
Translation: no time soon. i7 is as low as it'll go, $180 motherboards and $230 i7 920's (6GB of DDR3 can already be had for $100-ish too). There won't be anything i7-related that undercuts that even a year from now, what you will see however is i5 on P55 boards coming in at a lower price point (most significantly on the mobos, just like X48 vs P45). You probably won't get SLI+CF out of P55 boards tho (but you'll get CF), and they might be dual-channel DDR3 instead of trip channel, I forget what the road map looked like for Lynnfield. i5 will be Intel's Nehalem-budget move tho.
I'm pretty darn sure tripple channel DDR3 is not really a major reason why i7 is so much faster than C2Q's... And i5/Lynnfield will still have an on-board memory controller and a direct link to the PCI-E bus. i7 is just faster than C2Q/D because it's an entirely different/better core, not because they tweaked memory handling/bandwith a lil' and slapped QPI on the memory controller...
Last edited:
Performance between i5 and i7 can be close and i7 will still have redeeming qualities that Intel can sell it on... i5 probably won't see CF+SLI on the same mobos. Eventually there'll be more and more stuff that does take advantage of the extra memory bandwidth in triple channel DDR3, etc. They'll probably do other stuff to artificially keep i5 and it's socket as the 2nd tier choice to i7 as well, the fastest/newest cores will always debut as i7 parts, etc. OC'ing makes a lot of that moot for the enthusiast, but the world at large could care less about tweaking and overclocking.
This is not the first time Intel or AMD release their next-gen processor (that's truly a step up from the current stuff) on a high-end socket and wait a while (read: milk the market) before re-releasing it under a more mainstream socket with prices adjusted accordingly... The real question is whether they'll stay committed to both sockets or whether someone will get the short end of the stick.
Last edited: