Argonath RPG - A World of its own
Argonath RPG Community => Hardware/Software support => Resolved issues => Topic started by: Aimzz on July 11, 2011, 05:58:00 pm
-
I need help choosing between two CPU's, I will post them + specs.
Intel Core i5-2500K Processor
http://www.komplett.se/k/ki.aspx?sku=619274 (http://www.komplett.se/k/ki.aspx?sku=619274)
4 Cores
Supports 64-bit
3.3GHz stock speed, 3.7GHz turbo speed
32nm
95W
6mb cache
Hyper threading; No
Price; 1.717 Swedish crowns
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T Black Edition
http://www.komplett.se/k/ki.aspx?sku=617631 (http://www.komplett.se/k/ki.aspx?sku=617631)
6 Cores
Supports 64-bit
3.3GHz stock speed, 3.7GHz turbo (Turbos means it will use only 3 out of 6 cores, at 3.7GHz
45nm
125W
9mb cache
Hyper threading; Yes
Price: 1.628 Swedish crowns
You might think "Oh look the AMD wins and it is really cheap too, but after watching reviews I noticed that the 2500K will perform better in games since it will use 4 Cores in turbo mode while Phenom X6 uses 3, both at 3.7GHz. And the difference in the price is not even 100 Swedish crowns..So the price does not matter.
-
I'd still go for the AMD.
-
I doubt it would make too much difference anyway..
-
Intel, always.
AMD's shitty architecture NEVER changed since 2005 or so. Their sixcores don't make much difference with and old Intel Core 2 Quad... All AMD did over the past few years is raise that damn clockspeed which doesn't do anything if everything else is damn old..
apart from that, look at the differences :
4 cores on Intel is like 16 cores on AMD ( if that would exist in the future ), so ''6 cores'' shouldn't be the reason you're buying AMD stuff.
Clockspeed. Same. But my friend's 2500K runs at 5.5 Ghz so if you're into overclocking, the 2500K would definately win.
Intel wins - 13 less nanometres. ( lower = better )
Intel wins again, less power usage ( lower = better )
AMD has more cache, but then again, it doesn't win from intel because AMD's architecture basically doesn't allow it to run like Intel does.
Hyper Threading : nobody uses that.
Price : Yeah, 2500K costs a little bit more, worth it though.
Please. Don't buy AMD CPU's. Only AMD graphic cards ( if you can't afford a decent nvidia )
-
Aww, Sal, everyone knows you get a lot more power for your money with AMD.
-
Intel, always.
AMD's shitty architecture NEVER changed since 2005 or so. Their sixcores don't make much difference with and old Intel Core 2 Quad... All AMD did over the past few years is raise that damn clockspeed which doesn't do anything if everything else is damn old..
apart from that, look at the differences :
4 cores on Intel is like 16 cores on AMD ( if that would exist in the future ), so ''6 cores'' shouldn't be the reason you're buying AMD stuff.
Clockspeed. Same. But my friend's 2500K runs at 5.5 Ghz so if you're into overclocking, the 2500K would definately win.
Intel wins - 13 less nanometres. ( lower = better )
Intel wins again, less power usage ( lower = better )
AMD has more cache, but then again, it doesn't win from intel because AMD's architecture basically doesn't allow it to run like Intel does.
Hyper Threading : nobody uses that.
Price : Yeah, 2500K costs a little bit more, worth it though.
Please. Don't buy AMD CPU's. Only AMD graphic cards ( if you can't afford a decent nvidia )
Sounds like fantalk.
The technology ('nm') directly does not do anything to the end user. It will affect things like heat generation or power usage, but you already mentioned that, so your list is longer than it should actually be.
If you get an AM3+ board, you'll be later able to upgrade to future AMD CPU's, while still able to use current AM3 socket CPU's. Dunno about intel's, but I heard they don't stick to sockets - so upgrades to newer lines of cpu's might require buying a new mobo.
-
2500k All the way. It has many goods.. it doesn't matter if the 1100T has more cache.. 2500k is the best.. faster.. and better..
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/288?vs=203 (http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/288?vs=203)
-
So even if I do not overclock the 2500K, would it still be good?
-
So even if I do not overclock the 2500K, would it still be good?
It would be 4 times better than that AMD thing... trust me
Only good thing i know about AMD is that they stick to sockets, as Grz mentioned.. appart from that intel wins at everything.. The 2500K will also be able to be used in the newer ivy bridge(?) motherboards, so if you upgrade you can use the sandy bridge CPU
AMD has nice clockspeeds with Pentium 3 architecture..
-
It would be 4 times better than that AMD thing...
[citation needed]
Only good thing i know about AMD is that they stick to sockets, as Grz mentioned.. appart from that intel wins at everything..
[citation needed]
AMD has nice clockspeeds with Pentium 3 architecture..
[citation needed]
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html (http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html)
Note that the highest-performance CPU's are usually server-class, ie. the Xeon.
i5-2500k @ 3.3GHz's score is 7226
X2 1100T's score is 6050
Yes, the i5 is better, but not 4 times better. And "better" does not only mean faster.
-
Aww, Sal, everyone knows you get a lot more power for your money with AMD.
Both 2500K (4 cores) and 1100T (6 cores) cost the same and would you see at the test results;
(http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph4083/35047.png)
(http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph4083/35048.png)
(http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph4083/35049.png)
(http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph4083/35050.png)
(http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph4083/35023.png)
(http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph4083/35024.png)
(http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph4083/35028.png)
(http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph4083/35052.png)
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083/the-sandy-bridge-review-intel-core-i7-2600k-i5-2500k-core-i3-2100-tested (http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083/the-sandy-bridge-review-intel-core-i7-2600k-i5-2500k-core-i3-2100-tested)
http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/intel_corei7_2600k_and_corei5_2500k/10.htm (http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/intel_corei7_2600k_and_corei5_2500k/10.htm)
http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/intel_corei7_2600k_and_corei5_2500k/11.htm (http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/intel_corei7_2600k_and_corei5_2500k/11.htm)
http://www.guru3d.com/article/core-i5-2500k-and-core-i7-2600k-review/20 (http://www.guru3d.com/article/core-i5-2500k-and-core-i7-2600k-review/20)
More power for your money with AMD? Yeh right.
These results were without any overclocking, so your choice should be clear Aimzz.
-
Yeah I decided to order the i5 2500K + CM V6GT Cooler, thanks for the help guys.. :)
-
I went out 'Shopping' for my computer, and the Intel Mobos seemed to be more expensive than the AMD.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
-
I went out 'Shopping' for my computer, and the Intel Mobos seemed to be more expensive than the AMD.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
That is because most motherboards for the i-family (Z68, H/P67 etc) have more features as well, some of to mention are SSD caching, Intel QuickSync, integrated graphics etc. And yes, there are articles about these and AMD chipsets as well on the internet. :lol: