Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Gaming : get the i5 or the i7?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
October 13, 2013 5:47:44 PM

Hey.
I'm going to buy a new PC in a few days.
Ill be getting the 280x and it's built for gaming.
The only thing I'm not sure about, is the CPU.
It seems like latest games are requiring the i7 to run at their best, yet people keep telling me there is no use for the i7 in gaming.
So, should I add the extra 100$ for the i7? Will future games be using it?
Thanks.

More about : gaming

October 13, 2013 5:55:44 PM

Maybe, future games will use it, but for now, not really worth it. An I5 will still be more than enough for the next few years. I'd go with an i5, and wait for 290x gpus. Perhaps the 100% saving can be used for one of those gpus.
October 13, 2013 5:58:51 PM


Are you sure? New games are already asking for i7s...
Related resources
October 13, 2013 6:00:57 PM

What game is that? It's part of the 0.1% that will ask for it, and mostly, it's just for marketing schemes.
October 13, 2013 6:02:06 PM

Common sense is, they wouldn't release a game that would demand for an i7, and loose 99% of the possible gamers, wouldn't they? :p 
a b 4 Gaming
a c 86 à CPUs
October 13, 2013 6:06:02 PM

Also, the only benefit an i7 has is hyperthreading, which applies to double-precision calculations, not floating point calculations used for gaming.

If your game is using double-precision calculations enough for hyperthreading to be needed, you're doing it wrong.
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
October 13, 2013 6:08:10 PM

SirDrannik said:
Common sense is, they wouldn't release a game that would demand for an i7, and loose 99% of the possible gamers, wouldn't they? :p 


Also, they're referring to AMD cpu's that have 4 modules/8 cores. the XBONE and PS4 have 8 core AMD cpu's that are basically the same as amd's current high-end lineup. Intel Core-i5's are totally on par with those and should continue to be for the next few years.

Once programmers actually code for the use of more than 4 logical processors, i7's will leap ahead of their amd counterparts simply because intel has more per core performance than amd.

If you're worried about next-gen that much, go with an amd 8350 and overclock that a lot. That's the best compromise I can think of.
a b 4 Gaming
a c 86 à CPUs
October 13, 2013 6:19:40 PM

The jaguar cores in the new consoles are not the same as amd's current lineup of true processors. They're about on par with slightly beefier A10s, which an i5 will smash.
October 13, 2013 7:02:37 PM

Would like to hear more opinions.
a b à CPUs
October 13, 2013 7:23:26 PM

The i7 is not worth the $100 in gaming, but if you want to do more then just gaming get the i7 either way you won't be disappointed they are both beast gaming processors the only difference is a frame or 2.
a b 4 Gaming
a c 446 à CPUs
October 13, 2013 7:38:30 PM

So far the only game that has been proven to benefit from Hyper Threading is Battlefield 4 and only in multiplayer mode. It is possible that future games released with the Frostbite Engine will also make use of HT in multiplay mode. But as far as single play games.... none.

From a gaming perspective I would only buy an i7 if you are a hardcore Battlefield 4 fan and will be playing mutliplayer excessively / you can afford to spend the extra $$$ just in case future single player games might start using HT.
a b à CPUs
October 13, 2013 7:54:17 PM

i recommend the i5
October 13, 2013 8:08:14 PM

jaguarskx said:
So far the only game that has been proven to benefit from Hyper Threading is Battlefield 4 and only in multiplayer mode. It is possible that future games released with the Frostbite Engine will also make use of HT in multiplay mode. But as far as single play games.... none.

From a gaming perspective I would only buy an i7 if you are a hardcore Battlefield 4 fan and will be playing mutliplayer excessively / you can afford to spend the extra $$$ just in case future single player games might start using HT.


I second and triple that.

October 13, 2013 9:32:19 PM

Isn't it safe to assume that more games will follow BF4 8 cores usage in the next few years?
a b 4 Gaming
a c 86 à CPUs
October 13, 2013 9:41:18 PM

Givemema said:
Isn't it safe to assume that more games will follow BF4 8 cores usage in the next few years?


Read what he said. The new frostbite engine can make use of hyperthreading in multiplayer only. An i7 isn't actually 8 cores, and it's not even 8 threads; more like 4+4(1/2)-threads. And remember that those are double-precision ONLY.

Most games are never going to touch double-precision calculation, or even if they are, only going to do so for a few calculations a second; not enough to make a difference even in benchmarks.

By the time the majority of games are able to effectively use 8 threads (i.e. making something like an FX 8350 useful), any processor you buy now will be in need of upgrading anyways.

It kinda sounds like you're looking for one of us to talk you into spending the extra $100 so you have bragging rights, but it's simply not worth it right now, and not even close to being predictable enough to say if it'll be worth it in the future. (My money is on no, it won't be worth it, because most games aren't even optimized for four cores/threads, and the majority of games' consumer base are still on dual cores.)
a b à CPUs
October 14, 2013 4:47:22 PM

In gaming there is no difference with the i5 and the i7 the reason to get an i7 is for editing,rendering, stuff like that.
a b 4 Gaming
a c 300 à CPUs
October 14, 2013 5:19:18 PM

The i7 is simply NOT worth a $100 premium over an i5 for gaming.
IF you can get a great deal on an i7, then by all means get it. I would say if you can get one within $50 of an i5, do it.
If you are not going to overclock AT ALL... an i7 MAY be worth a $50-60 price increase. If you are going overclock, just get an i5.

An i7 has 3 main benefits over an i5.
1. hyperthreading.
2. A small clock bump(usually just 100-200mhz)
3. More L3 cache.(usually 20-25%)

The i7 will do everything else that a PC can do faster than a comparable(same gen) i5, BUT it's not going to make an i5 feel slow by comparison. The real world difference will be negligible. Neither cpu will be your bottleneck.

The logical choice = i5
Need bragging rights = i7
Too much money laying around = i7
a b à CPUs
October 14, 2013 5:45:27 PM

The difference between the i5 and i7 in gaming is negligible. There isn't much of a difference because game's currently are not designed for that many threads.

The way I like to see Intel's product lineup is:

i3 is the budget CPU, for things like web browsing or light gaming
i5 is the all around CPU, but it's also the gaming CPU
i7 is the computing and rendering CPU

Now, unless you're going to be rendering video or something else that is heavily reliant on the processor, it wouldn't be worth going to an i7.
October 15, 2013 10:17:53 PM

More opinions maybe?
a b 4 Gaming
a c 300 à CPUs
October 15, 2013 10:26:13 PM

I don't know what else you want to hear.

The i5 offers 99% of the gaming performance of an i7 for 66% of the price.

NOBODY needs anything more than an i5 for gaming.

But if money is no object for you, get an i7 because why not if you can afford it.
a b à CPUs
October 15, 2013 11:08:17 PM

Look dude, you got all the info here.

The best advice is to get I5 and then put those extra 100$ towards 290x - this will easily be better than I7 and 280x.

The only better choice here would be I7 and 290x, but do you have the cash for it??
October 15, 2013 11:30:10 PM

Look, I understand that right now the i5 is the right choice.
The thing is, we are already starting to see games with recommended specs of i7 and not i5.
See watchdogs for example, it asks for an i7.
So if this is starting now, what would it be like in a year or two? I'm thinking that most of the games will ask for that...
October 16, 2013 12:49:18 AM

Get the i7 if other people's opinion doesn't even matter anyways if you know what you wanted.
Thanks.
a b à CPUs
October 16, 2013 1:37:23 AM

Givemema said:
Look, I understand that right now the i5 is the right choice.
The thing is, we are already starting to see games with recommended specs of i7 and not i5.
See watchdogs for example, it asks for an i7.
So if this is starting now, what would it be like in a year or two? I'm thinking that most of the games will ask for that...


So? Metro Last Light also wrote I7 in their omg Optimal Requirements... in the end I5 got COMPLETELY the same FPS as I7 in benches there.

Problem with I7 is the same as with FX-8350 - their advantages are a massive multithreading and that is not what games really require - not now and not later on. Only in a very extreme cases with a massive amount of concurrent players in a multiplayer game or extensive physics will there be a difference between I5 and I7 and so far this difference proved to be very insignificant, that's why the consensus the gaming community adapted is that I5 is all you ever need and it is effectively true.

You should ask yourself a simple question - are you going to be constantly playing 64-man FPS maps or not. If yes. I7 would make sense, because it is where it shines more than I5. If no, then you will just waste money you could put towards a better GPU, which would serve you much better really.


Again: question to you is - will getting I5 instead of I7 lead to you having Radeon 290X or not. If the answer is yes - get I5.
a c 92 à CPUs
October 16, 2013 1:40:53 AM

Zaoldyeck216 said:
Get the i7 if other people's opinion doesn't even matter anyways if you know what you wanted.
Thanks.


+1

You seem to have already convinced your self that the i7 is the way forward, so just buy the i7.

The only downside is the extra $$, but if you can afford it, go for it.
October 16, 2013 1:56:10 AM

why blow the cash? Get an i5k now and then im sure in 2, 3 years older I7's will be dirt cheap.

But with the amount of oc your able to get an i5k at very safely, it's just more then enough.

It's like ram. 8 gigs is gonna cover you. 16 gigs if you really want it for, idk boosting a SSD or something. But past that? The hell for?
October 16, 2013 4:30:59 AM

Crysis 3 has 30% performance boost with HT on vs HT off on core i7 CPU.
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
October 16, 2013 5:09:41 AM

There is no point in getting an i7 when an i5 or FX-6300/8350 will work just fine. Buy the best value now and upgrade when it's cheaper to do so. That's the way that the tech world works.
a b 4 Gaming
a c 300 à CPUs
October 16, 2013 5:28:05 AM

Here are a couple of options for you-

1. unlocked i5(K) + GTX 770 = ~$600
2. unlocked i7(K) + GTX 670 = ~$600

Which one would you rather have? Which one do you think would perform better?


The answer is obvious.
October 16, 2013 8:14:31 AM

I can get the 8350 for 40$ more than the i5. Which one should I pick then?
I guess I'll let go of that i7.
a b 4 Gaming
a c 300 à CPUs
October 16, 2013 1:50:14 PM

The 8350 should be priced around the same as the lower non-K i5s.

This is what I think about 8350 vs i5-

8350 > any non-K i5
Any K model i5 > 8350


...and I bet there are a lot of people that would choose some of the non-K i5s over the 8350 still.
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
October 16, 2013 4:47:33 PM

Givemema said:
I can get the 8350 for 40$ more than the i5. Which one should I pick then?
I guess I'll let go of that i7.


If there's that big of a price difference, then definitely get the i5. The only reason I ever mentioned that the 8350 was a compromise was because it was the same price as(or even cheaper than) the i5-3570k/4670k.
October 17, 2013 5:17:14 AM

fudoka711 said:
Givemema said:
I can get the 8350 for 40$ more than the i5. Which one should I pick then?
I guess I'll let go of that i7.


If there's that big of a price difference, then definitely get the i5. The only reason I ever mentioned that the 8350 was a compromise was because it was the same price as(or even cheaper than) the i5-3570k/4670k.


It is. I was referring to the regular i5. I'm not getting the K version and am not planning on any kind of OC
!