Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Best performance & overclock - Core i7 920 or Phenom II X4 955

Last response: in CPUs
Share
May 26, 2009 7:44:07 PM

Hello! I wonder, if I should pick an Intel Core i7 920, or an AMD Phenom II X4 955. What I will be using my computer primarly for is gaming, and I want a really fast CPU that will meet my needs and the hardware I will be using. Now I am going to use 2 nVIDIA GeForce GTX 295s in SLI mode and want to use DDR3 RAM. Price doesn't really matter because the Core i7 and Phenom X4 955 have where I live about the same price(maybe like 12,5$ USD difference). Now I want to know which one of these that will give the highest performance/overclock, and I want to overclock 'em A LOT :pt1cable:  ! I will be using watercooling, and I won't use the shitty thermal paste you get when you buy the cpu. As cooling I have planned to use a waterblock of course, but then modify either a Thermalright Ultra-120 Extreme, or a Zalman CNPS 9700 NT Ultra Quiet, and put it above so I will get both watercooling and air cooling :D 

So here's the big, or the big questions:

1. Which one will give the most performance(includes overclocking) for the cooling I will be using?

2. Which one runs at the lowest temperature?(lower temperature=higher overclock and a higher overclock=higher performance)

3. Are both good at being capable of handling multi graphic cards solutions?(which means more than 1 video/graphics card)

Oh and, does the Phenom II X4 955 have an intergrated IHS/Heatspreader? I know the Core i7 does, but how do I get rid of them? I want to remove it and apply some high quality Arctic Silver 5 instead of the margarine you get and put it back so I will get better cooling.

AND NO FANBOYS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I THINK AMD AND INTEL BOTH MAKE GOOD CPUs SO NO BULLSHIT LIKE "INTEL MAKE BETTER QUALITY CPUs" OR "AMD SUCK BALLZ" OR "INTEL IS BUTTER WHILE AMD IS MARGARINE(hehe I hate margarine :)  ) OR SOMETHING SIMILIAR!!!!!! INTEL'S WEBSITE IS MAYBE MORE SEXEYYY BUT THEY DON'T MAKE COOL DRIVER UPDATES LIKE AMD!
a c 203 à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
May 26, 2009 7:48:45 PM

UltraO said:
As cooling I have planned to use a waterblock of course, but then modify either a Thermalright Ultra-120 Extreme, or a Zalman CNPS 9700 NT Ultra Quiet, and put it above so I will get both watercooling and air cooling :D 
Huh? How will you get the water to the waterblock? How will you attach the air cooler to the waterblock?
a c 203 à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
May 26, 2009 7:59:15 PM

Have you found any AM3 DDR3 SLI motherboards yet?
Related resources
May 26, 2009 8:25:18 PM

WR2 said:
Huh? How will you get the water to the waterblock? How will you attach the air cooler to the waterblock?

Well I will use a water pump which I connect the water blocks to with tubes which cools chipset, cpu, gpu etc and then in the end it will be connected to a heat exchanger which is connected back to the pump and then it goes on and on :) 
And well it will be a little bit tricky to attach the air cooler but yeah I'm sure it will work!
May 26, 2009 8:29:52 PM

WR2 said:
Have you found any AM3 DDR3 SLI motherboards yet?

http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_nforce_980a_sli_us...
Seems to be a nice motherboard with 3 PCI-E x16 Slots(that doesn't get capped) and SLI ready and supports the AM3 socket including the Phenom II X4 955 :)  And if I am right nvidia motherboards always allow overclock?
a c 203 à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
May 26, 2009 8:40:14 PM

The only 980a SLI motherboard out right now is the ASUS M4N82 Deluxe. And its a DDR2 motherboard, not DDR3.
Not a whole lot of 980a SLI out at the moment. The boards are pretty new.
ASUS M4N82 Deluxe overclock
a c 203 à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
May 26, 2009 8:48:48 PM

UltraO said:
Oh and, does the Phenom II X4 955 have an intergrated IHS/Heatspreader? I know the Core i7 does, but how do I get rid of them? I want to remove it and apply some high quality Arctic Silver 5 instead of the margarine you get and put it back so I will get better cooling.
That would be interesting. You know what is under the IHS, right?
And that AS5 has metallic conductive properties?

Phenom II X4 955

May 27, 2009 5:37:08 AM

WR2 said:
That would be interesting. You know what is under the IHS, right?
And that AS5 has metallic conductive properties?

Phenom II X4 955
http://www.tcmagazine.com/images/news/Hardware/AMD/AMD_Phenom_II_X4_955_BE_01.jpg


Yeah, but I was just going to apply it to the core...

And lol it sucks why can't nvidia manufacture motherboards on their own without third-party assholes who just put *** into them. Well I guess it will be the Core i7 920 but how far can I overclock it with the cooling mentioned above?

AND HOW DO I GET RID OF THE IHS/HEATSPREADER? WILL IT COME OFF IF IT LIES IN THE FREEZER OVER ONE NIGHT/12 HOURS?
a b à CPUs
May 27, 2009 5:56:56 AM

I would not recommend removing the heat spreader...its probably soldered on.
May 27, 2009 6:11:21 AM

i7 would be stronger with overclock. 955 should have a higher overclock although i think they fall both at about 3.8-4.0ghz oc's to most avg people, but it will be less productive as i7 in most multi threaded applications the 955 is better at games though but things like encoding and adobe etc 920 is better by a noticeable difference. Also why don't you get a good quad core cooler like COOLER MASTER V8 or xagmatic dark night
May 27, 2009 6:48:47 AM

UltraO said:

Oh and, does the Phenom II X4 955 have an intergrated IHS/Heatspreader? I know the Core i7 does, but how do I get rid of them? I want to remove it and apply some high quality Arctic Silver 5 instead of the margarine you get and put it back so I will get better cooling.


One can remove any IHS with the liberal use of a small handheld blowtorch. When the IHS turns red, prize it off with a screwdriver.

Another method that has worked for some is to use a small handheld grinder, like the ones that smash repairers use. Grind off the top, then work on the sides.
May 27, 2009 8:28:54 AM

May i ask what your previous experience with modding and overclocking?
May 27, 2009 9:15:56 AM

BTW, Intel actually do make better CPUs at the momet.. AMD dont have anything as good as the i7.. yet..

To awnser you questions

1. The i7 will overclock like a bitch, i know this because i have one.

2. My overclocked i7 runs at 53C full load after 40 mins of prim95 using a zalman 9700 with AC5

3.Both CPUs will cope with Crosfire or SLI very well and i would think you would only notice any diffence in actuall CPU performance in a benchmark or encoding
May 27, 2009 9:16:00 AM

BTW, Intel actually do make better CPUs at the momet.. AMD dont have anything as good as the i7.. yet..

To awnser you questions

1. The i7 will overclock like a bitch, i know this because i have one.

2. My overclocked i7 runs at 53C full load after 40 mins of prim95 using a zalman 9700 with AC5

3.Both CPUs will cope with Crosfire or SLI very well and i would think you would only notice any diffence in actuall CPU performance in a benchmark or encoding


sorry, i dont know how that DP happend.
May 27, 2009 11:26:52 AM

AMD has best price/performace. Don't waste your money on overpriced CPUs.
May 27, 2009 4:13:03 PM

core i7 ownage said:
AMD has best price/performace. Don't waste your money on overpriced CPUs.


Don't waste my money? lol the Core i7 920 and the Phenom II x4 955 cost the same where I live so it's not overprices but actually the Phenom II x4 955 would be the overpriced one as the Core i7 920 is much more powerful.
May 27, 2009 4:17:28 PM

slo said:
May i ask what your previous experience with modding and overclocking?

The best overclocker in the hole universe :D 
a b à CPUs
May 27, 2009 5:02:44 PM

i sure hope you have a 30" monitor (2560x1600 res) for those 2 GTX295's
June 5, 2009 12:12:56 PM

UltraO said:
Don't waste my money? lol the Core i7 920 and the Phenom II x4 955 cost the same where I live so it's not overprices but actually the Phenom II x4 955 would be the overpriced one as the Core i7 920 is much more powerful.

Look here noob go to new egg(which is one of the cheaper sites) and look at the lowest most suckiest i7 and compare it to the 955. It is nothing. i am an IT professional so i would shut it if i were you. and for your info the 955 ocs to an easy 4.3 GHz with an aftermarket AIR cooler. with water it goes far beyond that. and don't forget that amd has the fastest oc and benchmark. it is not a thousand dollar processor but it sure hands intel its a$$.
a b à CPUs
June 5, 2009 2:00:08 PM

Nothing against the AMD Phenom II x4 955 it makes a fine budget gamer CPU but the Intel Core i7 920 CPU is more powerful.The only (slight) problem with going the Core i7 route is the more expensive motherboard and triple channel memory.Oh and by the way I built a Phenom 9850 BE system last year to help AMD out a little when they were in trouble (I wouldn't touch the original defective Phenom with a 10 foot pole).I may decide to build a new Phenom II x4 955 system as well as a new Core i7 920 system.
To the O.P.'s question.
1. Intel Core i7 920
2.It wouldn't matter unless you were running on liquid helium cryogenic cooling then the Phenom x4 955 might win by a little bit (perhaps).
3.Yes both CPU's are capable.
June 6, 2009 3:30:12 AM

Dude, the i7 overclocked is like a Viper with Twin Turbos. All i7 920's overclock to 3.8 - 4.0 stable all day. I don't even know where people come up saying the phenom is better at gaming, 'cause an overclocked i7 will net you at least a 6.8Ghz QPI memory link, and those benchmarks will destroy the AMD in any game. I've been an AMD fan for years, but the i7 changed everything. And wait until more games start supporting multi-threading, the i7 has 8 of them. A stock i7 is fast, but an overclocked i7 is like having 50% more power on tap, it's just amazing to own one.
June 13, 2009 10:42:02 PM

"Dude, the i7 overclocked is like a Viper with Twin Turbos. All i7 920's overclock to 3.8 - 4.0 stable all day. I don't even know where people come up saying the phenom is better at gaming, 'cause an overclocked i7 will net you at least a 6.8Ghz QPI memory link, and those benchmarks will destroy the AMD in any game. I've been an AMD fan for years, but the i7 changed everything. And wait until more games start supporting multi-threading, the i7 has 8 of them. A stock i7 is fast, but an overclocked i7 is like having 50% more power on tap, it's just amazing to own one."


Look the difference now between the 2 is minor, so dont let the I7 look like much of a big deal. Sure they may win in Encoding and Decoding benchmarks due to 8 threads and triple channel memory configuration, but in real world gaming thats hardly noticable. Check link below

http://www.guru3d.com/article/amd-phenom-x4-945-and-955...

As show I7 maybe faster, but the the higher the resolution gets, they still fall at the same rate as a phenom II 955 which is lame. So stop making I7 looks like it is all that If it can choke and drop at the rate of a Phenom II
955 during high resolution gaming.
a b à CPUs
June 13, 2009 11:59:35 PM

rebelleader757 said:
Look here noob go to new egg(which is one of the cheaper sites) and look at the lowest most suckiest i7 and compare it to the 955. It is nothing. i am an IT professional so i would shut it if i were you. and for your info the 955 ocs to an easy 4.3 GHz with an aftermarket AIR cooler. with water it goes far beyond that. and don't forget that amd has the fastest oc and benchmark. it is not a thousand dollar processor but it sure hands intel its a$$.

You see though, the "lowest most suckiest i7" absolutely DESTROYS the top Phenom II in all CPU limited benchmarks, including when overclocked. So, it is the better buy. Of course, that's ignoring the difference in motherboard and RAM cost, which is significant (though less significant than it used to be), but still, AMD definitely does not hand Intel its ass. If anything, it's the other way around. Admittedly, gaming is very rarely CPU limited, and even more rarely is it CPU limited and highly threaded, so it is an area where the i7 and Phenom II are more likely to be pretty close in performance, but neither is exactly stressed in that case. Look at situations where there is a high end CF/SLI setup though, and you can see the i7 pulling away - once more strain is put on the CPU due to the more powerful graphics, and the i7's additional power becomes readily apparent.

As for the 955 overclocking? From what I've seen, it tends to go to between 3.8 and 4.2 on air (depending on your luck). The i7 920 D0 also tends to get to a similar clock range, perhaps slightly higher (maybe 3.9-4.3?). Sure, AMD scales better at extreme cold, but how many people honestly run on liquid helium? Since the i7 has better performance per clock cycle (both single and multithreaded), the i7 920 is simply a better CPU than the 955, and if anything, it gets farther ahead when overclocked because the 955 loses the clockspeed advantage that it enjoys when both are at stock speed.

Oh, and Kemnaly, the i7 isn't choking at high res gaming. The graphics card is choking, so the CPU becomes irrelevant.
June 14, 2009 12:24:09 AM

Got to say, the only real reason is that triple channel and 8 threads. disable it and what do u get, Somethnig that cant keep up to the 955. The 8 thread is the only thing keeping it in the competition. Know that. If The 955 as only four threads and can push those results, imagine with 8 920 dies and perhaps the 975 as well.
a b à CPUs
June 14, 2009 12:28:47 AM

Not at all. The i7 will easily keep up if you turn off HT and only run 2 channels. In fact, if someone with a 955 will run some benchmarks, I'll run the same ones with mine with only 2 channels of RAM and no HT. I bet mine is still faster.
June 14, 2009 12:30:54 AM

rebelleader757 said:
Look here noob go to new egg(which is one of the cheaper sites) and look at the lowest most suckiest i7 and compare it to the 955. It is nothing. i am an IT professional so i would shut it if i were you. and for your info the 955 ocs to an easy 4.3 GHz with an aftermarket AIR cooler. with water it goes far beyond that. and don't forget that amd has the fastest oc and benchmark. it is not a thousand dollar processor but it sure hands intel its a$$.


A true 'IT professional' would know that it all depends on the application being used, and to some extent on the OS as well. For instance, no x86 processor will scale well enough to run a large Oracle DB, or a large SAP system. An I7 will pay for itself in a few months in a graphics shop using Maya or CS4 (or both), as well as in a large CAD shop.

'So I would shut it if I were you.'
June 14, 2009 12:58:53 AM

cjl said:
You see though, the "lowest most suckiest i7" absolutely DESTROYS the top Phenom II in all CPU limited benchmarks, including when overclocked. So, it is the better buy. Of course, that's ignoring the difference in motherboard and RAM cost, which is significant (though less significant than it used to be), but still, AMD definitely does not hand Intel its ass. If anything, it's the other way around. Admittedly, gaming is very rarely CPU limited, and even more rarely is it CPU limited and highly threaded, so it is an area where the i7 and Phenom II are more likely to be pretty close in performance, but neither is exactly stressed in that case. Look at situations where there is a high end CF/SLI setup though, and you can see the i7 pulling away - once more strain is put on the CPU due to the more powerful graphics, and the i7's additional power becomes readily apparent.

As for the 955 overclocking? From what I've seen, it tends to go to between 3.8 and 4.2 on air (depending on your luck). The i7 920 D0 also tends to get to a similar clock range, perhaps slightly higher (maybe 3.9-4.3?). Sure, AMD scales better at extreme cold, but how many people honestly run on liquid helium? Since the i7 has better performance per clock cycle (both single and multithreaded), the i7 920 is simply a better CPU than the 955, and if anything, it gets farther ahead when overclocked because the 955 loses the clockspeed advantage that it enjoys when both are at stock speed.

Oh, and Kemnaly, the i7 isn't choking at high res gaming. The graphics card is choking, so the CPU becomes irrelevant.



Basically your right on. The newest arch from Intel is faster, tho not that much in gaming, and the highest AMD is priced accordingly vs Intel anyways. Intels new arch is 1 arch ahead of AMD at this point, and it should be ahead, or Intels been doin the pooch. The overall system cost is whats usually taken into consideration in a gaming rig, which then puts the 955 in a very competitive scenario vs i7, BUT in this case, since we dont mind spending money as the OP obviously doesnt, Id say, go with the i7
a b à CPUs
June 14, 2009 1:03:01 AM

I'll definitely agree that the Phenom is in a fairly competitive overall system cost position, due to the cheaper boards and RAM. Don't get me wrong - the 955 is a great CPU, and I'd put it about on par with a Q9650 in many ways, but it just can't match an i7 for raw CPU power.
June 14, 2009 1:06:32 AM

Clock for clock, AMD will have to wait for BD to maybe be truly competitive.

June 14, 2009 1:29:47 AM

In reality, AMD does as well against i7 as does the first C2Ds do, as it should, since its really the next gen from K8, just like C2D was from P4, they just need to produce a new arch, and be able to keep up with Intel at that point.
Time will tell

And since this has obviously turned into a A vs B thread once again, Id point out that only since P2 has come out has AMD been competitive in the mainstream, and now is also sporting tris and duals which fare well also against Intel, tho this MAY change once Clarkdale is released, as that too would be 1 arch ahead of AMD.

Hector Ruin didnt quite live up to his name, as AMD still has a chance here at achieving near the top of perf with their next gen, its just coming so late, its still hurting AMD. I say, turn Hector over to Obama and his boys, let them have at em
a b à CPUs
June 14, 2009 2:47:42 AM

OK, just for fun, here are some quick benchmarks. Dual channel DDR3-1600 7-8-7-22-1T, 2 DIMMs per channel (8192MB total), 4GHz, 4 cores active, 4 threads active.

First, the settings:


Everest memory benchmark:


SANDRA memory benchmark:


SANDRA processor arithmetic:


3dmarkVantage CPU score:


3dmark06 CPU score:


Oh, and just for grins, here's a full 3dmark06 run with the i7 at 4200MHz (still HT off and dual channel though).
June 19, 2009 12:33:24 AM

Nice try, a 1000$ CPU and arguing also thats its superior against a 234$ one from AMD.

Ofcourse its faster at 5x the price and targeted at stupid overclockers, noone serious enough would buy the Extreme Edition of i7's when in the same price gets a beefy Dual Socket motherboard and 2x Xeon Nehalems E5520's with twice the Cores, twice the Threads, twice the raw Cpu Power and twice the upgrade path to 32nm Six core Xeon Westmeres at 2010. :lol: 

Here's some realworld benches for that little gypsy called AMD.











a b à CPUs
June 19, 2009 7:21:47 AM

Actually, my benchmarks are relevant. The D0 920s hit that kind of speed all the time (and unfortunately weren't available when I was building my system - if D0 had been out, I wouldn't have a 965). Oh, and dual E5520s is nice, but at just 2.26GHz apiece, they won't be significantly faster than my 4.2GHz i7 in multithreaded loads, and in gaming (still primarily single threaded), my i7 will utterly flatten the dual E5520 setup.
June 21, 2009 12:18:19 PM

In gaming, even an Q9400 or an AMD Phenom II 940 would simply ridicule the 1000$ CPU in price/perfomance cost. Nice try again but not cigar. A smart buyer would more than make up the lost ground to the expensive CPU by a pair of really fast SSD's in RAID0 and a beefy single gpu card, preferably an Nvidia with its CUDA hooks and its awesome 5x-20x acceleration in video processing with more soon to come, wiping the floor of the 1000$ CPU. Overclockers may enjoy their synthetic benchmarks and multitasking between some HD porn and 3DMark, smart users pay same or lower price and get a much more balanced and powerful system setup. And kids, remember it...the day when the i7 would be called "Prescott II" is not in a galaxy far far away, but closer than you think.

:lol: 
July 12, 2009 11:07:02 AM

I think Lynnfield will be much more competitive with the Phenom II's than the current Bloomfield processors.
The only thing with LGA1366/Core i7 that has had me on the fence with this whole Phenom vs i7 thing, is that LGA1366 is going to reserved for high-end and server CPUs from Intel in the future, whereas AMD will be using AM3 for all their mainstream processors...Intel will be releasing the mainstream LGA1156 later this year, which is a whole other chipset.

I don't know, I just think AMD has a better selection for most mainstream users...It's true that a X4 955 is comparable to a 920 i7 for gaming because the software still isn't optimized take advantage of i7's HT.

Both systems will give you great performance though, no matter what.
I think everyone forgets that even though the i7 is better clock for clock, both chips are a great upgrade from anything older than a Core 2 Quad.
Even then, C2Q is on the out. *shrug*
I'm building my system this summer and I like the idea of saving close to $300CAD by purchasing a AM3 Gigabyte board + X4 955 + 4GB DC RAM, as opposed to an i7 920 + LGA1366 Gigabyte mobo + 6GB trip channel RAM...
My own personal opinion though. I just think both platforms have their advantages and it will depend on your specific needs/requirements.

EDIT: The one thing I hate about AM3 boards out right now, is the almost total lack of SLI support. About 50% of all X58 mobo's have SLI + CF support, whereas almost all AM3 boards only support CF...Doesn't leave much choice for multi-GPU setups, which I intend to have in the future.
a c 117 à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
July 12, 2009 12:29:53 PM

UltraO said:
The best overclocker in the hole universe :D 



Is there a black whole in your Universe ?
July 20, 2009 12:38:39 AM

i'm copypasting from newegg. The Vorlon said regarding the 955:

Pros: The Core i7 series DESTROY this cpu in most benchmarks... But that is not really the point.

This CPU is priced to be up against the Intel Q9550 and Q9650 series, and it's over all performance is in the general range of those two CPUs.

The AMD fanboys proclaiming this the fastest CPU in existance, are, well, just fanboys, but the Intel folks out there should open their minds up as well. The AMD motherboards tend to be a tad cheaper than the Intel boards, so over all this CPU is an excellent value when views from a total platform perspective.

Regarding over clocking, the AMD and the Intel parts are quite different. For a short period of time, the AMDs will (generally) overclock a little better than the Intel parts - This is because the AMD parts are thermally limited. The Intel parts are speed path limited but have much lower power consuption values, and will generally have higher stable 24/7 overclocks than the AMD parts, but cannot match the short term AMD overclocks.

Cons: These cpus use a lot of power 125 watts versus (typically) in the 65 to 70 range for the Intel Core2quads.

Other Thoughts: There will be a x4 965 (3.4 ghz) soon, so they may be a bargain to be had on this part when it is no longer the top of the AMD heap...

END of copypaste
I lean towards the AMD simply for the cost, but since that's not a big deal for you, then go and spend on the i7. If you want OC all the time, intel. If you want bursts of speed (mainly gaming/large polygon scenes), go AMD. Really, there are tradeoffs you need to consider in how you want to use the computer, not just I WANT OVERCLOCK. If you really want power, go buy a rack and put several server blades in parallel and you'll have an awesomely fast computer.
a b à CPUs
July 20, 2009 12:45:32 AM

The i7 is better when overclocked but at stock the 955 will walk all over it in a lot of stuff. The big thing is, the i7 scales dramatically with OC'ing while the phenom II's give mediocre results. It's just architecture making the difference and seeing as nehalem is pretty much a new arch compared to the phenom II's which are more of a revision if you like, it's pretty decent from AMD this round.

If you have no intention of overclocking your cpu, you'd be better off with a phenom II 955 instead of an i7 920.
a b à CPUs
July 20, 2009 12:55:49 AM

grimpr said:
In gaming, even an Q9400 or an AMD Phenom II 940 would simply ridicule the 1000$ CPU in price/perfomance cost. Nice try again but not cigar. A smart buyer would more than make up the lost ground to the expensive CPU by a pair of really fast SSD's in RAID0 and a beefy single gpu card, preferably an Nvidia with its CUDA hooks and its awesome 5x-20x acceleration in video processing with more soon to come, wiping the floor of the 1000$ CPU. Overclockers may enjoy their synthetic benchmarks and multitasking between some HD porn and 3DMark, smart users pay same or lower price and get a much more balanced and powerful system setup. And kids, remember it...the day when the i7 would be called "Prescott II" is not in a galaxy far far away, but closer than you think.

http://i43.tinypic.com/2w7pjsk.jpg :lol: 

In price/performance, yes. I didn't buy the 965 for gaming. I got it for engineering apps, including matlab and solidworks. If gaming were my only goal, I might not even have an i7 at all. As for Nvidia Cuda, it's pretty much useless to me. None of the apps that I need a fast CPU for use CUDA at all. As for a beefy GPU, I think 4870 quadfire counts in that category (those are for gaming :D )
July 20, 2009 12:57:37 AM

jennyh said:
The i7 is better when overclocked but at stock the 955 will walk all over it in a lot of stuff. The big thing is, the i7 scales dramatically with OC'ing while the phenom II's give mediocre results. It's just architecture making the difference and seeing as nehalem is pretty much a new arch compared to the phenom II's which are more of a revision if you like, it's pretty decent from AMD this round.

If you have no intention of overclocking your cpu, you'd be better off with a phenom II 955 instead of an i7 920.


For gaming, probably true. For most gaming, any more than 2 cores is generally over-kill. For serious use, say Maya 3d, PS CS4 or any of a number of high end CAD programs, the more threads the better. The newer Xeons are really starting to shine.
a c 127 à CPUs
July 20, 2009 4:12:30 AM

rebelleader757 said:
Look here noob go to new egg(which is one of the cheaper sites) and look at the lowest most suckiest i7 and compare it to the 955. It is nothing. i am an IT professional so i would shut it if i were you. and for your info the 955 ocs to an easy 4.3 GHz with an aftermarket AIR cooler. with water it goes far beyond that. and don't forget that amd has the fastest oc and benchmark. it is not a thousand dollar processor but it sure hands intel its a$$.


Sure "Mr. IT". Whatever you say. Have you even considered that the CPU the OP is talking about is the i7 920? Not $1K. Only a 1/4, probably less than that. And the D0 stepping has been shown to easily hit 3.8GHz from the stock 2.66GHz on air using the stock voltage. Be the X4 955 has to raise the voltage to get to that 4.3GHz, doesn't it?

Either way stop being a punk.

jennyh said:
The i7 is better when overclocked but at stock the 955 will walk all over it in a lot of stuff. The big thing is, the i7 scales dramatically with OC'ing while the phenom II's give mediocre results. It's just architecture making the difference and seeing as nehalem is pretty much a new arch compared to the phenom II's which are more of a revision if you like, it's pretty decent from AMD this round.

If you have no intention of overclocking your cpu, you'd be better off with a phenom II 955 instead of an i7 920.


The whole point to the OPs thread is getting one for OCing. Thats what he plans to do. So in the end its probably best to go with the Core i7 920 especially since he plans on two GTX275s.
July 20, 2009 4:40:02 AM

WAIT! that Nvidia mobo supports DDR3 for the 955!!!! Look at the specs carefully!!
July 26, 2009 5:07:13 PM

Nice benchmarks! im glad my q9550 has better overall than an amd 955 on a ddr3 mobo but i think that you guys have lost the point! a pc sould be upgraded when it is no longer efficient and not because the new i7 or amd9950 BE gets 2 fps more in games like crysis!. why to buy an i7 that will be out of production in 2-3 months when the new 6core chips will come out? what will you do then? buy the new 6 core or later the new 12 or 40 core just to say you have one?. I have been around since the first 8 bit computers and i o/c pcs since the time you needed a soldering iron and tampering with jumpers on the mobo! but i did it only for making them run heavier applications or top games of their time. However if you want to build a system decide first what you want it for, an amd 9950BE has better cost/performance ratio and can use existing mobos that have am2+ socket, an i7 has build in triple channell memmory controller hyperthreading and good oc capabilities but you have to buy a good mobo an even better set of ddr3 memmory and a high efficiency psu. if you dont care about the cost buy the i7 but if you have a limited budget buy amd. As for me ill stick to what i have until they drop the prices or until an upgrade is absolutely needed!
P.S Pardon my english but its not my native language.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 23, 2009 7:02:08 AM

i7 has hyperthreading, that makes it a bit better then 965.
But I would buy 965, more performance / $ in my country.
The 965 costs 66% of what i7 costs and as far as Im concerned, i7 isn't 33% faster then 965. <---period.
a b à CPUs
August 25, 2009 5:09:43 PM

cjl said:
Not at all. The i7 will easily keep up if you turn off HT and only run 2 channels. In fact, if someone with a 955 will run some benchmarks, I'll run the same ones with mine with only 2 channels of RAM and no HT. I bet mine is still faster.


Thank you for providing some reason. I would really like to see the results of this duel. Keep up the levelheaded unbiased posts... some one has to.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
December 17, 2009 3:54:46 AM

ya ASUS m4a78t-e, really nice board? M using with AMD 955 be!!
a b à CPUs
December 17, 2009 8:52:08 AM

Haha. I know this a necro thread but I had to comment at the epic fail statement. "The i7 is better when overclocked but at stock the 955 will walk all over it in a lot of stuff. The big thing is, the i7 scales dramatically with OC'ing while the phenom II's give mediocre results. It's just architecture making the difference and seeing as nehalem is pretty much a new arch compared to the phenom II's which are more of a revision if you like, it's pretty decent from AMD this round.

If you have no intention of overclocking your cpu, you'd be better off with a phenom II 955 instead of an i7 920."

Facepalm to that one. And facepalm to me for posting in this thread.
a b à CPUs
December 17, 2009 9:37:54 AM

^ Here:

!