Tom's Hardware > Forum > CPU & Components > CPUs > Intel core I7-920 2.66 GHZ or amd phenom II X4 955 3.2GHZ

Intel core I7-920 2.66 GHZ or amd phenom II X4 955 3.2GHZ

Forum CPU & Components : CPUs - Intel core I7-920 2.66 GHZ or amd phenom II X4 955 3.2GHZ

Tom's Hardware: Over 1.4 million members in 6 different countries available to answer all your high-tech questions. Sign up now! Its free!
Word :    Username :           
 

I am planning on buying a pc, howevere i can't figure out wether an intel i7 core 920 2.66 GHZ pc will actualy give me more than an amd phenom II X4 955 3.2 GHZ. Please help me out

Sponsored Links
Register or log in to remove.
- 0 +

If you can, go i7, you will definitely see a difference in multithreaded apps and it scales much better with multi-gpu setups. But for gaming, the X4 955 performs basically the same, maybe slightly better. If you overclock the i7 it would definitely pull ahead much more.

Reply to bige420
- 0 +

to be specific i will be using this pc for progamming applications, for gamming (occasionaly) and in the near future for grafic applications.

Reply to ps-jl
- 0 +

I'd lean towards the i7 then.

------------------------------ Asus P6T deluxe
i7 965 @ 4.2GHz (200*21), 1.384V
12GB Corsair Dominator DDR3-1600 CAS 7
Reply to cjl

I'm asking myself the exact same question for the exact same reasons. From youtube through google to here I'd say [maybe] amd.
Mostly because it is cheaper. If you go for i7 you'll have to overclock to get over 3ghz; and thus reasonable for standard apps. @ work we use intel quadcores @ 2.4 and loading projects in VisualSt takes ages! Amd is already over 3Ghz and costs 50-100 $ less. Not to mention your MBoard will cost 50-200$ less as well (me thinks Gigabyte GA-MA790FXT-UD5P vs any intel 1366). For working CPU speed is king go for whatever gives higher Ghz. Saying multithread is important is still bullsh!t.(Sorry guys) (::Overall coding speaking)

The downsides are overclocking is much easier & stable with intel than AMD (from what I've seen so far I may be wrong by now) and that AMD seems to lock you with crossfire... no SLI. but you can still get 1 powerful geforce to compensate. I'm saying Geforce because regardless of how well ATI does cheap good cards, most gamemakers get in bed with NVIDIA.

http://www.tomshardware.com/review [...] ,2326.html

Like for last Remnant, some games just hate ATI guts. I like ATI so I fell sorry for them, but it's the hard truth.

Reply to crazywakkawakka
- 0 +

crazy: actually, Intel's does more work per clock cycle, so despite the lower clock speed, the two are roughly equivalent in single threaded tasks. The i7 is a better choice, even if you don't overclock. If GHz was all that mattered, the Pentium 4, with stock clock speeds as high as 3.8GHz, would still be king for single threaded, but an E8400 will utterly flatten it in every way because of the more efficient architecture.

 

(Oh, and you can think of the i7 920 as a 2.8GHz CPU, since that's the speed it'll run most of the time anyway with turbo mode).


Message edited by cjl on 06-22-2009 at 07:42:18 PM
------------------------------ Asus P6T deluxe
i7 965 @ 4.2GHz (200*21), 1.384V
12GB Corsair Dominator DDR3-1600 CAS 7
Reply to cjl

Ok ok... (Hell I'm no rocket scientist)

And so if we inject overclocking in the equation is that still true? What are the hopes of getting those clock speeds up even a little? Does the i7 still rock more?

Reply to crazywakkawakka

I7- Part time 8 core processor
X4 - full time 4 core processor

HT > *

------------------------------ Core I7 920 D0 @ 4.2Ghz
MSI X58 Pro-E
32GB SSD, WD Blacks In R0
Sapphire HD 5870's In XFire
Reply to PsychoSaysDie

bige420 wrote :

If you can, go i7, you will definitely see a difference in multithreaded apps and it scales much better with multi-gpu setups. But for gaming, the X4 955 performs basically the same, maybe slightly better. If you overclock the i7 it would definitely pull ahead much more.




All the benchmarks we see these days lie - what gamer *ONLY* has the game installed? NO ONE

Everyones system has A/V, firewall, chat apps, torrents, skype etc running - i7 owns in the real world - only the people who have worked with i7's and use them will know what its all about.

Oh and BTW Psycho - the dual socket nehalem xeon rigs own quad socket AMD parts on the server front - 16 threads total (8 cores + 8 threads) on the Intel will beat 16 real AMD cores easy - check the benches out on Anandtech.

------------------------------ Q6600@3510/1560 + TT BigTyphoon+Mod
8gb Kingston 800mhz
Gigabyte EP35-DS3P
XFX 8800GT/512
Reply to apache_lives

apache_lives wrote :

All the benchmarks we see these days lie - what gamer *ONLY* has the game installed? NO ONE

Everyones system has A/V, firewall, chat apps, torrents, skype etc running - i7 owns in the real world - only the people who have worked with i7's and use them will know what its all about.

Oh and BTW Psycho - the dual socket nehalem xeon rigs own quad socket AMD parts on the server front - 16 threads total (8 cores + 8 threads) on the Intel will beat 16 real AMD cores easy - check the benches out on Anandtech.




16HT's makes me drool

------------------------------ Core I7 920 D0 @ 4.2Ghz
MSI X58 Pro-E
32GB SSD, WD Blacks In R0
Sapphire HD 5870's In XFire
Reply to PsychoSaysDie
Tom's Hardware > Forum > CPU & Components > CPUs > Intel core I7-920 2.66 GHZ or amd phenom II X4 955 3.2GHZ
Go to:

There are 1292 identified and unidentified users. To see the list of identified users, Click here.

Sponsored links
  • Ask the community now
  • Publish
Ad
They won a badge
Join us in greeting them