I7 920 or i7 860?

[cauchy2k]

Hi i would like to update my system,which system would you choose
A- Asus P6TD Deluxe with core i7 920 and mushkin redline 1600 mhz 6-7-6-18
B- Asus p7p55d Deluxe with Core i7 860 and mushkin redline 1600 mhz 6-7-6-18

I want a system for faster movie encoding(DVD to AVI,MPG1),games(i'm not a big gamer)ALL I WANT IS THE BEST PERFORMANCE.
Thanks

 

[yomamafor1]

Both Core i7 920 and Core i7 860 shares the same core, with minor differences on the structure. So they both should perform similarly. However, the i7 920 gives you the opportunity to upgrade to multi-GPU configuration, since its a much better platform for that (and currently the best platform on the market to do that as well).

 

[gkay09]

^+1 and i7 has Tri-Channel memory controller compared to the 860's dual-channel, which should make a difference in video encoding and other tasks...
So i7 920 would be a better option...

 

[xaira]

the i7 860 is the faster choice, no one xept the most demanding enterprise users will ever require tripple channel memory

http://vr-zone.com/forums/475539/core-i7-860-tested-faster-than-core-i7-920.html

 

[LePhuronn]

no one xept the most demanding enterprise users will ever require tripple channel memoryl

Except anybody who uses Photoshop for more than painting simple colours and anybody who does even rudimentary video.

 

[mikey5802]

^+1. And the i7 920 is great for overclocking if you can get the D0 stepping.

 

[archibael]

Except anybody who uses Photoshop for more than painting simple colours and anybody who does even rudimentary video.

I think the jury's out right now.

Anandtech's early look at Lynnfield in video encoding and Photoshop did seem to show that clock-for-clock the i7-920 beats the Lynnfield equivalent, which implies that the extra memory channel does improve matters on these tests... but what we're getting isn't clock-for-clock, is it? i7-860 is (according to the latest webrumors) 2.8GHz, while the i7-920 clocks at 2.66GHz. A small difference, but on benches that are strongly clock dependent (and the implication of the Anand study is that there is some dependency, when you look at the 2.13GHz vs 2.66GHz comparisons) it could be significant.

Of course, as you guys have already suggested, overclocking might change the game.

 

[cauchy2k]

Thanks everyone for your advice,please keep sharing ideas.Thank you

 

[bige420]

They're both pretty close, but I would go with the 920 if possible simply because of tri-channel memory. But you cant go wrong with either one.

 

[JeanLuc]

The Core i7 860 is quicker, period. Just go and read al the leaked benchmarks, expensive tri-channel memory makes ah heck all difference for the home user/gamer, clock rates is where it's at and the 860 has the 920's number when it comes to clock rate and no amount of memory bandwidth is going to help it.

Also consider that the 860 is 95 watt TDP compared to the 920's 130 watt TDP, I have yet to see how this translates into lower temps and power savings but you can be bet it will offer an improvement. Also the Turbo mode on the 860 is highly aggressive, it can push the one of the cores to 3.4Ghz which is handy for single threaded games and apps and for those who don't want to overclock the CPU. For comparison the 920 on goes to 2.94Ghz in turbo mode. As far as overclocking goes the Lynnfields have been pushed to over 5Ghz on air, which compares to about 4Ghz/4.2Ghz for the Core i7 920.

At this point I would say the Core i7 860 will be the chip of choice but I would wait until the mainstream reviews come out to confirm early findings.

 

[LePhuronn]

Be that as it may, JeanLuc, the OP said he wants to do video work. Unless it's low-end consumer stuff (i.e. Movie Maker or Premiere Elements) then there is no discussion to be had - it's the triple-channel 920 and just clock it up to 3.4GHz where the stock cooler can still take it, so you don't have to worry about anything else.

So, to OP: how heavy is your video encoding going to be, and how often? How serious is your gaming?

 

[JeanLuc]

Be that as it may, JeanLuc, the OP said he wants to do video work. Unless it's low-end consumer stuff (i.e. Movie Maker or Premiere Elements) then there is no discussion to be had - it's the triple-channel 920 and just clock it up to 3.4GHz where the stock cooler can still take it, so you don't have to worry about anything else.

So, to OP: how heavy is your video encoding going to be, and how often? How serious is your gaming?

Mostly likely he is doing low end consumer work, how many of us work for big video production companies? Anyway I'm not going to second guess the OP any longer, the benchmarks on the that Anandtech link above compare the chips clock for clock, at default speeds the Lynnfield 860 runs nearly 200 Mhz faster then the 920 and that's before any overclocking.

For me the big benefit of having a Core i7 920 is the X58 platform and having access to two full X16 slots running at X16 and X16 for SLI and Crossfire (bear in mind you can do video encoding on video cards these days) which is ideal for gamers who want the fastest setup. However if isn't a hardcore gamer the P55 single X16 and X8 slot should provide more then enough bandwidth for his purposes without the expense of triple channel memory and a X58 board.

 

[xaira]

+1^

 

[cauchy2k]

Be that as it may, JeanLuc, the OP said he wants to do video work. Unless it's low-end consumer stuff (i.e. Movie Maker or Premiere Elements) then there is no discussion to be had - it's the triple-channel 920 and just clock it up to 3.4GHz where the stock cooler can still take it, so you don't have to worry about anything else.

So, to OP: how heavy is your video encoding going to be, and how often? How serious is your gaming?

I want a system for faster movie encoding(DVD to AVI,MPG1),games(i'm not a big gamer)ALL I WANT IS THE BEST PERFORMANCE.
Thanks

 

[JeanLuc]

I want a system for faster movie encoding(DVD to AVI,MPG1),games(i'm not a big gamer)ALL I WANT IS THE BEST PERFORMANCE.
Thanks

The Core i7 860 is your chip then, I do quite a bit of video encoding myself (I've moved all my DVD's to .Avi/XVID) and the only way to really speed things up is by having a faster CPU. Since the 860 and 920 share the same architecture the only the big difference in speed is the clock rate in which case the 860 has 200Mhz more than the 920. The same applies to gaming, more mhz’s the better triple channel memory won’t make any significant difference here.

I would still wait until the early reviews come out before making up your mind, the 920 still has it advantages in as much as it’s a more mature CPU that’s already seen a couple of revisions.

 

[dirtmountain]

i7 920.

 

[cauchy2k]

The Core i7 860 is your chip then, I do quite a bit of video encoding myself (I've moved all my DVD's to .Avi/XVID) and the only way to really speed things up is by having a faster CPU. Since the 860 and 920 share the same architecture the only the big difference in speed is the clock rate in which case the 860 has 200Mhz more than the 920. The same applies to gaming, more mhz’s the better triple channel memory won’t make any significant difference here.

I would still wait until the early reviews come out before making up your mind, the 920 still has it advantages in as much as it’s a more mature CPU that’s already seen a couple of revisions.

I would like to know for sure which CPU can get safer and stable OC speeds,the winner in that test should be the chosen.
What do you think?

I have something in favor of triple channel (with 6gb) in my case,when I browse internet with IE8 Vista 64 SP2 with my current PC (4gb DDR2) i receive full memory warnings(i don't use pagefile)
Thanks

 

[Gucio]

If you don't use a pagefile when memory finishes and if any running app cant allocate new space in ram will simply crash. So for future if you want a super pc go with i7 920 you can put up to 24GB of ram. With i7 860 you will have limited ram up to 16 GB (and only dual channel), limited PCIe rails, and 8XX series will not have a 6core version, i don't know if there will be 9XX series for LGA1156 socket. But on other hand it's true that new 860 can beat 920 in few things and have only 95 TDP, but with good cooler you wont have to worry about it.

 

[cauchy2k]

Thanks Gucio for your post.It's been very helpful since I think I favor i7 9xx series,in my case affordable i7 920.I think Gulftown CPU's release is going to be very good for Bloomfield owners because it could make used i7 975 cheaper,so we could get yet better performance than i7 920 and of course than i7 8xx.I think i7 870 can beat many times i7 920 because of 870's higher clock and higher turbo speed increase.I'd like to see a benchmark of 870 stock vs 920 safe OC 3.8 ghz (knowing that i7 Lynnfield overclocks too PCI-e when you increase voltage or bus,so it's not a good safe overclocker) ,i think i7 920 would be the winner and the option to upgrade to current top of the line i7 975 when Gulftown i7 1xxx gets to the market or i7 1xxx itself if you have more money(by the way I read a recent article that states that early tests on i7 1xxx at 2.40 ghz shows important temperature decrease vs current i7 9xx.But that's what I think,I'd go with i7 920 OC'ed now and i7 975 for Q2 2010.If you have any suggestion please let us know here.
Gucio I think with 6 gb or better 12 gb should be OK for me for using my pc without pagefile since Vista 64 uses a lot of RAM and specially IE, too.I'd like to see how this behave under Windows 7 64-bit.
Thanks

 

[Gucio]

Good for you i'm currently saving money for a little render farm, and since 3ds max 2010 is out i'm going to switch from vray to mental ray which is a memory hug and needs fast memory transfers, so i was thinking about xeons before but the cost is way to high, so in my case faster memory i have more time i save. Since i7 9XX have triple channel ddr3 and can transfer up to 25.6GB/s and 8XX only 21GB/s so i will definitely go with i7. But for now i'm waiting till the prices drops to no more than 400$ and maybe i will go with 940

 

[cauchy2k]

Gucio I have seen used core i7 940 at ebay at 349,you'd only have to buy a fan/heatsink solution.

 

[Gucio]

Hmmmm... used smells suspicious, can you post me a link?

edit: Never mind found even 2 more, hmmm maybe i will buy a used one 360$ seems like a good price instead of 559.99$

 

[cauchy2k]

Hi Gucio there's one at $360 new sealed but it's in auction http://cgi.ebay.com/Intel-Core-i7-940-Processor-CPU-Brand-New-Sealed-2-93_W0QQitemZ130328379640QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item1e582d40f8&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14

and used for 349 http://cgi.ebay.com/Intel-Quad-Core-i7-940-2-93-i-7-CPU-Nehalem-Processor_W0QQitemZ140344283844QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item20ad2bd2c4&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14

sorry for the delay,i was trying to figure out how to enable hyperlinks here

the person who sells the used 349 $ is a power seller with many cpu's there, the should not be a problem

 

[Guest]

200 Mhz difference doesn't matter. Has anyone looked at the stats on Intels website for the 920 vs 860?

http://www.intel.com/products/processor/corei7/specifications.htm

Bus speed is 4.8 Gt/s for a 920 and 2.5 Gt/s for a 860. Even if an 860 is a little faster if the bottleneck is smaller BY HALF, then you push less data through. Its pretty simple! Turbo boost and over clocking don't mean anything again if you can only push through HALF the data of a 920's Bus. I would also agree with the earlier post of 920 = 24 GB of RAM and 860 = 16GB, if you want a power house for video encoding, gaming, or apps 920 wins again. Bus speed is key! Overclock your heart out of a 860 if you can't match the bandwidth (i.e. Bus Speed) of a 920 with triple channel memory then you can't come close to the power. Why would anyone think a 860 is faster?

 

[kdn]

no one agree on a winner, both are good imo ><