Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

I7-860 over i7-920

Last response: in CPUs
Share
September 8, 2009 5:29:19 PM

Originally for my new rig that I'm building next month with the DX11 and W7 release, i was going to get an i7-920 but after seeing today's benchmarks of the i5, should i wait until the i7-860, which will obviously benchmark much better than the 920 for a similar price? Thanks for info! :-)

More about : 860 920

September 8, 2009 5:44:12 PM

Yes, go for the 860, it beats the 920 in gaming purposes (because it has a higher clockspeed) for a similar price.
a b à CPUs
September 8, 2009 5:46:36 PM

Gulli said:
Yes, go for the 860, it beats the 920 in gaming purposes (because it has a higher clockspeed) for a similar price.


Also has better Turbo and Hyperthreading to boot, but only dual-channel memory which is fine for desktop use.
Related resources
a b à CPUs
September 8, 2009 5:53:54 PM

well are you wanting the best now or do you want it to be upgradeable?

If you looking at performance than yeah go for the 860.
Although if your wanting upgrade at cheaper price in the future. then i say the 920.

Im only mentioning this because from what i heard is that the Core I9 will be compatible with the X58 motherboards. So if down the road you need a 6core/12 thread processor you wont need to replace the entire computer. Just a cpu.

Just something to think about.
September 8, 2009 5:59:05 PM

fazers_on_stun said:
Also has better Turbo and Hyperthreading to boot, but only dual-channel memory which is fine for desktop use.


is Dual Channel memory only available in DDR2? That's what I'm running on my current system...

When is the release date of the i9's anyway?
a b à CPUs
September 8, 2009 6:01:54 PM

notrace said:
is Dual Channel memory only available in DDR2? That's what I'm running on my current system...

When is the release date of the i9's anyway?




Core I9 sometime 2010. (most say it will be in the 1st half of the year.)


I do believe that the I5 and I7 only use DDR3 ram
September 8, 2009 6:03:30 PM

"is Dual Channel memory only available in DDR2? That's what I'm running on my current system..."

No, the i7 860 works with DDR3 memory only, dual channel means the system works best with 2 or 4 sticks of ram, where triple channel wants 3 or 6.

"When is the release date of the i9's anyway?"

Somewhere in 2010 and it will be a six-core and probably cost you 1000 bucks, not that you'll notice the difference while gaming.

By the time six-cores have become the standard your X58 motherboard will probably be hopelessly outdated.
September 8, 2009 6:05:47 PM

Gulli said:
"is Dual Channel memory only available in DDR2? That's what I'm running on my current system..."

No, the i7 860 works with DDR3 memory only, dual channel means the system works best with 2 or 4 sticks of ram, where triple channel wants 3 or 6.

"When is the release date of the i9's anyway?"

Somewhere in 2010 and it will be a six-core and probably cost you 1000 bucks, not that you'll notice the difference while gaming.

By the time six-cores have become the standard your X58 motherboard will probably be hopelessly outdated.


So for example this would be a logical choice for RAM?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
September 8, 2009 6:11:28 PM

"So for example this would be a logical choice for RAM?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod [...] 6820146777 "

Yep, perfect, but a bit expensive, try another brand.
September 8, 2009 6:12:50 PM

Yeah, go for the memory warmon6 suggested.
September 8, 2009 6:14:00 PM

Gulli said:
Yeah, go for the memory warmon6 suggested.


It can only take up to 1333MHz speed RAM? Would 6GB be too much?
a b à CPUs
September 8, 2009 6:18:54 PM

Na. if going for a 64 bit windows the 6 GB would be the sweet spot. if 32 bit windows then yeah that would be to much sence 32 bits only see (rounding up) 4 GB of memory.
September 8, 2009 6:21:47 PM

"Na. if going for a 64 bit windows the 6 GB would be the sweet spot. if 32 bit windows then yeah that would be to much sence 32 bits only see (rounding up) 4 GB of memory."

But you'll lose dual channel, unless there are 3GB or 1,5GB sticks out there, you see, there are still valid reasons why Intel calls LGA 1366 CPU's "high-end".


P.S. 4GB is enough, even with 64bit Windows, that may change a couple of years from now, but right now it's enough.
a b à CPUs
September 8, 2009 6:22:45 PM

I'd still get the i7 920 over the i7 860, they're priced about the same and with the X58 you still get crossfire or SLI at 16x-16x instead of 8x-8x with the P55.
a b à CPUs
September 8, 2009 6:23:38 PM

Gulli said:
"Na. if going for a 64 bit windows the 6 GB would be the sweet spot. if 32 bit windows then yeah that would be to much sence 32 bits only see (rounding up) 4 GB of memory."

But you'll lose dual channel, unless there are 3GB or 1,5GB sticks out there, you see, there are still valid reasons why Intel calls LGA 1366 CPU's "high-end".


P.S. 4GB is enough, even with 64bit Windows, that may change a couple of years from now, but right now it's enough.


He does have a point.
September 8, 2009 6:23:51 PM

Well i was reading this post in the meantime...
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/266032-28-tomshardwar...

Being a big gamer myself, I will definitely be running X2 GPU's,, possibly dual GTX 285's and originally was going to get 12GB of RAM and OC the 920 to ridiculous heights with water cooling...in that case do your opinions change?
a b à CPUs
September 8, 2009 6:26:39 PM

Not mine.
a b à CPUs
September 8, 2009 6:26:51 PM

^ +1. Unless the OP is on a really tight budget, go for 4 sticks = 8GB. Moah is bettah!! :D 
September 8, 2009 6:28:28 PM

If the sky is the limit then go for LGA 1366 and overclock the 920, it will be better than the 860 (clock for clock of course) with multiple GPU's.

But seriously, 12GB is just a waste of money unless you're building a supercomputer to find the Higgs Particle.
a b à CPUs
September 8, 2009 6:29:56 PM

Gulli said:
But seriously, 12GB is just a waste of money unless you're building a supercomputer to find the Higgs Particle.

:lol: 
September 8, 2009 6:31:47 PM

Haha budget isn't really much of my concern, i just would like a rig that blows others away, and i do a shitload of video-gaming editing and hate lagging during that on my current rig its a real problem...plus I'm aiming for 1920x1200 resolution on my next monitor...and yes, finding the Higgs Particle is definitely on my "to-do" list once i build this bad boy.
a b à CPUs
September 8, 2009 6:42:00 PM

Check prices, only about $70 difference between similar platforms of i7 920/X58/6GB RAM and i7 860/P55/4GB RAM. Make sure the P55 is a gaming crossfire board with 8x/8x and not the 16x/4x crossfire boards.
September 8, 2009 6:46:20 PM

Nah you're right, if I'm going to be SLI'ing then i should definitely go with the X58's 16X/16X slots.
September 8, 2009 7:41:06 PM

Gulli said:
But seriously, 12GB is just a waste of money unless you're building a supercomputer to find the Higgs Particle.


I find myself thinking the same, but i've been quoted several times people telling me that their either too lazy to close browsers or their heavy multitaskers or such. For a gamer with an i7, 6 GB is optimal, any more and youll lose performance.

I too am thinking of which one to get. If the i7 860 cant run dual GPUs then eh, screw it. Only reason id look into the P55 MB's is their cheap
September 8, 2009 7:55:25 PM

Would you really lose performance with over 6GB? How so? Does your CPU not know what to do with all the extra memory?
September 8, 2009 8:18:16 PM

notrace said:
Would you really lose performance with over 6GB? How so? Does your CPU not know what to do with all the extra memory?


Never heard of that happening, unused ram just sits idle, it doesn't slow the system down.

a b à CPUs
September 8, 2009 8:21:32 PM

^Depends on what software you run. RAM benefits a lot in renderings and such.

The ONLY legit reason I can think of where too much RAM would be a problem is if you don't reduce pagefile. If you let Windows manage the pagefile you'd have a 24GB page file on a 12GB build! :ouch:  . For a 6GB system, a 1-1.2GB page file is good or you can turn off page compleately
September 8, 2009 8:22:52 PM

My question lies with the forthcoming DirectX 11 GPUs.
In a single card solution, will they be limited by the x8 PCIe bus of the P55s?
(Maybe I am not understanding this correctly, can the P55 allow for 16x PCIe for a single card by adding the two together?)
September 8, 2009 8:29:57 PM

Acclaim said:
My question lies with the forthcoming DirectX 11 GPUs.
In a single card solution, will they be limited by the x8 PCIe bus of the P55s?
(Maybe I am not understanding this correctly, can the P55 allow for 16x PCIe for a single card by adding the two together?)


You'll get the full 16x with a single GPU.
a b à CPUs
September 8, 2009 8:34:05 PM

notrace said:
So for example this would be a logical choice for RAM?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...


Nope. That DDR3 is rated for 1.9V. Look for memory rated at 1.65 volts or less, such as this:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Also make sure you install the memory in matched pairs of sticks - 6GB makes no sense on a dual channel setup - either go for 4GB or 8GB depending on how much you think you will need.
September 8, 2009 8:35:37 PM

The D0 920 is cheaper than the i7 860 here in the UK by £20. If you will be using more than one video card, the X58 is the way to go as prices stand. Simple. 6GB DDR3 kits are not expensive and nor are X58 boards.

Mind you, I so want the Asus P55 RoG Maximus III Formula mobo:

http://www.scan.co.uk/Product.aspx?WebProductId=1068208

Isn't she pretty <3
a b à CPUs
September 8, 2009 8:39:02 PM

dirtmountain said:
I'd still get the i7 920 over the i7 860, they're priced about the same and with the X58 you still get crossfire or SLI at 16x-16x instead of 8x-8x with the P55.


You can get x16/x8 with the P55 ........

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Another thing you should know is that it really don't matter if both lanes are x8..... There is little to no difference at all.... It all comes down to the GPU's that are being used....

BTW, the 750 pwns the 920 in almost every benchmark.... The only time we say the 920 ahead was when using more than 2 GPU's and most of us can deal with 2 GPU's since 3 or more are considered overkill.....
a b à CPUs
September 8, 2009 8:53:05 PM

Yea, looks like typical newegg typo.....
a b à CPUs
September 8, 2009 8:54:18 PM

fazers_on_stun said:
Also has better Turbo and Hyperthreading to boot, but only dual-channel memory which is fine for desktop use.



i7 has both Turbo Boost and Hyper threading too - even if the 860 has better versions still doesnt account for the much higher memory bandwidth of the i7's
September 8, 2009 10:05:50 PM

OvrClkr said:
You can get x16/x8 with the P55 ........

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Another thing you should know is that it really don't matter if both lanes are x8..... There is little to no difference at all.... It all comes down to the GPU's that are being used....

BTW, the 750 pwns the 920 in almost every benchmark.... The only time we say the 920 ahead was when using more than 2 GPU's and most of us can deal with 2 GPU's since 3 or more are considered overkill.....


What? According to this (http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i5-gaming,2403...);
A 750 can outdo a 920 on smaller resolutions, but once you get past 1920x1200 the i7 takes off, and it performs better on all the productivity tasks...and those tests are only done with one GPU, the i5 can't support 2 as well as the i7.
a b à CPUs
September 8, 2009 11:10:29 PM

You are comparing , Photoshop, Win-Rar, Win,Zip, etc..... I could care less if the 920 is faster in those apps.... Tom's is just comparing using those apps so we can see the main difference....

My comparison is mostly in games and similar benchmarks... For example : The 920 (2.66Ghz)averages 17k in 3dmark06 when it is paired with a hefty GTX 295, while the 750 (2.8Ghz) gets well over 18k using a GTX 285.... That is just one example of how the 750 destroys the 920...

As far as resolutions go that is overrated cause most users don't play at a higher res than 1900x1200... Most benchmarks are done @ 1650x1050 or 1900x1200 ..... Unless you want lame frames then yea you can go over 1900x1200... I don't see a need for more than that res ATM.....

My point of view is in fact the price / performance aspect.... While yes, you will have an overall more powerful machine with the 920/X58...When it comes to what you will save with 750/P55, the price of the 920 platform does not compensate for the amount of performance you get from the 750 platform....
September 9, 2009 12:13:22 AM

OvrClkr said:
You are comparing , Photoshop, Win-Rar, Win,Zip, etc..... I could care less if the 920 is faster in those apps.... Tom's is just comparing using those apps so we can see the main difference....

My comparison is mostly in games and similar benchmarks... For example : The 920 (2.66Ghz)averages 17k in 3dmark06 when it is paired with a hefty GTX 295, while the 750 (2.8Ghz) gets well over 18k using a GTX 285.... That is just one example of how the 750 destroys the 920...

As far as resolutions go that is overrated cause most users don't play at a higher res than 1900x1200... Most benchmarks are done @ 1650x1050 or 1900x1200 ..... Unless you want lame frames then yea you can go over 1900x1200... I don't see a need for more than that res ATM.....

My point of view is in fact the price / performance aspect.... While yes, you will have an overall more powerful machine with the 920/X58...When it comes to what you will save with 750/P55, the price of the 920 platform does not compensate for the amount of performance you get from the 750 platform....


Uh yeah, I'm pretty sure the 920 has better frame rates than the 750, or equal too.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=363...

And yes, as I'm not concerned with saving money, i do often use programs as WinRar and Photosop so speed in those desirable. Quite honestly, you can't rate your entire point of view of two CPU's based on one 3dmark06 test, that's obviously very flawed.
a b à CPUs
September 9, 2009 12:15:42 AM

Just incase most of you hadn't already figured it out...

The 'new' i7's are benched with turbo on, the old i7's are benched with turbo off.
a b à CPUs
September 9, 2009 12:20:04 AM

I'm pretty sure the old i7s are benched with turbo on too. It's just that turbo makes a much smaller difference, since realistically, it will only ever boost it by one speed bin.
a b à CPUs
September 9, 2009 12:20:18 AM

notrace said:
Uh yeah, I'm pretty sure the 920 has better frame rates than the 750, or equal too.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=363...

And yes, as I'm not concerned with saving money, i do often use programs as WinRar and Photosop so speed in those desirable. Quite honestly, you can't rate your entire point of view of two CPU's based on one 3dmark06 test, that's obviously very flawed.


Son, I am not rating my point of view soley on gaming purposes but if you would rather spend alot more on a 920 rig just for the .3 seconds you get in photo-shop then I guess you are entitled to you own opinion...

My point of view is based on what you spend vs. what you get.... the 920 has been out for a YEAR and it was by far the fastest CPU for under 300$ That is not the case anymore... It is what it is...
September 9, 2009 12:26:30 AM

OvrClkr said:
Son, I am not rating my point of view soley on gaming purposes but if you would rather spend alot more on a 920 rig just for the .3 seconds you get in photo-shop then I guess you are entitled to you own opinion...

My point of view is based on what you spend vs. what you get.... the 920 has been out for a YEAR and it was by far the fastest CPU for under 300$ That is not the case anymore... It is what it is...


Okay, number one please don't call me "son". I'm not your kid or gang member, and i really don't appreciate being talked down too when I'm trying to have a conversation. I understand your point and it makes sense, but I seriously think the way you process your opinion over single benchmarks alone is completely flawed. You are using words like "pwns" and "destroys" and logically they make no sense and you act like the i5 is completely superior to the i7 920 in almost every way, which it isn't. If i were to buy an i7 920 build over an i5 i would end up spending only ~50 dollars more, and for the speed purposes and better dual-GPU support, along with i9 compatibility, then why the hell not?
a b à CPUs
September 9, 2009 12:34:21 AM

I never said the i5 was completely superior than the 920 , it is obvious that the 920 is a faster chip OVERALL.. Second if the word "SON" gets you irritated then I guess that was my bad... lol... Third, the reason I use "destroys" is due to the fact that there are real numbers out that point out that the 920 falls behind in several bench-marks, in my book that = destroys, specially when the chip is 80 dollars cheaper... Forth, you buy what you want, who said I am the one who decides what you end-up with? And last but not least I am not talking down to you.. I am just posting what Tom's and Anand already posted.... If the 920 tickles your feather then go ahead, I was trying to let you know what was better price/performance-wise....
September 9, 2009 12:35:46 AM

OvrClkr said:
I never said the i5 was completely superior than the 920 , it is obvious that the 920 is a faster chip OVERALL.. Second if the word "SON" gets you irritated then I guess that was my bad... lol... Third, the reason I use "destroys" is due to the fact that there are real numbers out that point out that the 920 falls behind in several bench-marks, in my book that = destroys, specially when the chip is 80 dollars cheaper... Forth, you buy what you want, who said I am the one who decides what you end-up with? And last but not least I am not talking down to you.. I am just posting what Tom's and Anand already posted.... If the 920 tickles your feather then go ahead, I was trying to let you know what was better price/performance-wise....


Alright well in that case, thanks for your opinion.
a b à CPUs
September 9, 2009 12:53:30 AM

notrace said:
Alright well in that case, thanks for your opinion.


Well, maybe my post's did sound like the 920 ain't worth squat and I apologize for that. What I wanted you to know is that for the money the 750 simply cannot be beat... The 920 would be a smart choice IF you take advantage of all it's features....Better?
September 9, 2009 1:10:13 AM

OvrClkr said:
Well, maybe my post's did sound like the 920 ain't worth squat and I apologize for that. What I wanted you to know is that for the money the 750 simply cannot be beat... The 920 would be a smart choice IF you take advantage of all it's features....Better?


Haha yes, that i will completely agree with :-)
a b à CPUs
September 9, 2009 1:23:44 AM

Ok then.... Let us know if you need any help with your new CPU.......
!