Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

I5, not overclocking do i need a cpu cooler?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
September 9, 2009 10:08:33 PM

well i was wondering, if i bought an i5, should i buy a cpu cooler, do i need to or the stock cooler will do fine? and also at stock speed whats better 955 or i5, thx
September 9, 2009 10:25:02 PM

The stock cooler will be fine at stock, that's what it was meant for.

You can't compare the Phenom 955 to "i5" because there are different models of i5 chips, but clock for clock i5 is (slightly) better.
Related resources
a b à CPUs
September 9, 2009 10:26:20 PM

Proximon said:
I5 is better at stock, and yes you want to buy a CPU cooler.

This is a pretty good budget solution. It's new so we don't have a lot of options right now:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...


Bullshit.

The Phenom II destroys the i5 at stock. In fact, the i5 at stock is slower than a Phenom X3 710.
a b à CPUs
September 9, 2009 10:34:20 PM

Well unless you're overclocking, the i5 750 cooler is fine. In terms of performance in gaming they're pretty much equal.
September 9, 2009 10:37:16 PM

jennyh said:
Bullshit.

The Phenom II destroys the i5 at stock. In fact, the i5 at stock is slower than a Phenom X3 710.


You're joking right?

i5 is better then the 965 when they're both at stock, lol.
a b à CPUs
September 9, 2009 10:41:03 PM

thuglife11 said:
You're joking right?

i5 is better then the 965 when they're both at stock, lol.


Aaaand, here we go again.

Every i5 bench had it overclocked. Every one you saw, was with the i5 overclocked. You didn't notice it, because you're exactly the type of retard that intel sell cpu's to.
September 9, 2009 10:46:07 PM

jennyh said:
Aaaand, here we go again.

Every i5 bench had it overclocked. Every one you saw, was with the i5 overclocked. You didn't notice it, because you're exactly the type of retard that intel sell cpu's to.


*sigh*

the i5 was overclocked to match all other cpus at the highest stock setting. all cpus were at the same GHz while being benchmarked and the 965 was almost always on the bottom of the charts while being equally clocked with all other cpus.
September 9, 2009 10:46:47 PM

jennyh said:
Aaaand, here we go again.

Every i5 bench had it overclocked. Every one you saw, was with the i5 overclocked. You didn't notice it, because you're exactly the type of retard that intel sell cpu's to.



These weren't overclocked: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i5,2410-... http://www.hardocp.com/article/2009/09/07/intel_lynnfie... but seriously, how many AMD-stocks do you own, or do you just get a rush from flaming people for no apparent reason?
a b à CPUs
September 9, 2009 10:51:49 PM

Here's more benchmarks. Again look at the gaming performance between the Q9550/P2 955 and the i5 750.
http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews.php?reviewid=837
http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.php?option=com_conten...
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/2909/intel_lynnfield_c...
http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/801
http://techgage.com/article/intel_core_i7-870_i5-750_-_...

Quite frankly the real world gaming performance between those 3 processors is basically equal. Some games are better on one processor, others are better on another, some differences in GPUs, but in terms of real world performance... no difference.
a b à CPUs
September 9, 2009 10:53:38 PM

Come on Riot, they used a PhenomII x4 920 which isn't even in production anymore for that review. And Jennyh turbo boost is a part of the i5 750s abilities, get off it.
a b à CPUs
September 9, 2009 10:56:28 PM

If i see one more retard say that the i5 is faster than the 965 BE at stock, then yes...I will get rush from flaming their asses.

It's been talked about long enough, and no just because it's been talked about does not make it any different. Lies and bullshit are lies and bullshit, and that is something I will not tolerate from anyone.
September 9, 2009 10:56:57 PM

dirtmountain said:
Come on Riot, they used a PhenomII x4 920 which isn't even in production anymore for that review. And Jennyh turbo boost is a part of the i5 750s abilities, get off it.


ha whoops but it really doesnt matter. any AMD chip still have an extremely hard time competing. if you even want to call it that anymore at the price range
a b à CPUs
September 9, 2009 10:59:05 PM

dirtmountain said:
Come on Riot, they used a PhenomII x4 920 which isn't even in production anymore for that review. And Jennyh turbo boost is a part of the i5 750s abilities, get off it.


Overclocking a cpu is part of a cpu's abilities. What's the difference? Except you goddam idiots who buy into it now intel does it automatically?

You never oc'd before, but now it's ok because the cpu does it automatically? Get real.
a b à CPUs
September 9, 2009 11:01:14 PM

Just read the benchmarks, there's over a dozen out there. You'll see in gaming and some other applications the 955/965/9550/9650/i5 750 are neck and neck. It doesn't really matter if the i5 has 162 fps in one game with a single 4870 and the P955 has 146fps. In other games the p55 has 48 fps and the i5 750 has 42.
*just one cherry picked example, but there are others*
http://techgage.com/article/intel_core_i7-870_i5-750_-_...
September 9, 2009 11:07:47 PM

yea thats what i was thinking, is it really worth it if i get the i5 over the 955 if i will only be gaming while multitasking at the same time? is it worth the extra 50 bucks thx
a b à CPUs
September 9, 2009 11:08:27 PM

Take a few deep breaths jennyh, there's a huge difference between someone overclocking a CPU and the i5/i7 CPUs that do it automatically depending on what the usage is. In fact you have to actively turn off turbo boost to stop it from working.
a b à CPUs
September 9, 2009 11:11:54 PM

dirtmountain said:
Take a few deep breaths jennyh, there's a huge difference between someone overclocking a CPU and the i5/i7 CPUs that do it automatically depending on what the usage is. In fact you have to actively turn off turbo boost to stop it from working.



We're talking about something that *is not guaranteed* by intel.

It is being benchmarked and sold as this great new thing, but intel *do not guarantee* it. Not 1mhz above stock.

This cpu should not even be considered at anything except stock levels, anything else should be put under overclocking benchmarks.

Are you gonna be here to pick up the pieces from the i5 buyers who ended up with lame duck cpu's stuck at 2.6ghz? Who is?
September 9, 2009 11:12:24 PM

silvergo said:
yea thats what i was thinking, is it really worth it if i get the i5 over the 955 if i will only be gaming while multitasking at the same time? is it worth the extra 50 bucks thx


I think its worth it. I had an 955 AMD build all ready to go then I read all the benchmarks and checked prices. Depending on your build config the i5 costs the same as a 955 config, mine did anyways. I was going for quality while staying cost effective.
September 9, 2009 11:19:43 PM

jennyh said:
We're talking about something that *is not guaranteed* by intel.

It is being benchmarked and sold as this great new thing, but intel *do not guarantee* it. Not 1mhz above stock.

This cpu should not even be considered at anything except stock levels, anything else should be put under overclocking benchmarks.

Are you gonna be here to pick up the pieces from the i5 buyers who ended up with lame duck cpu's stuck at 2.6ghz? Who is?


personally, i'm waiting till 2010 before i buy a new rig. by then i5 statements will be completely accurate and maybe improved. if not i'll go with a 955 setup

nobodys going to give you a shoulder to cry on if your cpu cant OC. thats why its important to wait a few months.
a b à CPUs
September 9, 2009 11:24:44 PM

T answer the OP, i put this build together for my brother, he specified a single GPU and a storm scout case. The cost as of now is $900, free shipping and not counting rebates. it's an i5 750 build. If he can spring for another $100 i'd get the i7 860.

CPU/mobo combo - $305 i5/750 Gigabyte P55
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?Ite...

RAM / GPU combo - $240 G.Skill low voltage RAM 2x2 GB DDR3 1333 7-7-7-21 and a GTX 260 (the games he plays work better with Nvidia)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?Ite...

Case/PSU combo - $140 Coolermaster Storm Scout / CM 600w PSU
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?Ite...

HD - $75 WD 640 SATA
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?Ite...

Burner - $30 Sony optiarc SATA
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

OS - $110 Vista 64 bit with upgrade
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

around $900. There's places to save a bit of money here and there, but he wants that case and the GPU is a very good choice for his uses.

September 10, 2009 1:02:28 AM

nice combo on the case, i was thinking antec 900 but i ono now that case is kinda similar. the psu is kinda risky isnt it. and yes if you can sacrafice a lil you can get similar pricing compared to 955.

Riot: yea waiting is good and youll get better deals, but waiting too much mean more better stuff comes out and the cycle continues lol. ive waited 4 months and its time to buy =p
a b à CPUs
September 10, 2009 2:12:07 AM

Facts:
1-Core i5 @ 2.66GHz WITHOUT Turbo Boost is slightly better than Phenom II 965.
2-Core i5 @ 2.66GHz WITH Turbo Boost is better than Phenom II 965.
3-Core i5 is currently 50 bucks cheaper than PII 965.
4-LGA 1156 mobos are sold at as low as $100.
5-I am AMD biased, yet I admit i5 is a better CPU than PII and am even considering it for a future build.

Conclusions:
1-Core i5 was meant to be used with Turbo Boost.
2-Intel does not guarantee that each processor's thermal dissipation, etc will give enough headroom for the highest Turbo Boost bins, but the feature works well.
3-So, if you just say Turbo Boost is overclocking, then you should compare it to a Phenom II @ 2.66GHz, and disable 2MBs of Core i5's L3 cache and Turbo Boost. However, benchmarks just reflect what consumers get for their money, which leads to:
4-CPUs are benchmarked at their stock setting, and each one may have its own "tricks" to earn some more points.
5-Even though Turbo Boost is implemented, Nehalem is inevitably a superior architecture.
6-We'll have to wait till AMD adjusts its prices, since there is no way the 965 priced at $250 can be a better deal than $210.
7-AMD fanboys (I AM a fanboy) get this straight: AMD won't reward you for your efforts to defend it. AMD is a company which does not care for your feelings, and is not a person who everyone is attacking.
8-Everyone: fanboyism just leads to pointless flaming. Just make an unbiased balance on price/performance and your current needs, and get the product you think is more suitable. And mind you, everyone, AMD has to exist. A clear evidence of lack of competition is the ridiculously high prices of Core i7 870, 950, 975 for just barely 10% performance benefits.
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
September 10, 2009 2:20:01 AM

Good post sanchz.
Should sticky that.
September 10, 2009 9:59:06 PM

dirtmountain said:
Yes, with all the benchmarks that prove it. Until he does, the way i posted the benchmarks, it's FUD. In other words, explain this *again cherry picked" benchmark
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/2909/intel_lynnfield_c...


well i do agree with the i5 being superior to amd chip. but isnt that site comparing it to a 955?
a b à CPUs
September 10, 2009 10:12:17 PM

Yes it is, and as you can see the PII x4 955 and the i5 750 are pretty much equal in the benchmarks.
September 10, 2009 11:34:54 PM

dirtmountain said:
Yes it is, and as you can see the PII x4 955 and the i5 750 are pretty much equal in the benchmarks.


Well, duh. As even the review page says: "Gaming is no longer a good indication of true CPU performance. As you push over 1024 x 768 resolutions you see the GPU take over and dominate the performance scale."

Given that those benchmarks aren't CPU-limited, a Core 2 Duo would probably be just as fast as a PII X4; does that make it a better CPU?
September 11, 2009 9:03:23 AM

jennyh said:
Overclocking a cpu is part of a cpu's abilities. What's the difference? Except you goddam idiots who buy into it now intel does it automatically?

You never oc'd before, but now it's ok because the cpu does it automatically? Get real.


The difference is you get to keep your warranty with turbo boost, as well as speedstep, you don't have to do jack *** in the bios, the tdp won't go up, etc...

The PII's can't do that, otherwise AMD would've given them turbo boost.
a b à CPUs
September 11, 2009 2:12:48 PM

MarkG said:
Well, duh. As even the review page says: "Gaming is no longer a good indication of true CPU performance. As you push over 1024 x 768 resolutions you see the GPU take over and dominate the performance scale."

Given that those benchmarks aren't CPU-limited, a Core 2 Duo would probably be just as fast as a PII X4; does that make it a better CPU?


If you buy a CPU for gaming, and the Core 2 Duo performs better then the PII x4 in the games you play or want to play, then yes, for you the Core 2 Duo is a better processor.
September 11, 2009 2:18:49 PM

JennyH is just spreading FUD and lies.

Turbo is not overclocking. JennyH can't provide one actual reason why you should turn Turbo off.
September 11, 2009 2:19:54 PM

jennyh said:
We're talking about something that *is not guaranteed* by intel.

It is being benchmarked and sold as this great new thing, but intel *do not guarantee* it. Not 1mhz above stock.

This cpu should not even be considered at anything except stock levels, anything else should be put under overclocking benchmarks.

Are you gonna be here to pick up the pieces from the i5 buyers who ended up with lame duck cpu's stuck at 2.6ghz? Who is?


Once again, please stop talking. You're full of BS.
September 11, 2009 2:33:08 PM

JennyH, you made me dig into the Sharikou archives to find this one:

The Burninator on 7/15/07
http://sharikou.blogspot.com/2007/07/only-thing-that-is...
Quote:
DO NOT BELIEVE PRO INTEL LIER!

There is none of problem in the AMD productions! All K10s are clocked at 4Ghz while using 1 watts of powers!

Burninator has seen many lies against the AMD:
1. People saying Penryn must be at 3.5Ghz to be beating K10 at the 2Ghz. THIS IS A PRO-INTEL LIE. Penryn is evil vapor-chip that is not real. It is well known fact that Intel CPUs only work when in same room as AMD CPUs since they steal. AMD chips power all machines, so Penryn can never beat any AMD CPU in any test ever.

2. People say Barcelona will come out on time as always scheduled by the Hector in August. DO NOT BELIEVE THIS INTEL LIE. K10 is already completely available. Were not super-success machines shown destroying evil Intel in the April at the Computex proceedings? This 100% super-proof that AMD is already in 100% success. Any sites that deny the success are only Intel PUmpers.

3. Liars who say that Barcelona is at the 2GHZ since that is all needed for beating Intels. WRONG intel fanbois! A Barcelona at only the 1Ghz is still 10x generations better than any Intel CPUs, and has 4x quad-true-power! So a Barcelona at the 1Ghz is better than Intel fake-chip at 40Ghz!! Anyone who says otherwise is the fanboi!
Burninator already give real truth reason: The primitive softwares that Intel pumpers forced on CPUs with evil monopoly cannot handle true power of Barcelona 10x lead. So Hector is only putting chips at 2Ghz until the softwares are made super-perfect by AMD technicians. Once softwares are fixed, all K10s will clock at 8Ghz with 100% passive no-fan needed!

4. Some Intel pumpers are on this site, but they pretend to like AMD! TRAITORS TO CAUSE YOU WILL BE PUNISHED FOR LIES!!!
ONEXPERT!! You shall pay for anti-AMD LIES!! You say AMD makes CPUs that are using 45 watts of the electricity? TOTAL LIES!!! Everyone who is non-pumper knows that no AMD CPU has ever used more than 1.5 watts of the electricities and that is only because of evil Intel Monopoly stealing cycles!

You say Core 2 is the P3s with glue? You pro-Intel traitor!! Every smart-non-evil persons is knowing that the Intel P3 is only a LIE for stealing from the AMD chips! Core 2 is not real, you are just pumping Intel.

You say that Intel laptops use 800watts of the electricity? You sicko-fanboy! Burninator has 100% of the proofs that ALL Intel chips must use 10000 Watts of the powers to turn on! Anyone who says any Intel chip uses less is a pro-Intel fanboy TRAITOR!

Last point, for this you must die: How dare you say that the IBM pumper chip is the fastest? Burninator already prove that the K10 is the 8Ghz fastest! You are paid IBM pumper too liar fanboy! And then you talk of C7 chips? You are traitor to AMD!



Please realize that this is what you sound like.
November 14, 2009 9:20:46 AM

I'm a new forum member here and
Presence of "jennyh" here makes me wonder about the quality of this whole forum.

I know I shouldn't generalize the whole forum based on one person but as I haven't encountered someone that ignorant, and that I happen to discover that kind of person the moment I stepped into this site....I don't know what to think.

a b à CPUs
November 14, 2009 10:26:35 AM

... and I have to wonder why someone would dig up a 2 month old thread, wonderfully buried away where it was not likely to start another rant from someone, just to say "LOL".
February 6, 2010 3:51:37 AM

This thread is a wonderful testament to how loopy Jenny is, and how funny it is that she should ever call for anyone to be banned. :lol: 
March 23, 2011 12:25:11 PM

dirtmountain said:
Yes it is, and as you can see the PII x4 955 and the i5 750 are pretty much equal in the benchmarks.



From your article bench link, page 9 instead of page 8 where "you assess".

" The AMD fans are saying it is a last ditch effort by Intel to prevent AMD from stealing market share. On the other hand, the Intel fans are saying it is going to be the next big thing.


In reality it falls in with the latter, it is going to upset the playing field and force AMD to re-think their current market strategy. AMD can no longer say that dollar for dollar they have the better CPU. If the pricing is correct at $196.99 for 1k lots of the Core i5 750, then the AMD Phenom II X4 955 (which runs about the same price) is a comparably priced CPU that cannot keep up in CPU related tasks. "

AMD IS FINISHED.

IT'S OVER ! JENNYH IS FINISHED !
a b à CPUs
March 23, 2011 2:00:39 PM

jennyh said:
Bullshit.

The Phenom II destroys the i5 at stock. In fact, the i5 at stock is slower than a Phenom X3 710.


Get real... : http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/88?vs=191 - take a look at the clock speed of the i5 ...ITS NOT 3.2 GHZ, its 2.8 and stop saying they are using overclocked i5s for the benchmarks.
a b à CPUs
a c 100 K Overclocking
March 23, 2011 2:24:08 PM

Hey guys, news flash. This thread is from 2009.
February 14, 2013 2:44:12 AM

jennyh said:
If i see one more retard say that the i5 is faster than the 965 BE at stock, then yes...I will get rush from flaming their asses.

It's been talked about long enough, and no just because it's been talked about does not make it any different. Lies and bullshit are lies and bullshit, and that is something I will not tolerate from anyone.


The i5 is faster than the 965 BE at stock.
!