Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Core i5-750 to go for?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
December 4, 2009 5:12:17 PM

Hi. I've planned on core i5 750. But before purchasing it I need a final confirmation from your side guys. Is it ok to buy that platform. I won't overclock it more than 3.7 Ghz. So, at that clock speed won't any socket burning take place?
Mobo planned is MSI P55 GD65.
Thanks in advance...

More about : core 750

December 4, 2009 5:20:44 PM

Unless you avoid Foxconn sockets entirely, there's no guarantee that won't happen. See if you can nail down an answer by the seller about that mobo BEFORE you buy it... I have my i5-750 at 3.6 and have worried a little about that problem. I did a system tear-down and visually inspected my processor and I think I'm ok... also, I didn't see the word Foxconn on my socket so maybe I'm not in with that bunch. That socket burn issue really scared me because when it happens it's taking your CPU and motherboard with it... not a cheap replacement to say the least.
December 4, 2009 9:53:55 PM

As the Anandtech article said, If you don't overclock it to 4.0ghz then don't worry about it.
Foxconn is printed on the underside of the socket. Lotes stamps it on the top of the socket, directly to the left of the curve of the lever.
Related resources
December 5, 2009 12:07:46 AM

msi boards don't use foxconn so your fine
December 5, 2009 1:22:08 AM

Or is it better to wait until companies make an official statement that the problem has been corrected?
a b à CPUs
December 5, 2009 2:42:01 PM

if ubernoobie is correct then you're fine.

Why don't you just e-mail MSI to ask them?
a b à CPUs
December 5, 2009 6:03:21 PM

vinay_venturas said:
Or is it better to wait until companies make an official statement that the problem has been corrected?


That would require that companies officially state that it's a problem to begin with. I don't think that's happened yet. The Anandtech article I read specifically said they thought under 4.3Ghz was okay. *shrugs* Reality, I'm sure there's no exact voltage, or exact clock speed at which the problem occurs. It's totally dependent on several details. For instance, how many pins aren't making contact is probably not exactly the same in every situation.

I will say, I sure hope my board is fine. Because my new i5 runs great at 4Ghz, and I'd really hate to have it fry because the pins don't contact well. Then again, my CPU cooler has a rear bracket to bolt it down. I wonder if that extra pressure applied against the CPU helps with pin contact (as compared with Intel stock heat sinks that put poor pressure against the CPU).
December 5, 2009 7:51:30 PM

ubernoobie said:
msi boards don't use foxconn so your fine


Yes they do.
December 6, 2009 12:21:13 PM

jerreece said:
That would require that companies officially state that it's a problem to begin with. I don't think that's happened yet. The Anandtech article I read specifically said they thought under 4.3Ghz was okay. *shrugs* Reality, I'm sure there's no exact voltage, or exact clock speed at which the problem occurs. It's totally dependent on several details. For instance, how many pins aren't making contact is probably not exactly the same in every situation.

I will say, I sure hope my board is fine. Because my new i5 runs great at 4Ghz, and I'd really hate to have it fry because the pins don't contact well. Then again, my CPU cooler has a rear bracket to bolt it down. I wonder if that extra pressure applied against the CPU helps with pin contact (as compared with Intel stock heat sinks that put poor pressure against the CPU).


Then, do your cpu pins make full contact with the socket?
a b à CPUs
December 7, 2009 1:44:15 AM

vinay_venturas said:
Then, do your cpu pins make full contact with the socket?


Took my HDT-S1283 cooler off and removed my CPU last night. Was wanting to reapply my AS5 anyhow as I didn't like the temp variations I had between CPU cores. Anyhow, visually inspected the pins and my CPU. Everything looked perfect. Tried to use the Macro mode on my digital camera to take photos of the socket and CPU. Unfortunately since my camera is a point-n-shoot it did a horrible job. Photos are too blurry to tell whether each contact on the CPU had contact marks on it.

With the naked eye however, everything looked perfectly fine. Wish I could say more.
a b à CPUs
December 7, 2009 5:47:09 AM

sdf said:
Yes they do.


Currently the ones out there do however msi I've heard is switching to using LOTES sockets.
It will probably still be a couple of months until the dreaded Foxconn sockets are gone.

By the way Tiger Direct has the i5 on sale right now at $190.

December 7, 2009 4:34:06 PM

Are lotes sockets free from burning?
Do the gigabyte p55a series boards use lotes?
a b à CPUs
December 8, 2009 12:36:57 PM

vinay_venturas said:
Are lotes sockets free from burning?
Do the gigabyte p55a series boards use lotes?


On your first question yes. No problems have been reported as of yet with Lotes sockets on P55 boards.
I can't answer your second question though.
a b à CPUs
December 10, 2009 1:57:26 AM

All the Gigabyte P55A series use the LOTES socket instead.

Avoid ASUS boards which all use Foxconn socket if you are so worried about the issue.

EVGA only use LOTES socket on their high-end board which cost the same as LGA1366 i7 boards.

Not sure about the other brands.

Best solution

December 10, 2009 4:36:22 AM
Share

This problem is really one hamper. But as our friends said, you can trust the new models of the Gigabyte with Socket LOTES.

What is a mark that is to be congratulated because of taking to seriously this type of problem, and since separate a special type of plate with socket LOTES, to leave us calm. But even so, for the use continue, I recommend the maximum of 3,5Ghz to leave a good edge of security. And without forcing very much in the voltages.
I use mine Core i5 in overclock at 3,5Ghz.

To go besides 3,5Ghz only with cooler to the style of our friend "jerreece", with great pressure in him...

At last, the damage can be big, if the overclock will be exaggerated.

Good overclock and good amusement!
________________________________

Know my work: Processador | Informatica on megahardware.com.br
a b à CPUs
December 10, 2009 4:46:09 AM

mage7 said:
This problem is really one hamper. But as our friends said, you can trust the new models of the Gigabyte with Socket LOTES.

What is a mark that is to be congratulated because of taking to seriously this type of problem, and since separate a special type of plate with socket LOTES, to leave us calm. But even so, for the use continue, I recommend the maximum of 3,5Ghz to leave a good edge of security. And without forcing very much in the voltages.
I use mine Core i5 in overclock at 3,5Ghz.

To go besides 3,5Ghz only with cooler to the style of our friend "jerreece", with great pressure in him...

At last, the damage can be big, if the overclock will be exaggerated.

Good overclock and good amusement!
________________________________

Know my work: Escolha o melhor laptop | Tudo sobre PC on megahardware.com.br

Do you turn on Load-Line Calibration(LLC)? What Vcore and Vtt do you use?
December 10, 2009 2:18:37 PM

andy5174 said:
Do you turn on Load-Line Calibration(LLC)? What Vcore and Vtt do you use?


I turn off Load-Line Calibration to be Intel specifications compliant . And my Vcore and Vtt are default. To undertand more abaut Load-Line Calibration see this: Load-Line Calibration, why keep off

Many people use that on, but I use that off.


_____________________________________________

Know my work: Escolha o melhor laptop | Tudo sobre PC on megahardware.com.br
a b à CPUs
December 10, 2009 2:37:40 PM

The P55A boards at least use a Lotes clamp, but I am not sure about the socket itself. They still use a Foxconn pin protector.

As for checking to see if pin impressions are on the chip, I noticed my new i5 already has pin indentations, possibly from Intel testing of it, so I am not sure how much a visual inspection helps (unless most chips do not already have the indentations.
a b à CPUs
December 11, 2009 4:23:49 AM

EXT64 said:
The P55A boards at least use a Lotes clamp, but I am not sure about the socket itself. They still use a Foxconn pin protector.

As for checking to see if pin impressions are on the chip, I noticed my new i5 already has pin indentations, possibly from Intel testing of it, so I am not sure how much a visual inspection helps (unless most chips do not already have the indentations.

Yes, the socket is still Foxconn! However, the socket burn was due to Foxconn's Clamp that doesn't provide even pressure on the processor.

In fact, LOTES does NOT make socket. Foxconn, Molex and Tyco are the only three companies that manufacture socket. LGA1156 socket manufacturer

99.99% of the motherboards including EVGA's high end boards are with Foxconn socket! The reason why there was no socket burn issue from EVGA is due to its LOTES Clamp.
December 14, 2009 4:34:35 PM

Sorry for late reply. Thanks a lot guys. You guys have cleared all the doubts i had. Is there any gigabyte p55a series board that is similar in cost to p55m ud2?
December 16, 2009 4:27:03 PM

Does the newly arrived H55 chipset support i5 750?
a b à CPUs
December 16, 2009 4:45:02 PM

Don't let the thought you have a foxconn socket make you lose sleep. Raj the tester at Anands that helped start this witch hunt has said a lotes socket has been confirmed burned as well.
http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=3671&cp=3#co...
Scroll down its in the comments section.

"The socket comment was made because in light of the failures we experienced during testing. Our failures have been all related to Foxconn sockets, but there is now a confirmed user case having issues with a LOTES socket too. In light of this, it's hard to give any board accolades for raw overclocking until we know for sure that the 'problem' is fixed. Out of all the boards, the EVGA P55 FTW was the most consistent and easy to use. Also note, this article is in no way reflective of 24/7 PC's and what matters in typical usage scenarios. "

MY POINT is, its o/c if you push hard enough you can blow any board up. These chips o/c so well people keep pushing. The boards that burnt were all earliest boards and earliest bios's. We all know the better the board you buy, the more voltage redundancy it has. Why? So you don't blow things up as easily.
December 20, 2009 2:37:26 PM

Thanx. So, what's the final word guys?
Shall i go with i5 750 or phenom ii x4 955 be?
I'll be keepin the rig for at least 4 years. So, afraid if i5 gets burnt after some 2 years.
a b à CPUs
December 21, 2009 1:14:28 AM

vinay_venturas said:
Thanx. So, what's the final word guys?
Shall i go with i5 750 or phenom ii x4 955 be?
I'll be keepin the rig for at least 4 years. So, afraid if i5 gets burnt after some 2 years.

Go for the i5!

Reason:

1. i5 can easily achieve 3.6GHz near stock core voltage(if not at stock core voltage) which is well below the maximum and absolute maximum with ALL other voltage well within maximum specification as well. Hence, you will be absolutely fine even with Foxconn CLAMP.

2. 99.99% PII-955's maximum on-air OC is 3.8GHz which is nothing but a garbage compared to i5@3.6GHz.

3. FYI: i5(stock@2.66GHz) vs PII-965(stock@3.4GHz) (LOWER the better in some cases)
It shows that i5 is significantly better even it's 740MHz less than 965. Imagine what will happen when i5 is merely 200MHz less.

4. Power efficiency: i5 consumes 24% less power compared to 955, being much better at the same time.
a b à CPUs
December 21, 2009 2:08:42 AM

andy5174 said:

2. 99.99% PII-955's maximum on-air OC is 3.8GHz which is nothing but a garbage compared to i5@3.6GHz.


Not so, the C3 stepping can get 4.0 GHz pretty easily on a Phenom II and a Core i5 750 can hit 4.0 GHz pretty consistently too. At 3.6 GHz+ they are pretty close in gaming with the Core i5 750 slightly pulling ahead and doing much better in other multi threaded apps.

Get the i5 750 if you can, if things are tight then the Phenom II 955 is a great bargain and you wont be missing out on much at all. The 955 will overclock like a 965 125w (C3 stepping).
December 27, 2009 1:08:46 PM

Thanks guys. Sorry for replying late as i forgot to look at the thread. I'll take the core i5 route as i want sli benefits and i'll be playing pcsx2 emulator too which works best with intel and nvidia. Thanks a lot for being with me all these days to help me figure out the best for me. Thanks again.
a b à CPUs
December 27, 2009 1:31:04 PM



Enjoy
December 27, 2009 7:36:13 PM

andy5174 said:
3. FYI: i5(stock@2.66GHz) vs PII-965(stock@3.4GHz) (LOWER the better in some cases)
It shows that i5 is significantly better even it's 740MHz less than 965. Imagine what will happen when i5 is merely 200MHz less..


If you read the full benchmarks and hover over the info bubble to view the specs for the i5, it has turbo enabled, making it run at 3.2GHz. Thus the i5 in those comparisons is just 200MHz under the 965. As a result, a 3.8GHz 955 and 3.6GHz i5 would have nearly the exact scaling as in that comparison, with the i5 barely coming out on top in most benchmarks.

The i5 is still better, but it is't definitely not 740MHz behind the 965 in those comparisons. Yes, it's still better clock for clock, but not nearly as much as you're making it out to be, as nearly all benchmarks have turbo enabled.
a b à CPUs
December 27, 2009 8:42:20 PM

Atranox said:
If you read the full benchmarks and hover over the info bubble to view the specs for the i5, it has turbo enabled, making it run at 3.2GHz. Thus the i5 in those comparisons is just 200MHz under the 965. As a result, a 3.8GHz 955 and 3.6GHz i5 would have nearly the exact scaling as in that comparison, with the i5 barely coming out on top in most benchmarks.

The i5 is still better, but it is't definitely not 740MHz behind the 965 in those comparisons. Yes, it's still better clock for clock, but not nearly as much as you're making it out to be, as nearly all benchmarks have turbo enabled.

Not exactly.

Many of those tests are multithreaded. Therefore it's not exactly as you paint it. Varying on the TDP and current operating temperature the core clocks will scale up and down with Turbo and Speedstep.

Most of the tests there are multithreaded. Therefore the odds are that the Corei5 ran at its stock clocks of 2.66GHz (with the exception of a few tests there).
a b à CPUs
December 27, 2009 9:43:44 PM

ElMoIsEviL said:
Not exactly.

Many of those tests are multithreaded. Therefore it's not exactly as you paint it. Varying on the TDP and current operating temperature the core clocks will scale up and down with Turbo and Speedstep.

Most of the tests there are multithreaded. Therefore the odds are that the Corei5 ran at its stock clocks of 2.66GHz (with the exception of a few tests there).


The i5 has three states, either 1.2ghz idle, 3.2ghz with 1-2 cores active and 2.8ghz with 3-4 cores active.

Chances are you knew that and are lying again.
a b à CPUs
December 27, 2009 9:57:14 PM

Ok from an hour of experience with my i5 750, it will never hit 2.6 GHz unless you disable speed step and at four cores, mine atleast, hovers between 2.4 GHz to 2.9 GHz on load. I have never seen 2.8 GHz yet. To be honest it seems to like 2.4 GHz for some reason. I disabled speedstep and now it is between 2.6 GHz and 2.9 GHz at load with 2.6 GHz being the majority, it is not throttling under load I checked.

Turbo mode seems pretty dumb to me.
December 27, 2009 9:59:53 PM

There's no point in debating. Honestly, there isn't. For real-world differences, what's the difference between 4-5 frames when you're running at 100+ FPS anyways, 3-4 seconds when you're processing something that takes 30 seconds, or 3-4 minutes when processing something that takes 30 minutes?

955 = Really damn good, overkill for whatever you'll need
i5 = Really damn good, slightly more overkill for whatever you'll need

Take your pick.

If you had 2 PC's, one with a 955 and one with an i5, and you used it every single day, you would probably never tell the difference unless you benchmarked or carefully timed everything. Both are very good processors and will handle anything that you need for at 3+ years without even overclocking.

An i5 platform at NewEgg will run you about $50 more, but you'll save about $10-20 per year anyways in energy costs with an i5 platform (if your PC is on 24/7) - so honestly, the cost will even out in the long run anyways. For gaming a 955 might be a little smoother. For everything else, an i5 will probably shave off some time. If you overclock, you'll be damn happy with either. Just go with your gut decision and don't over-analyze.
a b à CPUs
December 27, 2009 10:13:26 PM




did you not read your own link?

"The screenshots shown only represent maximum load scenarios, in reality this type of scenario is more the exception than the rule and if there is no load, both CPUs throttle back to 1200 MHz."
a b à CPUs
December 27, 2009 10:14:57 PM

Yes Badtrip...

It's like me saying the Phenom II owns the i5 with 1.8ghz less? You know, my Phenom II spends most of it's time at 800mhz and is at 3ghz+ more of an exception than the rule?

While doing nothing much, both cpu's will be throttled back to 800mhz (phII) and 1.2ghz (i5). When running ALL those benchmarks, the i5 will be either at 2.8ghz or 3.2ghz and that's a fact.
a b à CPUs
December 27, 2009 10:22:10 PM

Atranox said:
There's no point in debating. Honestly, there isn't. For real-world differences, what's the difference between 4-5 frames when you're running at 100+ FPS anyways, 3-4 seconds when you're processing something that takes 30 seconds, or 3-4 minutes when processing something that takes 30 minutes?

955 = Really damn good, overkill for whatever you'll need
i5 = Really damn good, slightly more overkill for whatever you'll need

Take your pick.

If you had 2 PC's, one with a 955 and one with an i5, and you used it every single day, you would probably never tell the difference unless you benchmarked or carefully timed everything. Both are very good processors and will handle anything that you need for at 3+ years without even overclocking.

An i5 platform at NewEgg will run you about $50 more, but you'll save about $10-20 per year anyways in energy costs with an i5 platform (if your PC is on 24/7) - so honestly, the cost will even out in the long run anyways. For gaming a 955 might be a little smoother. For everything else, an i5 will probably shave off some time. If you overclock, you'll be damn happy with either. Just go with your gut decision and don't over-analyze.


Exactly, this is the point I've tried to make for so long. If you are a pure gamer than the decision should only be based on whether you ever think you will have the need to SLI, in that case go i5 750, if not then roll a damn dice.

People need to understand that the i5 750 is not noticeably faster than the Phenom II in non-gaming apps.

Also, I'm sorry Jenny, the Phenom II perfectly ties and some times trades microscopic blows with i5/i7 in games, it is not faster in any way and neither is the i5/i7 in gaming.
a b à CPUs
December 27, 2009 10:33:11 PM

Quote:
People need to understand that the i5 750 is not noticeably faster than the Phenom II in non-gaming apps.


I agree completely. How about this?

Truespace 5.1 rendering



Truespace 7.5 rendering



MainConcept H.264



Dvdshrink 3.2



Nero 9 Recode



V-dub



DIEP Chess



Crysis CPU bench



UT3 CPU bench




With a few exceptions, the Phenom II is clearly ahead of the i5 720 in *real world apps*. Most of those anand benches are synthetics. Look at the real apps there and you can see that the Phenom II is almost certainly faster overall than the i5.

Quote:
Also, I'm sorry Jenny, the Phenom II perfectly ties and some times trades microscopic blows with i5/i7 in games, it is not faster in any way and neither is the i5/i7 in gaming.


Yes I know that. I don't consider 1-2 fps to be a win unless some intel fantard claims 1-2 seconds less encoding time is a 'win' too.
a b à CPUs
December 27, 2009 10:37:30 PM

jennyh said:

With a few exceptions, the Phenom II is clearly ahead of the i5 720 in *real world apps*. Most of those anand benches are synthetics. Look at the real apps there and you can see that the Phenom II is almost certainly faster overall than the i5.
.


Don't forget that when benched at the same clocks, the Core i5 750 has a slight lead in the trend, you know a whole 1-2 seconds!
a b à CPUs
December 27, 2009 10:39:22 PM

AMW1011 said:
Don't forget that when benched at the same clocks, the Core i5 750 has a slight lead in the trend, you know a whole 1-2 seconds!


Yes generally it is true. Clock for clock, an intel will usually beat the equivalent AMD by a very small margin in everything except gaming.
a b à CPUs
December 27, 2009 10:41:54 PM

Btw if anyone can be bothered to highlight the Phenom II 965, i5 and Phenom II 955 in all of those benchmarks, feel free lol.
a b à CPUs
December 27, 2009 11:02:49 PM

jennyh said:
Btw if anyone can be bothered to highlight the Phenom II 965, i5 and Phenom II 955 in all of those benchmarks, feel free lol.

Sorry the site you linked to does not qualify as a Legitimate source of information., there is NO advertising on this site. Its not affiliated with any media corporation. We don't know his standards or ethics.
He might answer to you, for all we know.
edit
I know he's affiliated/employed by ocz.
December 27, 2009 11:11:28 PM

notty22 said:
Sorry the site you linked to does not qualify as a Legitimate source of information., there is NO advertising on this site. Its not affiliated with any media corporation. We don't know his standards or ethics.
He might answer to you, for all we know.


Lostcircuits is actually quite reliable. If I'm not mistaken, it's run by someone at OCZ, leaving me to believe that it's a very neutral source in regards to processors & GPUs.
a b à CPUs
December 27, 2009 11:19:20 PM

notty22 said:
Sorry the site you linked to does not qualify as a Legitimate source of information., there is NO advertising on this site. Its not affiliated with any media corporation. We don't know his standards or ethics.
He might answer to you, for all we know.
edit
I know he's affiliated/employed by ocz.


Nice sarcasm I actually appreciated that. :D 
a b à CPUs
December 28, 2009 8:18:15 AM

Nobody else going to comment on the 965 BE winning 7 real-life benchmarks while the i5 750 only won 2?

Look at the gap as well. The 965 BE is very clearly faster, even in stuff that the intel would expect to run away with (ie chess nodes have always very strongly favoured intel cpu's).

Look at the low resolution gaming. Isn't that used by some as proof of the i7's superiority over the Phenom II? If you believe that, looking at those Crysis low-resolution results you would conclude that the Phenom II is the faster cpu.

To my knowledge, Lostcircuits has never been accused of being in either sides pocket. Look at the testing methology, the results do not lie and the 965 BE is actually quite a bit faster than the i5 750.
!