AMD Phenom II X4 965 vs. Intel core i5-750

Which of these processors is the best one?

It depends on what you are using it for, so what are you using it for? Also I would avoid the 965 and go with the 955; it’s the same as the 965 except it is cheaper.

The Phenom 955 is a quadcore, the X4 moniker tells you that, a dual core would be X2.

As for which is faster, well the Core i5 750 is slightly faster, but nothing all that noticeable.

Since you do a lot of gaming you have to ask yourself whether you need the ability to SLI or not. If so then the i5 750 uses the P55 chipset which can allow for both SLI and Crossfire, something no AM3, for the Phenom, board can. If not then flip a coin.

The 955 is the same as a 965, except it's 200MHz slower and $20 cheaper. Using AMD Overdrive, you can just turn up the multiplier a notch to change the speed to 3.4GHz, making it the exact same. And FYI, quad-core isn't "better" for gaming, as games don't fully utilize all four cores. For current games, a good dual-core processor will net you performance very similar to a quad-core. Regardless, quad is still the way to go, as they're much better for non-gaming applications. For gaming, the i5 or a 955 is definitely the way to go.

Knowing the following would really help:
- What you plan on using your PC for
- If it's for gaming, which games and at what resolution?
- What are your other specs? (video card, RAM, PSU, etc)

Both are excellent processors and will easily last you 3-4 years without even overclocking. For gaming, they're both pretty even, sometimes with the 955 coming out on top by 1-2 FPS. In Ubisoft games, usually the i5 has a larger lead. For professional applications such as programs for video encoding, ripping, compression, etc - the i5 will generally finish tasks about 5-10% faster, which will save you anywhere from a few seconds to a few minutes depending on the length of the task.

In terms of overclocking, both are good. At higher frequencies, the i5 is a bit faster clock for clock, so it generally has overclocks that are more powerful. You'll easily hit 4.0GHz with either processor, assuming you get the C3 version of the 955. The AM3 platform is probably a little more stable and will support new CPUs for another year or two. The 1156 platform isn't quite as developed since it's much newer, but it still appears to be fairly solid (putting aside the Foxconn socket issue). The future of the 1156 socket is really unknown - but honestly, I can't imagine you needing or wanting to upgrade either of these processors in the next couple years. Note that the P55 sockets for the 1156 platform have had burning issues with higher overclocks, though it supposedly has been fixed.

An i5 platform will cost you about $50-$60 more, but will also save you $10-$20 per year on energy cost, assuming you leave your PC on 24/7. The cost will probably even out over a few years. The i5 is more power-efficient, but also gives off much more heat and as a result, probably is a tad bit louder.

Basically - both are damn good.

Time for eternal debate again!

The i5 750 is 5% faster than the 955 and 5% slower than the 965. It is very slightly slower than both phenoms in gaming.

Can we go one day on the forum without a new thread with the same question?

And leave it to jenny to just make up numbers or just fail miserably at math once again.

Link to exactly where you got those numbers.

Didn't you know that if you don't post a link that contradicts the majority belief on this forum then you are automatically wrong? Even if you later post it then it doesn't matter, you'll still be wrong. (Even if you are quoting a review that is actually on this site.)

No. This user has proven that she is terrible at math or just makes up numbers. And thats whats goes on over at the zone. Except they ban you.

PII-965 lost in 3 out of 4 games.

In the game PII-965 leads i5, it is 1.5 FPS better which is substantial.

In addition, i5 beats 965 by 4FPS, 18.9FPS and 1.9FPS in other 3 games which are insignificant at all.

i5 can't keep up with PII-955 at all in gaming.

jennyh, you are so right.

Keep up the great work!

Medium quality gaming benchmarks fail horribly, especially when the totals are in the 100's. In short, those anand gaming benchmarks are a joke.

On the other hand, if anybody cares to work out the lostcircuits benches?

Ah hell let me tell you how it ends up. The Phenom II 965 BE is 8% faster than the i5 750...that is with me being as generous as possible to the i5 by including the SSE4 V-Dub benchmarks which scores a 15% swing in the i5's advantage. Not to mention cinebench, yet another synthetic that favours intel.

Also, if I had worked out the average fps totals of the end gaming benchmarks and added them to the phenom II score, the 965 BE would probably have ended up 15% faster.

So yes I was wrong, it's not 5% its more like 15% in favour of the phenom II using real world apps.

No, you are terribly wrong!

There is huge difference between i5 and 955.

The 955 is much better and will last for 10 years compared to merely 1 year on i5.

Keep in mind that the i5 platform has received numerous revisions since the time of benchmarking. At the time of most benchmarks, the AM3 platform was very solid, while the 1156 was using it's very first shipments.

For non-gaming applications, judging by most benchmarks out there (including lostcircuits), an i5 is about 5-10% better in non-gaming applications, which will shave off a few seconds to a few minutes, depending upon task size.

For gaming at normal resolutions, an i5 or a P2 will be exactly the same. Some games favor Intel architecture, and some favor the AM3 platform.

No its about 10-15% in reality. That's the real reality not your warped reality andy.

I just worked out the lostcircuits benchmarks and the 965 BE is 8% faster at the very least. If the synthetic cinebench and SSE4 v-dub benchmarks were removed, the 965 BE would be more like 15% faster overall.

Truespace 5.1

i5 = 55
p2 = 63

i5 is 13% faster

Truespace 7.5

i5 = 157
p2 = 144

p2 is 9% faster

Cinebench 2003

i5 = 1935
p2 = 1708

i5 is 12% faster

Cinebench r10

i5 = 11320
p2 = 11096

i5 is 2% faster

MainConcept H.264

i5 = 50.2
p2 = 43.68

p2 is 13% faster

Dvdshrink 3.2

i5 = 167
p2 = 159

p2 is 5% faster

Nero 9 recode

i5 = 422
p2 = 402

p2 is 5% faster

V-dub non sse4

i5 = 16
p2 = 15

p2 is 6% faster

v-dub sse4

i5 = 17
p2 = 20

i5 is 15% faster

DIEP chess

i5 = 863563.4
p2 = 948604.1

p2 is 9% faster

Crysis

i5 = 170.5
p2 = 177.8

p2 is 4% faster

UT3

i5 = 147.0
p2 = 139.0

i5 is 5% faster

Overall

i5 wins =

13
12
2
15
5

= 47

p2 wins =

9
13
5
5
6
9
4

= 51

Phenom II 965 BE is 8% faster than the i5 750 on those alone.

That is being as generous to the i5 as I possibly can be. Btw I stopped before the end gaming benchmarks which (taken on average) would have scored the phenom II 965 BE even higher.

By being generous to the i5 I mean I included the cinebench benchmarks (synthetic favouring the intel), and the SSE4 V-Dub benchmark which frankly is a joke but there you go.

Argue with those numbers, anybody.

@jennyh

No need to argue. You rule the world!

And no PC benchmark needed as the results given by your imagination/make up is the best.

NO!

jennyh > anything

Andy what exactly are you contributing to this thread except utter garbage?

You know my phenom II 940 at 3.8ghz is faster than your i5 at 3.6ghz right?

jennyh > And MANY MANY more

There is not a single benchmark that is reliable except the famous "jennyh" benchmark.

http://www.lostcircuits.com/
Hanging on one no name web site = fail
His testing methods : For comparison purposes, all benchmarks were run in WinXP 32
Mentions: Intel Turbo is cheating= final fail
Compare to Guru3d, Anand, THG , Tweaktown, PC World FGS !

What the i5 750 did to AMD pricing in 2 months.

And please, everybody knows THG and Anand are intel shills.