AMD Phenom II X4 965 vs. Intel core i5-750
- Thread starter dantoshi
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Battlefield CPUs
AMW1011
Distinguished
- Dec 5, 2009
- 2,589
- 0
- 20,960
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.
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.
Pro Llama
Distinguished
- Dec 8, 2009
- 353
- 0
- 18,810
The next question is what graphics card are you going to use and if you plan on using sli or crossfire. If you are going with a HD 5850 or something like that I would go with the 955 because it will be cheaper and you will not need sli. If you already have cards that you want to do in sli then you may want to go with the i5 because the 955 boards that support sli are hard to find and put the price up closer to the i5 set-up.
If you are just looking for a cheap gaming computer that you are going to use one card with go with the 955 you will save about $60 which can be put towards a better card. If money isn’t important go with which ever you like better.
If you are just looking for a cheap gaming computer that you are going to use one card with go with the 955 you will save about $60 which can be put towards a better card. If money isn’t important go with which ever you like better.
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.
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.
blacklic0ric3
Distinguished
- Dec 21, 2009
- 44
- 0
- 18,530
I posted the same question a few days ago and this is what I learned. It all pretty much comes down to what you want. They are both basically equal in performance. I chose the i5 simply because I have never had an AMD cpu and because the turbo boost seems like a pretty cool feature.
jerreece
Splendid
- Sep 7, 2006
- 3,960
- 0
- 23,160
I did the research between the X4 955/965 and the Intel i5-750 also. There's also LOTS of debate on these forums between the two.
In general, the i5-750 is the superior processor between the two. However, for gaming purposes alone there doesn't seem to be a major difference between the two. The i5-750 does however, excel with other software (Photo shop, video editing, etc).
There are a lot of factors with gaming that the two are fairly close. However, from a purely statistical standpoint the i5-750 I find is the better of the two. It will typically cost a little bit more money though.
In general, the i5-750 is the superior processor between the two. However, for gaming purposes alone there doesn't seem to be a major difference between the two. The i5-750 does however, excel with other software (Photo shop, video editing, etc).
There are a lot of factors with gaming that the two are fairly close. However, from a purely statistical standpoint the i5-750 I find is the better of the two. It will typically cost a little bit more money though.
jerreece
Splendid
- Sep 7, 2006
- 3,960
- 0
- 23,160
Like I said, there's debate. LOL Look up i5-750 reviews and Phenom II X4 955/965 reviews and see how they benchmark compared to one another with applications or games that appeal to you. That's honestly the best way to decide.
Then compare prices, etc. (When I say prices, I mean prices on the CPU, Motherboard, and RAM. Not just CPU alone)
You'll find lots of debate here on the forums.
Then compare prices, etc. (When I say prices, I mean prices on the CPU, Motherboard, and RAM. Not just CPU alone)
You'll find lots of debate here on the forums.
keithlm
Distinguished
- Dec 26, 2007
- 735
- 0
- 18,990
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. I looked on LC and did not see it. Your math is always wrong. I want to see how you come to the conclusion that the i5 is 5 percent faster than the 955 and 5 percent slower than the 965. Show me how a 200mhz speed increase on the two AMD cpus results in a 10 percent swing.
You stated this numbers. You show it.
You stated this numbers. You show it.
jennyh
Splendid
- Mar 3, 2009
- 4,292
- 0
- 22,860
Yep I'm aware of that...however my sheer determination will eventually break them down and they'll come to see reason.
I'm gonna start with someguy7, who surely will want to get to the truth?
Start here someguy - http://www.lostcircuits.com/mambo//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=63&Itemid=42&limit=1&limitstart=12
Take every one of those benchmarks and tell us how much faster or slower the 965 BE is compared to the i5 750. For a maths wizard, that should be easy.
andy5174
Distinguished
- Mar 3, 2009
- 2,452
- 0
- 19,860
PII-955 is MUCH better than PII-965! Hence, 955 is better than i5 by 5%.
AnandTech is so wrong here:
i5-750 vs PII-965: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/default.aspx?p=109&p2=102
AnandTech is so wrong here:
i5-750 vs PII-965: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/default.aspx?p=109&p2=102
Just an FYI for future reference, Anand's Far Cry 2 benchmark isn't gameplay. It's an artificial stress test using the FC2 engine that simulates how the game would play if each core was at 100%. Using the in-game benchmarking for actual gameplay, both an i5 and a 955 will net 90+ FPS with a GTX280.
Regardless, a 955, an i5, or an i7 will get you the same performance in gaming. As a matter of fact, P2's and 1156 CPus will be better in gaming than the 920 due to tighter framerates. Outside of games, an i5 will net you ~5-10% additional performance in non-gaming applications over the Phenom II, with the exception of a select few applications.
For games, the 955 and the i5 are excellent and will remain excellent for years. You would never notice a difference.
Regardless, a 955, an i5, or an i7 will get you the same performance in gaming. As a matter of fact, P2's and 1156 CPus will be better in gaming than the 920 due to tighter framerates. Outside of games, an i5 will net you ~5-10% additional performance in non-gaming applications over the Phenom II, with the exception of a select few applications.
For games, the 955 and the i5 are excellent and will remain excellent for years. You would never notice a difference.
jennyh
Splendid
- Mar 3, 2009
- 4,292
- 0
- 22,860
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.
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.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram