Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

I9 vs i7

Last response: in CPUs
Share
February 15, 2010 2:47:19 PM

Hello,can i know which 1 is the better CPU.
is it i9 or i7?

More about : question

February 15, 2010 2:50:51 PM

then, the Phenom 2 x4 vs i7.
who is the better?
thank you!
m
0
l

Best solution

a b à CPUs
February 15, 2010 2:59:01 PM

The Core I9 isn't out yet, and the I7 is better than Phenom II overall (excluding gaming and ordinary computer use where they are equal or the PII takes the lead).
Share
Related resources
a b à CPUs
February 15, 2010 2:59:35 PM

no such thing as an i9 any more, but if you're referring to the i7 980X then that's the top-of-the-line 6-core chip coming soon.

So that'll be the best chip.
m
0
l
February 15, 2010 3:01:56 PM

Yes best at a price 1.000$
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 15, 2010 3:01:59 PM

LePhuronn said:
no such thing as an i9 any more, but if you're referring to the i7 980X then that's the top-of-the-line 6-core chip coming soon.

So that'll be the best chip.

Not necessarily. As you may know, AMD's Thuban comes out as well, so it is not yet certain that it will be the best CPU concerning raw power.
m
0
l
February 15, 2010 3:33:09 PM

Cryslayer80 said:
Not necessarily. As you may know, AMD's Thuban comes out as well, so it is not yet certain that it will be the best CPU concerning raw power.


Last I checked, the 6core AMD vs the quad core i7s, the i7 was still beating the AMD chips in highly threaded apps like video editing, databases, web work loads, etc.

I would assume the 6 core i7 would beat the 6 core AMD if the 4 core i7 is still beating it.

Best part though is either chip is way OP for most current games and the AMD will be a lot cheaper *and* the AMD chip uses less power for the same amount of work. So even though the i7 may be slightly faster, the AMD does it with less heat/power and won't cost $1,000
m
0
l
February 15, 2010 3:56:17 PM

I was saying that the i7 980x ("i9") will cost around $1.000 not thuban. How did you checked thuban vs i7 if we only know few things about thuban? All we know is there are 45nm, will have some sort of turbo boost and the clocks (2.4 - 2.8 and another one stronger but the speed is unknown) and thats prety much it.

But yes the i7 980x will definitely beat thuban having 32nm, hyperthreading and higher clock speed (around 3.0GHz).

But thuban will most likely beat 4core i7 in single or two threaded applications due to its turbo (the only limit beeing is its TDP).
m
0
l
February 15, 2010 7:09:11 PM

Quote:
"Kewlx25 wrote :

So even though the i7 may be slightly faster, the AMD does it with less heat/power and won't cost $1,000"

Slightly faster? Try 30% faster in Multithreaded apps.


I know at the top of my post I said the i7 is faster in highly threaded apps, but the bottom of my post I was talking about games. In games, the i7 doesn't have a whole lot of lead on AMD and some of that is because many times a game will get two threads schedule on the same core but different virtual cpus which obviously is less advantageous than scheduling two heavy threads on two different cores.

My A.D.D. doesn't help my writing, sorry for any confusion.. :-|

On a side note, Bad Company 2 actually locks itself down to one thread per core, so my i7 only shows activity on 4 of the 8 reported cpus. I'm assuming they check for hyper-threading

edit: also I was comparing the 6 core AMD to the 4 core i7, so the distance between them is a bit less.
m
0
l
February 23, 2010 1:31:52 PM

Best answer selected by danieleu.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 23, 2010 4:56:54 PM

Cryslayer80 said:
The Core I9 isn't out yet, and the I7 is better than Phenom II overall (excluding gaming and ordinary computer use where they are equal or the PII takes the lead).

This is why I will never trust anything come from AMD fanboys.

Quote:
Stop filling people's head's with Amd Fanboi Bullshit. Thuban has NO CHANCE against Gulftown

+1
m
0
l
February 25, 2010 8:27:45 PM

Pyschosaysdie, dude ur a idiot ur doing the same thing with ur intel ***. practice what ya preach numnuts
m
0
l
May 5, 2011 9:41:51 AM

Kewlx25 said:
Quote:
"Kewlx25 wrote :

So even though the i7 may be slightly faster, the AMD does it with less heat/power and won't cost $1,000"

Slightly faster? Try 30% faster in Multithreaded apps.


I know at the top of my post I said the i7 is faster in highly threaded apps, but the bottom of my post I was talking about games. In games, the i7 doesn't have a whole lot of lead on AMD and some of that is because many times a game will get two threads schedule on the same core but different virtual cpus which obviously is less advantageous than scheduling two heavy threads on two different cores.

My A.D.D. doesn't help my writing, sorry for any confusion.. :-|

On a side note, Bad Company 2 actually locks itself down to one thread per core, so my i7 only shows activity on 4 of the 8 reported cpus. I'm assuming they check for hyper-threading

edit: also I was comparing the 6 core AMD to the 4 core i7, so the distance between them is a bit less.

http://dailytech-iaz25th.blogspot.com/
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
May 5, 2011 9:44:37 AM

i guess you know about intels secrets..
m
0
l
!