Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

I5 750 or Q9400 for a gamer

Last response: in CPUs
Share
April 4, 2010 11:15:22 PM

Hi

I'm thinking about upgrading my PC. Now my rig is:

C2D E6750 @3.2Ghz
3Gb ram DDR2
Gtx 260 core-216
Abit IP35-E

I use my PC mainly for games so I need some new stuff. I wanna buy ATI HD5870 (or gtx480 but it's too hot, noisy and expensive for now) and I don't know which CPU to choose: Q9400 (or 9505) or I5-750 and, because of the now socket, new motherboard - MSI P55-GD55 IP55 and new Ram

The question is: is there a noticable difference in games between the quad and i5? I know that the later has turbo boost, more cache etc, but does it really, and i mean really, makes such a big difference? I don't wanna spend more money just to experience 3-4 more fps with the newer cpu...

More about : 750 q9400 gamer

a b à CPUs
April 4, 2010 11:52:44 PM

both the Q9400 and the i5 750 are very capable CPU's - however the Q9400 usues the LGA775 socket which has been replaced by the LGA1156 (i5's) and LGA1366 (i7 9** series)

If you have the budget the i5 or i7 is the way to go
April 5, 2010 12:07:04 AM

+1 w/ ulysses35
Related resources
April 5, 2010 12:24:23 AM

Well I know that LGA 1156 replaced 775 and that it's prospective choice but will it really make difference in games?
April 5, 2010 12:53:22 AM

What resolution are you playing at?

I wouldn't spend money on 775 tho if you have to upgrade get an i5/i7.

I wouldn't recommend a lower end MSI board i would stick to Asus/gigabyte
April 5, 2010 12:56:05 AM

The resolution is 1680x1050

What specific motherboard would you recommend?
April 5, 2010 2:00:56 AM

rogigor said:
The resolution is 1680x1050

What specific motherboard would you recommend?


What sort of budget and are you going to be overclocking and will you be wanting SLi/CF?? and for that resolution i cant see you needing anything more than you currently have.
April 5, 2010 9:07:23 AM

the budged is ~700$ maybe more. Yes I'm going to be overcloking and one day maybe I'll want sli/cf (but in a distant future)
April 5, 2010 10:39:17 AM

Your current processor is fine, it won't Bottleneck a 5870 much. The latest Article Toms did shows that in a sense. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i3-gaming,2588...

For example, my Q6600 at 3.2ghz scores the same CPU score for Vantage as the Phenom II x4 965 Stock. And that chip pushes that card well.

You will probably notice some bottle necking with certain games at 1680x1050 but I would guess nothing major. In fact, I did a bench run of 3DMark06 to see how much difference there is between my Quad and a Dual Core like yours.

2 Cores


4 Cores


Take special notice to the GPU sub scores, pretty well no change between half the CPU power and Full. Even at a low resolution my GPU is a clear bottleneck.

My advice is to grab the GPU you want and see how it works with your e6750. If you're worried you can probably get more speed out of that chip. But I think it'll work out good. Until there's a noticeable nagging bottleneck, there's no sense upgrading the CPU in my opinion.
a b à CPUs
April 5, 2010 10:55:05 AM

EDIT:

Since you are willing to pay $700 and want to OC(which is best on i5/i7) in the future, I would suggest you buy i5-750 system.

However, do remember to spend a little more for a decent CPU cooler if you want to OC.

BTW, CoolerMaster Hyper 212 Plus is the best bang for the buck FYI!
April 5, 2010 11:27:58 AM

That's be a bit a of a silly upgrade in my opinion. The 5770 is almost identical in performance to the GTX260. They trade blows in benchmarks.

A 5870 would be my pic. And stay with the e6750 for now.
April 5, 2010 10:53:57 PM

Ok. Thanks for the info I think I'll really try buying new video card first, then CPU. Btw, as for the CPU cooler, do you think that Scythe Ninja 2 will be ok?
a b à CPUs
April 5, 2010 11:03:37 PM

Btw. If you live near a Microcenter they have a great deal on the Q9550 ($190) which is a worth while upgrade.
a b à CPUs
April 6, 2010 4:17:20 AM

lucuis said:
That's be a bit a of a silly upgrade in my opinion. The 5770 is almost identical in performance to the GTX260. They trade blows in benchmarks.

A 5870 would be my pic. And stay with the e6750 for now.

True! But remember that he is playing at 1680x1050 which is what HD5770 more than capable of and so HD5850/5870 is a huge waste.

I would rather sell the GTX260 and buy HD5770 or stay with GTX260.

BTW, the reason why I suggested HD5850 is that 1680x1050 monitor is a bit outdated now and he might grab a new monitor soon.
April 6, 2010 5:11:27 AM

A buddy of mine just picked up a 5850 not too long ago. It is far from a huge waste at his monitors resolution of 1680x1050. And from what I seen of Toms latest article, the 5850 is still the Bottleneck of his system. He's got a Q9550 @ 3.4ghz.

I think the OP might see some bottle necking because of the Dual Core, but not enough to warrant a CPU upgrade. But I guess we'll just have to wait and see how it turns out.
April 6, 2010 5:17:39 AM

Hey maybe you should keep your video card. The GTX 260 216 is still a fantastic card. I'm using it right now and I max everything without trouble (except poorly optimized crysis)
a b à CPUs
April 6, 2010 6:07:36 AM

lucuis said:
A buddy of mine just picked up a 5850 not too long ago. It is far from a huge waste at his monitors resolution of 1680x1050. And from what I seen of Toms latest article, the 5850 is still the Bottleneck of his system. He's got a Q9550 @ 3.4ghz.

I think the OP might see some bottle necking because of the Dual Core, but not enough to warrant a CPU upgrade. But I guess we'll just have to wait and see how it turns out.


HD5850 is more than enough for almost every game except Crysis even under 1920x1080, let alone 1680x1050.















As you can see, HD5850 give 60fps+ in most games which is more than enough for any 1920x1080 monitor.
April 6, 2010 6:20:11 AM

Sure, but keep in mind future games. A 5850 may be more then enough now for most games, but what about a year from now?
a b à CPUs
April 6, 2010 6:50:04 AM

You would get the answer from these charts if you looked into them. That is, adding in another HD5770 to beat HD5850 a year later for much cheaper price.

By going HD5850 for 1680x1050 monitor, you are actually paying more for overkill(useless) performance NOW and worse performance in the future.

And remember that OP's playing under 1680x1050 instead of 1920x1080.
April 6, 2010 8:32:59 AM

Well I'm not gonna buy a new monitor :)  And I don't live near a Microcenter. In fact I live in Poland. As for the video card, from what I see on these charts, buying 5770 would be a step back from my gtx260 and 5850 isn't much cheaper than 5870 so...
a b à CPUs
April 6, 2010 8:40:03 AM

so... Stay with your GTX260 and be happy :) 
April 6, 2010 9:12:36 AM

No can do sir :)  Gtx260 is a great video card but I do want to experience DX11 in games like Metro 2033 and more which are to come. Maybe I'll just buy 5870 and see if the CPU is the bottleneck and then buy a quad or i5
a b à CPUs
April 6, 2010 9:28:52 AM

I'd go with the Q9400. It'll cost you almost double the money to run a LGA 1156 computer. To get a Q9400, it'd cost $180, getting a i5 750 would cost double, as you need DDR3 RAM ($100 for 4GB) and a new motherboard ($100 at least). Unless the i5 has a significant performance boost in your chosen game in the regions of 100%, I recommend taking the Q9400 or keeping the Core 2 Duo.
April 6, 2010 9:33:27 AM

Finally someone who said it straightforward :)  I must check out some reviews and comparisons of quatro and i5 and see if the latter has much better performance.
a b à CPUs
April 6, 2010 9:36:20 AM

Trust me, the E6750 is no slouch.

You don't have a need to upgrade to a quad.
April 6, 2010 9:46:46 AM

Ok, thanks (and thanks Lucuis for the comparison, somehow I didn't pay much attention to it). Maybe I'll really stay with e6750 for now.
a b à CPUs
April 6, 2010 10:38:31 AM

Here is a list of supporting cpu's for that mobo.

http://www.abit.com.tw/cpu-support-list/mb/intel_p35_ip...

Frankly I'd get a new monitor, and look for a second hand quad like a Q6600 (or new if you can get it) as they overclock very easily.

Alternatively a Q9550 / Q9450 ... why ... bigger cache.

I'd also look at a small SSD for your OS or a couple of 1Tb HDD's in RAID0 and shortstroke them.

That would give you maximum bang for your buck mate.

Hope this helps.
April 6, 2010 3:01:28 PM

I do not need a new monitor. 1680x1050 is enough for me and I don't need bigger resolution. Maybe I'll be a new one if I decide to buy PS3 one day.

As for the CPU, as I wrote before - I'll go for q9400 or q9550 if I feel that my current CPU is a bottleneck for new video card.
April 7, 2010 12:36:57 AM

Let us know how it goes :) 
a b à CPUs
April 9, 2010 11:33:19 AM

Good call.

No need to rip out the mainboard and replace it too.

That's like open heart surgery ... compared to taking a panadol.

Cheers.
April 9, 2010 10:29:15 PM

Raidur said:
Btw. If you live near a Microcenter they have a great deal on the Q9550 ($190) which is a worth while upgrade.



Down to 179.00 @ MC Paterson Nj.
a b à CPUs
April 9, 2010 11:03:40 PM

Damn $180, that's nuts.

About whether a 5770 is enough... I have more GPU power than a 5870 and I'm not satisfied. I'm at 1080 though but the difference from 1680x1050 isn't too much.

I'm an eyecandy whore so I try to run games the highest they can go (using in-game settings only) including AA.

Games that make my system chug... metro 2033 with 8x aa isn't very playable, 4x is. Bad company 2 isn't as playable as id like it on 8x dx10 so I play 4x dx10. Even assassins creed ii kind of clunks with full aa (still playable). Crysis is playable on 8x but not sure if I can say the same for dx10 (I'll have to check).

Tbh I'm ready to ditch my 4870 and get a 2nd 4890, then I'll oc the crap out of them and be cookin. :) 
!