Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Intel core i7 930 or new AMD? - Page 2

Last response: in CPUs
Share
a b à CPUs
May 1, 2010 2:23:57 AM

Great. It goes to prove that while performance matters, the choice of which CPU to go will depend on the individual's specific situation, needs, his biases and lastly how he reads the advice on this forum.

I hope the OP at this time has made has found the answer he is looking for.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
May 1, 2010 4:09:38 AM

andy5174 said:
No one force you to get the immensely overpriced i7-975. An OCed i7-930 can easily beat up the stock i7-975.

i7-930 is cheaper (and actually $100 cheaper if you are near a Microcenter) and performs better than 1090T when OCed.

Learn how to OC, noobish AMD fanboy.


It's not cheaper.... Its the same price as a 1090T and I'm not near a microcenter. You still have to buy the mobo and when you put it all together The 1090T is cheaper... You assume that because I'm talking about price/performance I don't know how to OC.... It astounds me how cocky Intel fanboys get.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
May 1, 2010 8:01:01 AM

@aznshinobi:

Quote:
It's not cheaper.... Its the same price as a 1090T

i7-930 $294.99
1090T $299.99 just reduced from $309.99
You fail!


Quote:
You still have to buy the mobo and when you put it all together The 1090T is cheaper

RAM price:
2GBx3 will of course costs more than 2GBx2. In addition, you can still get dual channel RAM for LGA1366 if you really want to save some money.

Price of MB that are with two 16x PCIE:
GA-EX58-UD3R $188.99
GA-890FXA-UD5 $179.99

Furthermore, you could get the same performance with even less cost by purchasing the i7-860+P55 if you don't need double 16X PCIE.

You fail again.


Quote:
I'm talking about price/performance

Why would you compare 1090T with the overpriced i7-975 if you know how to OC? Why don't you compare the cost-performance of 1090T with i5-750 which is 33.33% cheaper and performs far less than 33.33% worse in most cases? AMD fanboys are just insane and always make ridiculous comparison.

You fail once again.

Endless fail from AMD fanboys.

m
0
l
Related resources
a b à CPUs
May 1, 2010 8:18:57 AM

Haha, its funny because to prove your point you try to act like 5$ is a big deal. Or 15 for that matter. And, Your comparing a mobo that can run usb 3.0 to one intel board who can only run usb 2.0s. Thats stupid. You also compared the Gigabyte 890x to a board with only 2 16x2.0s Why would you try to pick the cheapest boards they have out just to prove a point. Stop crying. Your a ****ing hypocrite because you say we're close minded? You pick the crappiest comparisons just to prove a point. YOUR MAKING RIDICULOUS COMPARISONS. Jeez, your dumb.


EDIT: By the way, get your facts straight. The 890fx has 3 PCI 16 2.0 slots. Your intel board only has 2.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
May 1, 2010 8:24:19 AM

aznshinobi said:
Haha, its funny because to prove your point you try to act like 5$ is a big deal. Or 15 for that matter. And, Your comparing a mobo that can run usb 3.0 to one intel board who can only run usb 2.0s. Thats stupid. You also compared the Gigabyte 890x to a board with only 2 16x2.0s Why would you try to pick the cheapest boards they have out just to prove a point. Stop crying. Your a ****ing hypocrite because you say we're close minded? You pick the crappiest comparisons just to prove a point. YOUR MAKING RIDICULOUS COMPARISONS. Jeez, your dumb.


EDIT: By the way, get your facts straight. The 890fx has 3 PCI 16 2.0 slots. Your intel board only has 2.

Noob! Only two will run at 16x. It's 16x16x or 16x/8x/8x. As expected from dumb AMD fanboys. USB 3.0? Make yourself a device that can take advantage of USB 3.0! :p 
Gee, you must be on of the kind of necrofile. aznshinobi
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
May 1, 2010 8:30:05 AM

.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
May 1, 2010 7:22:19 PM

Then tell me andy. Which intel LGA 1366 actually have USB 3.0 and 16x/8x/8x Then tell me there price. Don't even talk about the "Make yourself a device that can take advantage of USB 3.0, If your going to be future proofing then why not just get it. Plus most of the USB 3.0 boards should have Sata 6Gb/s, Hard drives already use that. Now to the PCI issue, I realized already when i looked at its capabilities that it could run 16x/16x and 16x/8x/8x. The fact is find any 1366 socket Intel boards that actually can run 16x/8x/8x and tell me there price. Even if it doesn't have usb 3.0, there 250+ dollars.

Btw, necrofile isn't a word. Unless you were talking about flipping your c, to a g. and you still spell it wrong.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
May 2, 2010 12:06:37 AM

aznshinobi said:
Then tell me andy. Which intel LGA 1366 actually have USB 3.0 and 16x/8x/8x Then tell me there price. Don't even talk about the "Make yourself a device that can take advantage of USB 3.0, If your going to be future proofing then why not just get it. Plus most of the USB 3.0 boards should have Sata 6Gb/s, Hard drives already use that. Now to the PCI issue, I realized already when i looked at its capabilities that it could run 16x/16x and 16x/8x/8x. The fact is find any 1366 socket Intel boards that actually can run 16x/8x/8x and tell me there price. Even if it doesn't have usb 3.0, there 250+ dollars.

Btw, necrofile isn't a word. Unless you were talking about flipping your c, to a g. and you still spell it wrong.

It is a word from daily language and listed in the Urban dictionary.

Check it yourself: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=necrofil...

Sigh.... It proves once again that AMD fanboys are just dumb noobs who always show off their ignorance.
m
0
l
May 2, 2010 12:16:00 AM

Sorry, I came here looking for rational discourse and insightful observations, but I must have wandered into grade school by mistake.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
May 2, 2010 3:45:16 AM

src1425 said:
Sorry, I came here looking for rational discourse and insightful observations, but I must have wandered into grade school by mistake.

Come now... don't say that. The people here are professional and are discussing their knowledge and belief with great enthusiasm that's all. It is like this in congress or the parliament. You just have to filter the context from the insults, that's all... :) 
m
0
l
May 16, 2010 11:02:16 PM

You know what the way I see it, 6 true cores for about 300 is the way to go. It doesnt matter to much about benchmarks when they are so close in performance. The truth is, you will have 6 cores vs 4.
Most apps dont even use more than 2 but when your running multiple apps, you can decide which ones use which core.
So overall I think AMD is the way to go, Price, performance and flexiblity. You can even get a great bundle price going for AMD.
Anyways good luck!
m
0
l
May 17, 2010 8:58:18 AM

Can windows make use of the full 6 cores?
m
0
l
May 17, 2010 4:38:36 PM

jennyh said:
Interesting. Did tweaktown use the Black Edition memory profiles before whinging about memory performance?



Lolololol you say about someone else winging..your personality is rich.. im not a fanboy of any kind but i've seen so many of your posts and you remind me of a christian preacher who does not have any logic at all... You speak out of blind faith in your holy grail of a company AMD where the people there would probably scoff at your religious comments your posting on these forums...

but onto the actual thing at hand...this argument is pretty stupid.. every time someone probably sees this argument they go on to see the final cut line of what is best when they know fine right that there is no way their mind is going to change as computing is so broad that you just can't cut a clear line.. things are always changing aswell so people go on these arguments shouting what they know and yes their may be a reslut in the end but there's always another "if" lurking round the corner for someone to shout about...also depending on budget and the performance for what you're wanting to do on your pc but there is always people who think they might use their pc for something more in the future like perhaps a gamer thinks he may go onto encoding and other things.. he'll want to get something which is good all rounded , well that's for the people who don't like thorwing old things away incase they might just use it again which they usually never don't.

It plays on peoples minds.. there is no straight answer so just leave it alone...

I've already posted a forum before asking for advice between processors but it is really really indecisive.. there is an almost infinite amount of options... some more important and some not while some people will want options for the plain hell of it.

I can't even decide between the both!
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
May 18, 2010 6:56:04 AM

andy5174 said:
@aznshinobi:

Quote:
It's not cheaper.... Its the same price as a 1090T

i7-930 $294.99
1090T $299.99 just reduced from $309.99
You fail!


Quote:
You still have to buy the mobo and when you put it all together The 1090T is cheaper

RAM price:
2GBx3 will of course costs more than 2GBx2. In addition, you can still get dual channel RAM for LGA1366 if you really want to save some money.

Price of MB that are with two 16x PCIE:
GA-EX58-UD3R $188.99
GA-890FXA-UD5 $179.99

Furthermore, you could get the same performance with even less cost by purchasing the i7-860+P55 if you don't need double 16X PCIE.

You fail again.


Quote:
I'm talking about price/performance

Why would you compare 1090T with the overpriced i7-975 if you know how to OC? Why don't you compare the cost-performance of 1090T with i5-750 which is 33.33% cheaper and performs far less than 33.33% worse in most cases? AMD fanboys are just insane and always make ridiculous comparison.

You fail once again.

Endless fail from AMD fanboys.



Ugh... I'm confused, Andy...

Your post shows the Thuban $200 and the 930 at $290.... Where is the $5 difference?

This is a friggin no brainer. If anyone buys a 930 over a Thuban these days its because they are an extremely uninformed consumer or an Intel fanboy.

Hands down I would get a Thuban over 930 any day of the week IF I had the software to support it. Having said that, I game so I stick with my nice and cool 65 watt E8500 :)  Good night.
m
0
l
May 18, 2010 8:25:57 AM

go for i7 930 with gigabyte ga x58s ud5 motherboard blindly.
m
0
l
May 19, 2010 1:37:21 PM

werxen said:
Ugh... I'm confused, Andy...

Your post shows the Thuban $200 and the 930 at $290.... Where is the $5 difference?

This is a friggin no brainer. If anyone buys a 930 over a Thuban these days its because they are an extremely uninformed consumer or an Intel fanboy.

Hands down I would get a Thuban over 930 any day of the week IF I had the software to support it. Having said that, I game so I stick with my nice and cool 65 watt E8500 :)  Good night.



Would you still pick a 1090T over a 930 if you were only gaming like you said though? O.o you weren't too clear at that last bit..
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
May 19, 2010 10:22:47 PM

a1an said:
Would you still pick a 1090T over a 930 if you were only gaming like you said though? O.o you weren't too clear at that last bit..



I would not get either for gaming - I would get a 955 or a 750 and invest in a good GPU setup.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
May 20, 2010 2:06:59 PM

werxen said:
I would not get either for gaming - I would get a 955 or a 750 and invest in a good GPU setup.

Hmmm... got me thinking... I was planning on upgrading my rig from an unlocked X3 720BE OC'd at 3.6GHz into a 1090T. I don't use my PC other than gaming so maybe its better to get a 2nd HD4890 to crossfire instead.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
May 20, 2010 6:11:39 PM

I'd take a 930 over a 1090T.

The 1050T however, with a quality mobo, is an awesome bargain for an overclocker and is the real winner here. (For those that can utilize the cores)
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
May 21, 2010 2:44:08 AM

randomkid said:
Hmmm... got me thinking... I was planning on upgrading my rig from an unlocked X3 720BE OC'd at 3.6GHz into a 1090T. I don't use my PC other than gaming so maybe its better to get a 2nd HD4890 to crossfire instead.



Oh wow hell yes good idea. You will notice much more FPS in your game if you follow that route - plus you also have an unlocked quad core @ 3.6... you are good to go in the CPU department.
m
0
l
May 26, 2010 4:31:02 PM

werxen said:
Oh wow hell yes good idea. You will notice much more FPS in your game if you follow that route - plus you also have an unlocked quad core @ 3.6... you are good to go in the CPU department.


Only thing is that the motherboard for 750 is gonna create a bit of a bottleneck if your going to get high end crossfire or sli.. not so sure about AM3 though but i5 750 is better is better than the X4 at gaming also.. Not sure what comes ontop as the winner.
m
0
l
      • 1
      • 2 / 2
!