Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Intel' Clarkdale - I3 or I5

Last response: in CPUs
Share
May 20, 2010 7:15:19 PM

I am in the process of building my first computer. The computer will be mainly used for basic computing such as internet surfing, listening to music, watch HD movies or videos and school work (mainly with Microsoft Office). I am interesting in buying one of the following Intel processors I3-530, I3-540 or I5-650. I would like to know.

1. Will the I5-650 turbo boost make any real world difference over the I3' which don't have turbo boost?

2. The main reason I want to buy an Intel Clarkdale processor is because of its built in gpu that supports playing HD movies. I want to know from ones personal experience is HD video playback good as professional reviewers I have been saying?

3. Is an i5-750 over kill for my needs?

Thanks In Advance

More about : intel clarkdale

a c 83 à CPUs
May 20, 2010 7:58:47 PM

The I5-750 is defineatly over kill for those needs, and it doesn't have the integrated GPU that the other I5 and I3 have. Personally I don't think any of the I5 dual cores are worth the money, AMD gives more powerful quad core processors for the money. The I3 however, is a good processor at it's price point, and overclocks like a champ if your interested in that.
m
0
l
a c 136 à CPUs
a b å Intel
May 20, 2010 8:18:31 PM

I was looking over some benchmarks just today on the 45W AMD Athlon II X4 605e. I was rather surprised to see that in many tasks (but not all!), it outperformed the i3. Since it is not a particularly fast chip, to me that doesn't bode well for i3. The AMD Athlon II X3 440 (or X4 620, both 95W parts) would be significantly faster, and cost less. Also, the integrated graphics on an AMD motherboard (e.g. HD4200) would be superior to any Intel IGP.
Sticking to your specific question, however, I do believe the i5-650 would be the best of your listed choices, and yes turboboost would matter.
m
0
l
Related resources
May 20, 2010 8:24:07 PM

loneninja said:
The I5-750 is defineatly over kill for those needs, and it doesn't have the integrated GPU that the other I5 and I3 have. Personally I don't think any of the I5 dual cores are worth the money, AMD gives more powerful quad core processors for the money. The I3 however, is a good processor at it's price point, and overclocks like a champ if your interested in that.


Yeah I agree AMD provides bang for buck processors. Before I had settled on Intel' Clarkdale cpu I was leaning towards AMD Phenom II X4 955. Problem is that I have never own any AMD processors or know anybody who has one. I want to make sure the processor I purchase will last me for years. When it comes to the cpu heat of AMD Phenom II X4 does it match up to Intel and how is HD video playback on AMD' latest chipset (890GX).
m
0
l
May 20, 2010 8:26:51 PM

Onus said:
I was looking over some benchmarks just today on the 45W AMD Athlon II X4 605e. I was rather surprised to see that in many tasks (but not all!), it outperformed the i3. Since it is not a particularly fast chip, to me that doesn't bode well for i3. The AMD Athlon II X3 440 (or X4 620, both 95W parts) would be significantly faster, and cost less. Also, the integrated graphics on an AMD motherboard (e.g. HD4200) would be superior to any Intel IGP.
Sticking to your specific question, however, I do believe the i5-650 would be the best of your listed choices, and yes turboboost would matter.


Thanks for the reply
m
0
l
!