Why does the i5 750 get such good reviews?

[Jarott_damodred]

I have found, on numerous sites, that when asking for the best CPU for around 200$ the Intel Core i5 750 2.6GHz keeps coming up. When I go to www.cpubenchmark.net I find 5 CPU's for around 200$ ranked higher then the Intel i5 750.
AMD Phenom II x6 1075T = 199$
AMD Phenom II x6 1055T = 179$
AMD Phenom II x4 970 = 186$
AMD Phenom II x4 965 = 166$
And the Intel Core i5 760 2.8 GHz = 205$
Could someone please explain why the Intel i5 750 gets so much attention as one of the best for 200$ when there are 5 that that the benchmark charts say are better for the same price? I am aware that the i5 750 has 8mb cache (which is pretty high), Turbo Boost Technology, and can be overclocked a lot and still be stable but does all that really make it so much better? It doesn't offer Hyper-Threading and is only 2.6GHz so why do so many claim it to be one of the best for 200$?

 

[fazers_on_stun]

First of all, you shouldn't base a comparison on just one website's say-so. A lot of gamers here rely on Anandtech's comparisons (mainly because they are so easy to use I suppose) and according to AT (http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/109?vs=146), the i5-750 handly beats the X6 - 1095T in 3 of 4 game benchies, and is a bit better in BAA.

It also beats the X4 - 970 in the same 4 games, albeit by not as much.

 

[stone-69]

For a fair comparison based on the price you should check out the
"Best Gaming CPUs For The Money" here at THWG :
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/gaming-cpu-overclock,review-32031.html
If a 205$ CPU can't beat a 166$ CPU then it sure would be pityful (and soon out of the market).

 

[thechief73]

Hi jarott_damodred, Welcome to THW.

Just how and where were those CPU's ranked higher than the i5-750?

As for your question - "Why does the i5 750 get such good reviews? " , it is because the price vs performance really cant be beat.

 

[Wisecracker]

Yah win some.

Yah lose some.

... and some are rained out


All CPUs above $140 are incredibly powerful regardless of manufacturer. You should objectively consider your computing tasks and needs. These days all CPUs above $75 are incredibly powerful - LOL - and I think it is funny when people start talking about the *price/performance* of $200 processors.

Sometimes more cores are better, sometimes not.

Sometimes more RAMs will make a bigger difference than CPU choice.

A better GPU will help your gaming more so than your CPU choice.

And sometimes a RAID (or SSD) for better disk I/O is the solution.



And that's the way it is [:jaydeejohn:5]

 

[thechief73]

I agree with ct1615, The i5-750/760 is an all around great performer, it will everything pretty darn well. It will last you for years down the road without having to do a major overhal when something is released that a more of a budget build will not be able to handle very well or as well as you would like it to.

But I guess this all depends on the OP's intended use for this PC and thier budget, as always.

 

[Raidur]

Yeah, it's the best gaming CPU hands down at an affordable price (it and the 760). That's why it gets so much attention in reviews.

 

[55Range]

I5 750 great price/performance ratio, you cant go wrong with it-

 

[CsG_kieran_2]

Intel and cheap don't always go together lol but this one brakes it nice chip and much better than the almost all the X6's out there.

 

[jj463rd]

At this time I wouldn't be thinking about the i5 750 or 760 I would wait just around the corner for the new Sandybridge CPU's in January (2011).

 

[68vistacruiser]

First of all, you shouldn't base a comparison on just one website's say-so. A lot of gamers here rely on Anandtech's comparisons (mainly because they are so easy to use I suppose) and according to AT (http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/109?vs=146), the i5-750 handly beats the X6 - 1095T in 3 of 4 game benchies, and is a bit better in BAA.

It also beats the X4 - 970 in the same 4 games, albeit by not as much.

I gave up on Anandtech a long time ago when I discovered their reviews to be tainted. An Ati video card they recommended turned out to be garbage, as was an AMD processor. Not only did those reviews turn me away from them, but I dropped any thought of ever buying an AMD or ATI branded product again. In the end it made me a very happy man, as Intel and Nvidia have served me very well!

 

[SteelCity1981]

The best reviews on something personally that fits your needs is the one you are able to benchmark and perform yourself. You shouldn't take any online review and make it the deciding factor of anything you choose. Online reviews are great and give you a generel idea of the performance of something, but everyone uses their computers diff then the next guy. Like I said before many online reviews may give you a good idea on something, but it's really up to you to know exactly what fits your needs by doing your own test on your own pc.

 

[fazers_on_stun]

I gave up on Anandtech a long time ago when I discovered their reviews to be tainted. An Ati video card they recommended turned out to be garbage, as was an AMD processor. Not only did those reviews turn me away from them, but I dropped any thought of ever buying an AMD or ATI branded product again. In the end it made me a very happy man, as Intel and Nvidia have served me very well!

It's possible for any website to have a bad review, although I think most of them who care about their reputation will go to extra effort to make sure their reviews are legit and reproducible. From what I've seen, bad reviews get called out quickly by the readers and corrections get made quickly. I hate to say it, but personally I put more stock in Anandtech than I do on Tom's reviews. However there are plenty of other good review sites out there - Xbit, Lostcircuits, etc etc.

IMO, if you cut yourself off from half the market suppliers for CPUs and/or video cards (i.e., AMD/ATI), then you're stuck with whatever Intel or Nvidia has to sell you at the price they want to charge. It's sorta like my preference for Sony TV's - they're usually more expensive than say Samsung, and have some good features, but if I see a sale on a Samsung then that's what I'll go with. About the same quality and performance, but a cheaper price = winner in my book..

 

[ghnader hsmithot]

I hate intel because you cant upgrade it in anyway..In other words,upgrade options are limited

 

[smithereen]

I have found, on numerous sites, that when asking for the best CPU for around 200$ the Intel Core i5 750 2.6GHz keeps coming up. When I go to www.cpubenchmark.net I find 5 CPU's for around 200$ ranked higher then the Intel i5 750.
AMD Phenom II x6 1075T = 199$
AMD Phenom II x6 1055T = 179$
AMD Phenom II x4 970 = 186$
AMD Phenom II x4 965 = 166$
And the Intel Core i5 760 2.8 GHz = 205$
Could someone please explain why the Intel i5 750 gets so much attention as one of the best for 200$ when there are 5 that that the benchmark charts say are better for the same price? I am aware that the i5 750 has 8mb cache (which is pretty high), Turbo Boost Technology, and can be overclocked a lot and still be stable but does all that really make it so much better? It doesn't offer Hyper-Threading and is only 2.6GHz so why do so many claim it to be one of the best for 200$?

People claim it is one of the best, because it is. Furthermore, it's getting a bit old, and AMD has shuffled their lineup a little since it was released, so when it was reviewed the competition wasn't as steep.

For gaming, it's about the best their is. The Thuban hexacores are ranked higher because CPUBenchmark.net is fully multithreaded. If you're not gaming, the i5 is a great choice, and it WILL outperform any Phenom II. What are you planning to do?

 

[aznshinobi]

ATI parts are good... I mean now it's just AMD but their Graphics cards are beasts. If I do say so mah self, just personal preference though. The 5850 OC'd really makes me love AMD/ATI. But yes, the 750 gets those reviews because it deserves those reviews. I think this and the i3-540/530 are the on CPUs out of the 1156 lineup that was actually partially, budget oriented.

SB: http://www.anandtech.com/show/3871/the-sandy-bridge-preview-three-wins-in-a-row

^ But the next SB i5 Quad core beats out the current i7's so... This'll be interesting how they price. Intel reported that they would try to go after the mid-range budget. But we'll see.

 

[Jarott_damodred]

People claim it is one of the best, because it is. Furthermore, it's getting a bit old, and AMD has shuffled their lineup a little since it was released, so when it was reviewed the competition wasn't as steep.

For gaming, it's about the best their is. The Thuban hexacores are ranked higher because CPUBenchmark.net is fully multithreaded. If you're not gaming, the i5 is a great choice, and it WILL outperform any Phenom II. What are you planning to do?

In the past i haven't done much gaming with my computers but when Diablo 3 comes out i'd like to be able to play that even if it isn't running at best quality. I'm looking at getting an ATI 5770 but will probably use my old GPU until the system requirements 4 the game are made available. Really i just want something that will last a decent amount of time, be stable, and will be better then what i have now... an 8 year old computer!

 

[Jarott_damodred]

Best answer selected by jarott_damodred.

 

[Jarott_damodred]

Thank you all for the help. I didn't expect so many responses to my question.

So i ended up with the i5 750. I'm thinking i should have gone with the 760 now but i didn't see as many good reviews on it over the 750 so that's why i made this choice.

CPU : Intel Core i5-750 2.66Ghz 8MB Cache Quad-Core
Motherboards : ASUS P7P55D-E (Intel P55, 2xPCI-E, 9xSATA2, 4xDDR3, 1394)
8GB (4GBx2) PC3 10666 DDR3 1333Mhz Memory
Power Supply : 650watt
Case : Thermaltake V9 Black Edition (5 5.25, 6 3.5) 4 Fans, Audio/USB
GPU: ATI 5770 or Geforce GTS 450 (not sure yet)

Well that's my new machine.
Thanks again

 

[Mousemonkey]

This topic has been closed by Mousemonkey