Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

I5 or i7?

Last response: in Systems
Share
January 27, 2012 3:47:52 PM

Hello everyone. I had a question for you guys. I recently posted a question up on yahoo answers (http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AlicmPuKycCLqqWXphzy2Fjty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20120125035902AAQK0T3) and got really good answers. Now, I am a little confused. Which processor would be better for editing videos, making animations, playing games...etc The i5 2500k or the i7 2700k? Would making the switch affect the FPS/settings of a game/app. (ex. Battlefield 3 on MAX, Streaming content using CPU dependable program like Xsplit) If it isn't a hassle would you also be able to tell my which graphics card I should get? Originally I was going to get the Radeon HD 7970 but I have had people tell me to get the GTX 580 instead. Which CPU/Graphics card setup is better for what I want to accomplish?

More about : question

January 27, 2012 4:37:46 PM

For editing videos, making animations the best is i7 2600k. 2700k in an 2600k little overclocked from Intel , thing what you can do by yourself in 10 seconds from bios just raising the multiplier. To buy 2700k is a waste of money. Buy 2600k and you will be ok.
Score
0
January 27, 2012 4:46:17 PM

Battlefield 3 is not really meant to be played in ultra settings except for people that have multiple mid-highend to highend graphics cards. however the 7970 can handle it and it does so better than the 580 http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-7970-benc...
however i would for the same price sugest getting two 6950's that unlock to 6970's for the best bang for the buck that will out perform any system near its price range.
Score
0
Related resources
January 27, 2012 4:59:26 PM

Just get the I7, you will be set playing BF3 with either one but if u want it to last the i7 2600k is good, now if you don't feel comfortable OC your 2600k to 2700k specs, get the 2700k
Score
0
January 27, 2012 5:07:00 PM

You should take a look at this comparison
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Blind-Test-Shows-AMD-Mac...

I would get an FX-8150, A dual fan high end heatsink, and some low latency DDR3-2000
Keep in mind Windows 8 will be tailored toward more cores so 8150 would be a better choice IMO. 2600K is 4 cores. 8150 is 8 cores same price. 8 cores is more future proof.

Definately get the 7970. NV wont have anything to beat it for quite a while.....and no Kepler won't be faster than 7970.
Score
0

Best solution

January 27, 2012 5:16:34 PM

For video editing and other multithreaded apps, the 2600K is the best choice.
The extra cost of the 2700K is not likely to be worth it when you can reasonably oc either to the same levels.

For gaming only, the 2500K is all you need, but for those editing apps, the extra hyperthreads of the 2600/2700K are helpful.

If you will be using a single monitor, the GTX580 is probably best if you have any budget constraints. Even a GTX570 will be good.
The 7970is a bit stronger, and more expensive but overkill for a single monitor. If you will get into triple monitor gaming, or have no budget issues, then go for the 7970 for gaming.
I think I would avoid multiple gpu's so long as a single gpu will do the job. dual+ gpu's will be less consistent, even though FPS benchmarks will shine.

Another consideration is the possibility of using the Nvidia CUDA capabilities of their cards to improve video editing performance.
Check the specs for your apps to see if they can use CUDA.
Share
January 27, 2012 5:31:42 PM

Thanks for the fast replys. I didn't think my question has went through. I kept getting an error so now this has been posted twice. I do not know how to delete the 2nd post. I'm sorry. I will be using one monitor at the moment but later on I will move on to the 3 monitor setup. Also if it isn't to much to ask, would someone willingly build a good PC that will support what I want to do on cyberpower/ibuypower..etc and post the link here? I don't want to spend a lot to have it overheat or something. I can go up to $1600 Thanks.
Score
0
January 27, 2012 5:45:34 PM

actually i just did a little research. with games at max settings the 7970 does double what the 6950 does. and it overclocks better and the frame gain from overclocking scales better. the 7970 is the most powerful single GPU VGA card out there. the 580 doesnt come close. 7970 seems like the best way to go.
Score
0
January 27, 2012 5:51:40 PM

Is there any risk to building your own PC? I don't know how to do so but I am willing if it is indeed cheaper to do. I always wanted to build one.
Score
0
January 27, 2012 10:09:36 PM

uploadcomplete said:
Is there any risk to building your own PC? I don't know how to do so but I am willing if it is indeed cheaper to do. I always wanted to build one.


For a high end pc, it is the only way to go. You get higher quality parts, and a lower price.

The key is to get a good and compatible list of parts.

Take the time to download and read, cover to cover, the motherboard and case manuals before you get the parts. Many questions will be answered.

For the most part, there is only one way to connect things.

Google for some how to articles. Look at those that are more current.

The bottom line is that the experience is priceless!
Score
0
January 28, 2012 1:29:08 AM

Well if you go with the 7970 that leaves 1000$ for your build. I think with getting the 7970 you should future proof your system. AND a 2500k/2700k I7 system is forever gonna be stuck at 4 cores with the socket 1155.

AMD will have a 10 core AM3+ processor out later this year so I would build a Phenom II X6 based system so I can upgrade to the 10 core AMD later.

Me and another guy has put together a ~1200$ build recently in the MMORPG.com forums with links that are only a couple days old.

http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/post/4713348#4713...

Some notes on the build I would get a Rosewill 750 Capstone power supply. And an ASrock 990FX Deluxe 4 motherboard. Also get 8gb DDR3 2133 since the price has dropped through the floor.

A Phenom 2 X6 1090T @ 4ghz which is an easy OC to get to and a 7970 will run ANY game out now at max settings @ 1080p 120hz. So there is no reason to get an I7 especially since AMD's upcomming 10 core will definately be faster than any I7 socket 1155 system, and will be AM3+ so that mobo will be all set to upgrade to 10 core. With Windows 8 comming out fairly soon more cores is definately better.
Score
0
January 28, 2012 5:41:44 AM

grndzro said:
Well if you go with the 7970 that leaves 1000$ for your build. I think with getting the 7970 you should future proof your system. AND a 2500k/2700k I7 system is forever gonna be stuck at 4 cores with the socket 1155.

AMD will have a 10 core AM3+ processor out later this year so I would build a Phenom II X6 based system so I can upgrade to the 10 core AMD later.

Me and another guy has put together a ~1200$ build recently in the MMORPG.com forums with links that are only a couple days old.

http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/post/4713348#4713...

Some notes on the build I would get a Rosewill 750 Capstone power supply. And an ASrock 990FX Deluxe 4 motherboard. Also get 8gb DDR3 2133 since the price has dropped through the floor.

A Phenom 2 X6 1090T @ 4ghz which is an easy OC to get to and a 7970 will run ANY game out now at max settings @ 1080p 120hz. So there is no reason to get an I7 especially since AMD's upcomming 10 core will definately be faster than any I7 socket 1155 system, and will be AM3+ so that mobo will be all set to upgrade to 10 core. With Windows 8 comming out fairly soon more cores is definately better.


http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=287

The 2600K is the better choice. The FX-8150 is cheaper, yes, but isn't nearly as good as the 2600K is.

Also, we don't know what Windows 8 is going to do for bulldozer. People said that once Windows 7 was patched that there would be massive gains, but there was very little gained after several patches. People said that Bulldozer was going to crush Intel, and it didn't. For all we know, Windows 8 could see marginal gains, if any. It would be nice if there were in fact massive gains, but again, we won't know that.

More cores doesn't always mean better. In theory, the 10 core processor will be the better choice for video creation, rendering, etc... but that is in the future. We don't know if the OP wants to spend money now just to spend it again. Whereas the 2600K is going to be 'future' proof all in its own without any upgrades. 4 cores, PLUS 4 threads.
Score
0
January 28, 2012 9:09:33 AM

When properly overclocked they are equal. Especially when you OC the IMC to 3000 and use DDR3 2000 with tight timings.

But I was never reccomending the the FX8150. even though I would pick it over the K series in a heartbeat.

I was reccomending he go with the 990fx platform because 2nd revisions of a new architecture are always better. FX8150 was a new architecture with bugs and I'm positive it's sucessor later this year will be better than Socket 1155.

Are you willing to bet a 4 core IxxxxK will beat the 10 core piledriver later this year?
If someone gave you the choice of which one to get?

I simply have faith that AMD will turn things around and from what I'v seen of the recent housecleaning the Dirk Meyer BS is over.

I think Piledriver will surprise a lot of people in a good way.

No it's not 4 cores + 4 threads. Thoes extra 4 threads only operate when an actual core is in wait mode so it's only a small bonus. Personally I would rather have the actual cores and not hyperthreading. You probably did know that though.

play BF3 on both systems. the 8150 gives a smoother experience.
http://semiaccurate.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6044
Score
0
January 28, 2012 5:13:24 PM

I don't like the concept of overclocking a chip very highly to match another, when you can just overclock the other and it will still outperform the former.

I would like to see AMD's pile driver perform nicely and I would love to see AMD start competing with Intel again. However, I don't take chances on 'faith'. Either it will perform, or it won't. There isn't a "buy this and hope it turns out the way we want".

Again, in theory a 10 core, especially one with better architecture, should beat a four core processor. But then again, so should an 8 core.

Sure the 8150t will play BF3 smoothly, but BF3 isn't the only game out there. In the benches I linked above, some games play at the same FPS as the 2600K, and some perform better with the 2600K.

I see what you meant with going with the phenom, but those are being phased out and replaced by Bulldozer, which as you said will be replaced with Piledriver.

Now to answer your question of "if someone gave you the choice of which one to get?" I would get the one that has been tested and proven to be the better choice. If a 10 core Piledriver performed better at the same price as the 3570K or the 3770K, then of course I'm going to get that. But as it stands right now, I would get the 2600K for animation, editing, and rendering. The 2500K I would get for gaming. If I was on a true budget, then AMD's 1100T.
Score
0
January 29, 2012 9:27:52 AM

Best answer selected by uploadcomplete.
Score
0
January 29, 2012 11:47:17 AM

oops
Score
0
January 29, 2012 1:00:37 PM

This topic has been closed by Mousemonkey
Score
0
!