Quad Core Processors

[TP-Oreilly]

Hi, i was looking at the i7 930 which is a quad core at 2.8ghz, and also the amd anthlon x4 630 which is a quad core, why is the amd one SOO much cheaper, does it not have threads or something?

the amd is also at 2.8ghz, i know intel charge more but, surely the i7 930 must offer something alot better than the amd one

 

[iPwn]

The Intel chip is also 2.8GHz.

The reason for the price jump is simply the Intel name. I'm sure there may be some debate over shear performance, but IMO, you're paying for the name.

 

[TP-Oreilly]

do they have the 8 threads thing tho
they dont have the auto overclock thing either

 

[foothead]

The Intel chip is also 2.8GHz.

The reason for the price jump is simply the Intel name. I'm sure there may be some debate over shear performance, but IMO, you're paying for the name.

Please do some research before you post. Moar GHz does not always mean better processor. The Athlon II doesn't even have L3 cache.

do they have the 8 threads thing tho
they dont have the auto overclock thing either

No, Athlon IIs only have four threads. Hyperthreading is currently only available in intel CPUs (well, as far as x86 CPUs go at least).

The 'auto overclock' is a feature of the motherboard, not the CPU itself. I believe intel has made it standard for any i7 supported mobo though, so you should get it with any deent board. As far as AMD boards go, it is available, but less common.


What will you be using this computer for? That is really the deciding factor on what CPU you should get.

 

[dancingmadrb3]

If not gaming the Athelon II seems a good bet, but if you are a gamer and on a budget the Phenom II is good for the buck, while most intels with similar capacities are twice as pricey.

 

[foothead]

If not gaming the Athelon II seems a good bet, but if you are a gamer and on a budget the Phenom II is good for the buck, while most intels with similar capacities are twice as pricey.

This is not really true... The i7 is much more capable than the Phenom II, even in gaming. The reason the two seem to perform the same is because the GPU is the bottleneck.

Also, I wouldn't buy an athlon II for anything more than basic use and/or light gaming. If you are going to get into stuff like high-end photo editing, lots of media converting, etc. then the i7 is the best choice. For gaming and normal use, the phenom II is definitely the best for your money.

 

[TP-Oreilly]

thanks

well ive actually already got an i7 930, im just checking to see if i could have saved some money by getting and anthlon x4 at the same ghz

 

[dancingmadrb3]

Maybe, but as I said maybe a decnt GPU could have helped balance it out a little.
I heard some decent benchmarks with the right combo.
Not saying thats the rule, but I have seen some cool setups that sometimes rivaled the i7

 

[iPwn]

Moar GHz does not always mean better processor. The Athlon II doesn't even have L3 cache.

Boy is my face red....

I understand the GHz isn't only factor...

Didn't read the Athlon part and assumed Phenom.

 

[foothead]

Maybe, but as I said maybe a decnt GPU could have helped balance it out a little.
I heard some decent benchmarks with the right combo.
Not saying thats the rule, but I have seen some cool setups that sometimes rivaled the i7

Yeah, in gaming. That is because the GPU is bottlenecking the full performance of the CPU. Run a CPU only benchmark, and the i7 will destroy, no matter what the GPU.

The reason you see Phenom II setups beating equivalent i7 setups at high resolutions, really high settings is because AMD's chipsets seem to have more throughput than intel's. In normal gaming, for all intents and purposes, the two are equal. The exceptions seem to be heavily multithreaded games with tons of CPU rendered physics.