i5-661

Performance with Hyperthreading will vary depending on the specific hardware and software you use. I personally think Hyperthreading is overrated. The Core i7 940 Processor has about the same processing power than the Phenom II 1090T. The Core i5 760 Processor is does not have Hyperthreading and is beat by the Phenom II 1090T in processing power.

If you wanted to save money I would buy the Phenom II 1090T Six-Core.
 
Whats better when overclocked i5 2500k or i7 2600k
I think when overclocked to lets assume 4.5 Ghz, the turbo boosts doesn't work and does hyper threading work?
 
I wouldn't get the Phenom II X6. The Phenom II X6 1100t costs the same as the i5 2500k, and the 2500k is just as fast. This is according to www.cpubenchmark.net, which uses as many threads as possible, so it shows that even if a program is threaded for 6 cores, the quad-core 4 thread 2500k beats the X6. For programs that take advantage of 4 threads, 2 threads, or just 1 thread, the 2500k has a clear advantage. ;)
 
Last edited:
Ankur said:
Whats better 4 cores/8 thread cpu or 6 core/ 6 thread cpu.
The 8 thread acts as 8 cores when needed I guess due to hyperthreading.
Click to expand...

If you're referring to Intel's hyperthreading, then the extra "cores" only add about 25% of what a real core would, and that's under ideal circumstances. Sometimes it's much lower, and sometimes HT actually hurts performance.

Given the same architecture, 6/6 would trump 4/8, but in reference to an i7 quad versus an Phenom II hexacore, they trade blows for the most part in multithreaded programs like your video editing. I think the i7 does have a slight overall advantage, but given the ~$100 price difference of the Phenom, you can see why it's being recommended.

edit: I'm talking about 1366/1156 i7's, by the way, since Sandy Bridge is currently out of action. If you're looking at SB, the i5 2500K is only $30 more expensive than the 1090T (plus the extra mobo costs), and is loads faster when overclocked. The i7 2600K adds hyperthreading to that, which could give a large boost to encoding times and whatnot.
 
Last edited:
Drenlin said:
If you're referring to Intel's hyperthreading, then the extra "cores" only add about 25% of what a real core would, and that's under ideal circumstances. Sometimes it's much lower, and sometimes HT actually hurts performance.

Given the same architecture, 6/6 would trump 4/8, but in reference to an i7 quad versus an Phenom II hexacore, they trade blows for the most part in multithreaded programs like your video editing. I think the i7 does have a slight overall advantage, but given the ~$100 price difference of the Phenom, you can see why it's being recommended.

edit: I'm talking about 1366/1156 i7's, by the way, since Sandy Bridge is currently out of action. If you're looking at SB, the i5 2500K is only $30 more expensive than the 1090T (plus the extra mobo costs) and loads faster when overclocked. The i7 2600K adds hyperthreading to that, which could give a large boost to encoding times and whatnot.
Click to expand...
Nice explanation! :good:

To the OP: remember to check www.cpubenchmark.net. You'll see that the older i7s do in fact trade blows with the Phenom II X6s, but the i5 2500k performs about the same as the Phenom II X6 1100t, but with only 4 cores. This shows that it will perform just as good as the Phenom in highly multithreaded apps, and better than the Phenom in everything else. ;)
 
^ True dat. The real allure of the SB chips is their overclocking though...they'll typically hit ~4.8GHz on air, stable. :eek:
 
Sounds good, I think I will stick with X6 1090T. Hey and which new intel processors are coming out in Q3 2011, LGA 2011 chipset I guess. What will be their possible clock speed and # of cores?
 
Ankur said:
Sounds good, I think I will stick with X6 1090T. Hey and which new intel processors are coming out in Q3 2011, LGA 2011 chipset I guess. What will be their possible clock speed and # of cores?
Click to expand...
I'm not sure, but they'll probably cost $300< :(. I still suggest that you consider Sandy Bridge 1155, though. You'll see a definite advantage over the 1090t, and if you decide to overclock, you'll be golden. :)
 
Hey, leave the boy alone. He decided on Advanced Micro Devices. Just joking :D

But I really do like the processing power of my Phenom II 940 Quad-Core. I do not think you will regret buying a Phenom II Six-Core.
 
2048Megabytes said:
Hey, leave the boy alone. He decided on Advanced Micro Devices. Just joking :D

But I really do like the processing power of my Phenom II 940 Quad-Core. I do not think you will regret buying a Phenom II Six-Core.
Click to expand...
^Yeah, you'll be happy whichever way you go. The 1090t and the 2500k are both great CPUs. ;)
 
Del_Monico said:
I don't recommend quad-core CPU's. There's just not enough reason to have that many cores running, unless you're working graphic design for DICE or something.

A hyper-threaded dual core processor will be plenty for what you need, especially at 3.33 GHz. Hell, it'd probably run onboard graphics without much of a hiccup. Though I still don't recommend it.

I'm not read into the NVIDIA cards now-a-days. I mainly stick with ATI for my needs. They just seem to run better in my eyes. I don't even know the comparison numbers to reference the GTX 570/460 to an ATI unit, but I'll suggest the ATI numbers: A 5000 series would do just fine. Doesn't even really matter wich sub-set you get, as long as you have at least 1gig of RAM onboard.
Click to expand...

how can you not recommend a quad core? were at the point in the road nowadays that quad cores are more in need than daul cores are.a few years ago i could agree with you but not now.

now for the GPU, i dont think one is better than the other(performance wise). if i were in for an upgrade it would be an nvidia card,they just have more to offer at the moment(PhysX,CUDA,Tesla) and i believe SLI scales higher than Crossfire.
 
tech savvy said:
how can you not recommend a quad core? were at the point in the road nowadays that quad cores are more in need than daul cores are.a few years ago i could agree with you but not now.

now for the GPU, i dont think one is better than the other(performance wise). if i were in for an upgrade it would be an nvidia card,they just have more to offer at the moment(PhysX,CUDA,Tesla) and i believe SLI scales higher than Crossfire.
Click to expand...
I am really stuck in which GPU to buy. I am looking for GTX 570/560 Or Radeon 6950. If there is any other cheaper GPU for heavy gaming Ithen I would consider it.
 
u should be ok
if you don't have enough (as Jeremy Clarkson would say) powwwwweeeeer then u could over clock it and buy a good fan or water cool it. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top