i5 vs i7

lostsoul62

lostsoul62

Member
You spend a thousand dollars to build a computer. All you need is an i5 for an average user. Why not spend another hundred dollars and get an i7? That's just 10% more because you will use the same motherboard. Now would getting the i7 last another year before you upgrade and if so then it would be worth getting an i7 vs. an i5? Also is getting a (K)series going to be worth getting if I don't overclock or should I get a (K) series incase I want to overclock later so it will last for a little while longer? The problem is if I use my (K) series CPU to upgrade or overclock later on then I have to spend a hundred more dollars for RAM? I'm not sure what to do?
 
Last edited:
1. An i7 will not get you an extra 10 percent/1 extra year in gaming. In fact, in most games it's probably 3 percent.

2. Always get a K series CPU. Only $30 more and later you can get an extra 15 percent+ out of your CPU by overclocking.

3. You don' need special RAM to OC your CPU or to get a K series CPU.
 
You don' need special RAM to OC your CPU or to get a K series CPU.[/QUOTE]

If I buy 1600 RAM and later on I want to overclock don't I have to get 1833, 2100 and so on for my RAM?
 
lostsoul62 said:
You don' need special RAM to OC your CPU or to get a K series CPU.
Click to expand...

If I buy 1600 RAM and later on I want to overclock don't I have to get 1833, 2100 and so on for my RAM?[/QUOTE]
You can just run your 1600 RAM at 1833, 2100, etc.
 
Not really any point in not getting 2133 to start with then. If you get 2133, your technically not overclocking it, just setting it manually in the bios.
 
If you're just gaming then the i7 is overkill and won't really be more future-proof.

Put it this way: the i5 2500K came out in 2011. If you built a gaming system in 2011 (or early 2012), then you probably bought an i5 2500K. You could've bought an i7 2600K - but would you be any better off with the i7 than the i5 here 3 years later in 2014? No. The performance difference between them in terms of gaming is tiny.

Even the first generation i5s (the 750s and 760s particularly since they were quad-cores) are fine for gaming today in 2014 some 4 years after their initial release, so if you bought say an i7 860 instead of an i5 760 in 2010 you wouldn't really be better off here in 2014, 4 years later.

What really matters is the graphics card. You should spend most of your money on the graphics card because ultimately that is what will affect your gaming performance the most. The CPU is probably the second most important thing, along with the PSU and the motherboard.

I've owned both an i5 760 and an i5 2500K. Got the 760 in 2010, it was still a great gaming CPU when I sold it in 2012 and replaced with an i5 2500K setup. And the 2500K is still great today for gaming (and is even sufficient enough for my video and photo editing too!)
 
Last edited:
StrangleHold said:
Don't know where you get your memory, but there's not that much difference between 1600 and 2133. Pretty much the same, unless you get some really low timing 2133. But low timing 1600 is too.
Click to expand...
You're right, I just looked on Newegg and there is only a few dollars difference. When I built my rig over a year ago the difference was much more significant.
 
Get faster RAM if you are relying on an APU.

The gaming i5 vs i7 debate used to be true that it was about the same, but increasing we're seeing games that make use of the HT (wolfenstien, BF4, planetside 2) and I would suggest that an i7 is worth it, especially with consoles being 8 cores, I think this trend will only increase. I haven't seen any benchmarks (recent ones) to prove this though and those that are around, focus on the average or max FPS, which is not where HT helps, its the minimum FPS which plummet under certain scenarios.

But it does come down to the games you play and how long you want to keep your machine. I think DX12, DDR4 and increased physics and particle effects will make an i7 a winner even more so. This is conjecture of course.

Secondly, ask yourself if you are going to use virtual machines (VMs), wishing to run multiple applications (e.g. run RCON while gaming, etc etc).
 
Last edited:
Okedokey said:
Get faster RAM if you are relying on an APU.
Click to expand...

Actually even FXs do better with faster memory vs. Intel. But if its the same price or just a few buck more I see no sense not getting 2133. But even Intel gets a bump going from 1600 to 2133. If it were 1600 vs. 1866, then yeah no point. But buying new and 2133 is the same price it makes no sense not getting it.
 
StrangleHold said:
Actually even FXs do better with faster memory vs. Intel. But if its the same price or just a few buck more I see no sense not getting 2133. But even Intel gets a bump going from 1600 to 2133. If it were 1600 vs. 1866, then yeah no point. But buying new and 2133 is the same price it makes no sense not getting it.
Click to expand...

True, but RAM is more and more expensive these days! Damn those floods!
 
StrangleHold said:
Intel must have done some tweaking to Haswells memory controller. Actually alittle better then I even thought with faster memory.
Click to expand...

Me too. Although, the gains, aren't massive are they. In Australia RAM (well everything except the beach) is bloody expensive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top