Quad or i7

G

Gordon.C

Member
Hello

I am just wondering if its more profitable to get core i7 clocked at 2.66 or to get core 2 quad with core 2.83.
Of course the i7 will require newer motherboard so is it better to get the i7 really?
 
If you have the money, I'd say go for i7. During the debate between dual core and quad core, everyone was yelling "quad blah blah blah because it's future proof." I'm going to use the same argument and say i7, because it has more cores and more future proof.
 
Yup, i7 is actually cheaper than some quads. The only problem with being a cheaper CPU is that you'll need a new motherboard, which will cost minimum of $250, and some triple channel ddr3 memory. You'll be spending around $600 for this new platform.

But when looking at the benchmarks, i7 is much more efficient at the same clocks as quads.
 
Pssh yea man. My rig was 2500 bucks. My mobo was close to 400 and the ram well, i forgot how much ram was. But you have to relize, if you run XP which I am right now, your only going to be able to run 3 gigs of ram. Only if your going to run Vista than I would go for the 6 gigger.
 
In my own personal opinion I would wait until they have refined the technology of Intel i7 processor line. The i7 processors are 130 to 140 Watt. In the future I am sure they will bring the power consumption down to 95 Watts or lower.

The Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550, or the Q6600 are 95 Watt processors and great alternatives to the i7.
 
2048Megabytes said:
In my own personal opinion I would wait until they have refined the technology of Intel i7 processor line. The i7 processors are 130 to 140 Watt. In the future I am sure they will bring the power consumption down to 95 Watts or lower.

The Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550, or the Q6600 are 95 Watt processors and great alternatives to the i7.
Click to expand...


Lets not forget the performance boost vs cost is not quite there yet. I7 might be better but lets see some actually quad-support for games before we go upgrading too ^-^
 
Twist86 said:
Lets not forget the performance boost vs cost is not quite there yet. i7 might be better but lets see some actually quad-support for games before we go upgrading too ^-^
Click to expand...

I personally prefer Dual-Core processors now for this reason. Quad-Core processors for the normal end user or the gamer are not better at present (except for multitasking). An Intel E8400 or E8500 Dual-Core would likely give better performance for most gaming software out there presently and they consume less power than Quad-Cores.
 
^^ games are now staring to use quad cores...thats why GTA IV doesnt run very well on higher clocked dual cores and yes thats including the E8400s ;)

im just glad i went quad.
 
I am also for the quad idea probably i7 because maybe today games dont support quad but who is talking about today in 6 months or a year it may be and it will be different.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top