Is my E8400 and it's Asus P5Q Pro Turbo motherboard really that slow compared compared to something like an I5 dual core and DDR3 or are we just splitting hairs? I've been thinking about a Core 2 quad, but they're still rather expensive. My E8400 has been the same price for at least 2 yrs. now. What's the deal with the high prices on the old stuff? Is it because they're old, they don't seem to be scarce.
Core 2 duo
- Thread starter double_d1
- Start date
I would say a Core 2 duo that new is still able to hold its own while gaming, especially when overclocked, but there are other tasks that could definitely be helped by a new processor.
What exactly do you do with the comp that might be sped up by a quad core?
I wouldn't go from a dual core to a dual core. The new dual core i5's would only be about 30% faster per clock, and they can't be freely overclocked by much(highest turbo of the processor only).
The prices can stay up on older processors, because they know there are still some people that will upgrade their older system even with a somewhat expensive proc. They are still decent processors, but a quad core i5 2500K that can be overclocked to 4.5ghz+ at the drop of a hat and 5ghz+ with tweaking would blow anything in the Core 2 line away.
What exactly do you do with the comp that might be sped up by a quad core?
I wouldn't go from a dual core to a dual core. The new dual core i5's would only be about 30% faster per clock, and they can't be freely overclocked by much(highest turbo of the processor only).
The prices can stay up on older processors, because they know there are still some people that will upgrade their older system even with a somewhat expensive proc. They are still decent processors, but a quad core i5 2500K that can be overclocked to 4.5ghz+ at the drop of a hat and 5ghz+ with tweaking would blow anything in the Core 2 line away.
saaiello
Splendid
- Oct 13, 2009
- 4,042
- 0
- 23,460
I5 2500K is amazingly fast at transcoding it would really make no sense for you to spend money on anything but an I5 or better. Transcoding would be much faster on a quad but the Core 2 quads are way overpriced compared to what the I5 2500K cost.
That would definitely be helped by a new core i5, but they also have the new Quicksync feature which speeds up video encoding/decoding tremendously for programs coded for it that would make you have to get a H67 board. This would disable the overclocking ability of the unlocked processor, though, I believe the lower models also have Quicksync in them as well, so they would be a cheaper alternative once more programs use the fixed function hardware.
I would wait for the Z67 chipset that should be coming out soon, since you've already waited so long. The Z67 chipset should allow you to overclock and use the graphics core(where QS is located)
BTW, QS supposedly made a minute of video encoding(even with video cards) into 10-20 seconds. Another was only slightly faster, but it still beat out the other cards.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/sandy-bridge-core-i7-2600k-core-i5-2500k,2833-17.html
This shows about a 2x speedup when compared to other cards though:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083/the-sandy-bridge-review-intel-core-i7-2600k-i5-2500k-core-i3-2100-tested/9#
Once QS is used in more software, this would be perfect for your use. Even now, the 2500k is a fast processor that can handle encoding blazingly fast, especially if you overclock.
I've been thinking about an I7 950. I see them for $299.99 I was thinking about buying some DDR3 memory now because the price has been dropping. I built the PC I'm using now, one part at a time and the first thing I bought was some DDR2 memory because it was dirt cheap. The next month it doubled in price. Just hope I'm doing the right thing by doing it this way. If anyone has some feedback I'm glad to hear it.
Do you plan on using more than two video cards for anything? If not, I really think the new core i generation would be a better option. They are faster per clock, can clock higher, and use less power while doing that.
The i7 950 wouldn't be a bad option if you plan on using the extra pci-e lanes for anything. It's just so hard to pass up >30% better performance from a processor(for me), though.
Memory is at a low right now. In fact, OCZ left the memory business, because they weren't making enough money in it to be worth it. This will be one of the low points for DDR3 so getting some right now would be worth it. It might even be worth it to get 4GB sticks as they are priced almost linearly for their size compared to 2GB.
Just make sure when you get memory to get the right amount. The i7 9xx series uses triple channel(3 sticks) while the new core i2xxx uses dual channel(and any i7 8xx or i5,i3).
I can spend about a $1000.00 dollars, like I said it's going to be a one part at a time gig so it's possible that I could spend more. The DDR3 memory is cheap right now and was thinking about buying some. I'll keep in mind what mobo I'll be getting when buying memory. Already have Corsair Graphite case. two WD 500 gig drives and a Lite on DVD burner. Have an extra XFX Radeon HD4850 from my Cross fire setup that I can use to get started. If you have some ideas to share, let me know.
Too bad we don't know how much each system costs...
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/sandy-bridge-core-i7-2600k-core-i5-2500k,2833-15.html
And I don't know why Tom's has the new gen performing much better in CS5. There must be other reasons for the system to be performing slowly on that bench they did.
jaguarskx
Titan
- Apr 19, 2006
- 27,978
- 3
- 84,965
Additionally, using a SSD as a scratch disk (I prefer the word "thrash") can potentially shorten it's life since the the sectors can only be overwritten so many times before they become unusable.
I'm not saying the SSD will die on you in less than a year, but a HDD is better suited as a "thrash" disk.
I'm not saying the SSD will die on you in less than a year, but a HDD is better suited as a "thrash" disk.
How about a Ram "thrash" disk?
With how cheap Ram is right now, all you would need is 16GB(or 24GB with the i7 9xx) of it. Get a Ram drive program to make a 12GB Ram Drive, and there is your "thrash" disk.
I believe Ram is much more durable as well. I just don't know how many GB this uses exactly, though. If it's smaller than 12GB than this would work wonders.
With how cheap Ram is right now, all you would need is 16GB(or 24GB with the i7 9xx) of it. Get a Ram drive program to make a 12GB Ram Drive, and there is your "thrash" disk.
I believe Ram is much more durable as well. I just don't know how many GB this uses exactly, though. If it's smaller than 12GB than this would work wonders.
Mousemonkey
Titan
- Sep 3, 2006
- 59,462
- 17
- 92,965
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
News Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger retires, effective immediately — also steps down from BOD, two co-CEOs step in- Started by Admin
- Replies: 34
-
Question Cloning m.2 ssd with Macrium and it’s stuck at 100%
- Started by Dmaher13
- Replies: 19
-
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram