Is the i7 worth getting now or later?

[descendency]

Buy an Xbox 360 and wait for the Westmere/AMD offerings.


(edit: By then, the multicore games will be more prevalent due to the 360, PS3, and market saturation of Quads.)

 

[V3NOM]

Why does everyone say, Oh wait to buy the i7... Get a P45/775? It's Old Technology, that will be phasing out... Sure if you build a P45/775 right it will be as fast as the i7, but the price is not that different for a full build.

I just spent a week researching different options for my first build, first gaming rig.

The Price difference between the 2 options is not even $200 for a full system.

I say go for the i7, go with the new technology, software will be made to take advantage of the i7 soon.

...$200 that would give you more gaming fps if you spent it on better graphics than better CPU

for the last time. (ok maybe not)

If you are building a gaming rig, you will get better performance for your dollar by spending it on GRAPHICS not CPU. Unless you have an extreme graphics setup that is bottlenecked by a Core 2 and needs a Core i7, then fair enough. if you've cashed out for two 4870X2's or three GTX 280's you can obviously afford i7.

Think of these things before you go spending money on an i7 then crying when its slower than a cheaper core 2 system with superior graphics.

 

[Heyyou27]

Don't bother with a dual core this late in the game; you can get a Q6600 for $190 or a Phenom 9550 Black edition for $160 on newegg.

 

[bmlevey]

In your newegg rig, you could probably save about 50-75 on the monitor. KDS monitors are inexpensive/great. ( I use one)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824155053&Tpk=kds%20monitors

 

[keither5150]

To Venom, Anyone buying a I7 will also be buying a Hd4870, GTX 280, 260, or Hd 487x2. I doubt that anyone will build a new I7 rig and keep their old video card.

I had a E8400 @3.6 with 4 gigs ddr3 1333MGh and a hd 4870x2.
I now have I7 920 @stock with 6 gigs 1600 ram and my hd 4870x2

Minimum FPS have increased by close to 40% on Crysis ( Average FPS up by 13%)
GTA4 benchmark FPS increased by 25%.

Memory may have been responsible for part of that.

I7...... don't knock until you try it.

 

[V3NOM]

that's what im saying. if you upgraded graphics instead of getting i7 you would have seen MORE improvement. a 260 is nowhere near top end.

 

[keither5150]

I already had the Hd 4870x2 in my old system. See my earlier post which explains my upgrade.

My point is that no sane person would build a I7 machine without top notch graphics....... Most I7's machines will be running 4870x2's or 280's

 

[V3NOM]

yes i read it. if you added a 4870 or 4850X2 or another 4870X2 you would have got more FPS than upgrading to the i7..

actually i have seen a few threads with "budget" i7 systems with a 260 or 4870... DO NOT MAKE A BUDGET i7 BUILD!

even a single GTX 280 does not mean you should get an i7. two or three, fair enough as the core 2's would probably bottleneck them.

but the whole idea is to get more FPS right? so you would be better off spending the cash on better graphics than better CPU, right? unless the CPU was stopping the graphics cards from reaching their full potential. ie two 4870X2's or three GTX 280's.

 

[gamerk316]

If its a new build, get the i7, unless you are on a really tight budget. I've configured a few i7 systems run with a 4870 and 6GB 1600 DDR3 for around $1700, if you know where to look...

 

[fazers_on_stun]

My take is that a cheap i7 920 with 6GB and overclocked would be more futureproof , and you could probably do a drop-in upgrade to Westmere in a year. The GPU upgrade cycle is usually much faster than CPUs, and I think nVidea and AMD will be coming out with newer GPUs this quarter or next anyway.

There was one website that showed an i7 performing much better than expected on multi-GPU setups on certain games where the GPU didn't bottlenect the system. So as GPUs scale upwards it'll be increasingly important to not have the bottleneck shift to the CPU, depending on what gaming resolution and settings you normally use. Unfortunately I don't have the link handy on this computer but I'm sure others do .

 

[V3NOM]

^yeah. no wonder on 800X600 with a GTX 280.

 

[spathotan]

ATI 5800 is due out in Q3/Q4.

 

[V3NOM]

O.O that should be just in time for my next build... see what nVidia can cook up in time though

 

[spathotan]

It more than likely wont be the level of step-up as it was from 3800 to 4800. But who knows.

 

[fazers_on_stun]

^yeah. no wonder on 800X600 with a GTX 280.

Here's the link so the OP can read for himself: Core i7 Multi-GPU SLI Crossfire Game performance review

No 800 x 600 at all on the chart, and it's only when you get to 2560 x 1600 that the i7 drops down to just 30 - 50% better than a dual-core Wolfdale in some of the games with a dual GTX280 setup.

So where's the P2 equivalent multi-GPU test review?

 

[foolycooly]

Here's the link so the OP can read for himself: Core i7 Multi-GPU SLI Crossfire Game performance review

No 800 x 600 at all on the chart, and it's only when you get to 2560 x 1600 that the i7 drops down to just 30 - 50% better than a dual-core Wolfdale in some of the games with a dual GTX280 setup.

So where's the P2 equivalent multi-GPU test review?

This is interesting information indeed, but I still think you might be missing Venom's point. To his credit he is saying that if it came down to a difference of an 8500 and two 4870x2s or two GTX 280's, and an i7 with only one of either card, then the results would be different. In your link, both the i7 and the duo are using the dual card setups. Most of the time, people building i7 machines aren't able to spend $2,500+ on the rig. If they are using it primarily for gaming, then two cards are better than one and a a faster processor. The FPS results may have all been under the e8500 marks in your link had they not had two cards in each test. Also, the test has both CPUs at stock if i'm reading correctly. The E8400-8600 can be overclocked to 4Ghz+ fairly easily. Just my $.02

 

[fazers_on_stun]

This is interesting information indeed, but I still think you might be missing Venom's point. To his credit he is saying that if it came down to a difference of an 8500 and two 4870x2s or two GTX 280's, and an i7 with only one of either card, then the results would be different. In your link, both the i7 and the duo are using the dual card setups. Most of the time, people building i7 machines aren't able to spend $2,500+ on the rig. If they are using it primarily for gaming, then two cards are better than one and a a faster processor. The FPS results may have all been under the e8500 marks in your link had they not had two cards in each test. Also, the test has both CPUs at stock if i'm reading correctly. The E8400-8600 can be overclocked to 4Ghz+ fairly easily. Just my $.02

Perhaps I did misunderstand his point, but my original point (in my first post) was that as GPUs become increasingly powerful it's important to not have the bottleneck shift to the CPU. Both nVidia and AMD/ATI are releasing more powerful GPUs and/or multi-GPU cards in the next quarter or two, and presumably at similar prices as today's 4870 or 280 if they want to sell many of them . And the link in the second post was evidence that, at least for certain games on certain multiple GPU setups, the i7 showed it was not going to bottleneck compared to a E8500. So, FWIW according to the one test, the i7 would seem to be the more 'futureproof' system when those more powerful video cards come out at affordable prices. By that time, presumably the OP will have upgraded his monitor as well to take advantage of those more powerful video cards.

It could be that the P2 will show similar surprises in multi-GPU or more powerful GPU setups, but I'm not aware of any actual multi-GPU test results for now. Hopefully with the NDA lifting this week we'll see some.

 

[billiardicus]

If you plan on playing at 1280x1024, the $625 SMB PC here on Tom's is a great system (get a better case though). It will absolutely dominate everything at that resolution and probably for several years to come.

I wouldn't think about i7 unless you're playing at 1920x1200+, and are looking to spend $1500+.

As for arguments about i7 vs C2D vs C2Q, checkout some legion hardware articles were different cpu's are compared with a single GPU, example the GTX 295 http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=807

 

[merlinbadman]

It seems like you are buying a PC for the long haul, 3+ years, if your last pc is anything to go by.

In that situation I would deffo suggest buying an i7, over the course of 3 years the $200-$300 premium for an i7 disappears. The C2D's are old even now, how will they compare in 2-3 years?