Phenom II 955 Versus Core i7 920: Gaming Value Compared

Page 9 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
I'll only add a couple things to this. Someone stated the author said he would choose the i920 for all the other things you do with a computer, but never was this tested in any of the article. Also, hardly anyone really does a whole lot of video / audio encoding in reality (to which I'm sure people on here will say they do it all the time). For the majority of users in everyday computer no difference would be seen.

Of course the Intel is faster, we all know that, but I agree with other people saying the cost of the AMD system could have been much lower (940, ddr2, lower cost MB), which is where AMD really is a good buy. In face C2Q is still a good buy too (at least some of the chips).

A couple of people said they would like to see results based on one video card as well as the dual video cards tested here, I echo that sentiment.

One more thing, there are a lot of people on here who need to take a deep breath, take their favorite relaxant, maybe take a nice long bath, and ease some of that tension/anxiety building up from internet rage. :)
 
Bah, this review is slightly flawed IMO. It can be difficult to get different pieces of hardware from different companies together in similar configurations but the video cards are different...very similar yes but different, and the performance difference between the two could through the results off a bit...the machines obviously are very close performance wise, why not use two 4890's in both rigs.
 
Very nice review I must say yes we knew who was gonna win but AMD did get a few kicks in there too. I have used both AMD & Intel in the past right now its all Intel but that does not mean I dislike AMD at all. Im about to build a new gaming PC & am gonna decided whether to go with a Core i7 or a AMD offering & clock the snot out of either one of them. Right now I got a old Core 2 Quad Q6600 @4.1Ghz which blasts through everything I throw at it but man does it eat up my Thermoright IFX-14 with 2 140mm fans on it sure it runs cool but you know the cooler is working hard to keep the temps down. But this was a great review please keep up the good work A+++ for this review.
 
What happened with this review that some sites say they wont link here anymore? Did I miss something? I all have read are some post about what may or may not be posted on sites front page or soemthing...was this review from a some other site or something?
 
good review, to tired to read all the coments now, the review clearly show at that pricerange an i7 sadly is a better choice than phii 955, but still i think its possibel to build a more responsive and better AMD rig at that pricepoint hehe, well i woudnt recomend using phii 955 in any build thou, its a waste of money, at this moment the best 4 core from AMD is 940 (price/performance) and plattform am2+. Am2+ becoause of motherboardprices at 790FX chipset. But the prices are getting closer, so i woudnt be suppriesed if there soon will be a better price/performance going AM3.

But a good review cleeve.
 
And i dont think u should appoligize for comparing rigs with nvidia/intel cpus/gpus vs amd/nvidia or just AMD.

Because as i said a lots of time a person that want to build a rig are looking for the best rig for the money he has to spend and for hes use.

It is far more interesting to read this builds off than just cpu or gpu reviews.

Fanboys will never be satified anyway, but every one that is interested in computer would love reviews of diffrent setups for the same price.
 
I have a Dream (think that was some fameous words)

A build off between Toms/Anantech/Hexus/xpreview and so on, 2 riggs at each pricepoint.
 
This isn't about "Fanboys" this is simply about do it right and if you cant get help or dont post it. Anyone who knows how to set up a half way decent AMD system can spot the flaws and that the author wont show is face and respond to those questions seriously underminds this being legit. Personaly I dont expect the AMD setup to stand a chance, the I7 is a much better core, I just want to see a fair race, cant have a guy in pits put the ignition wires on the wrong cylinders and then expect to have accurate data. Its as simple as that. 2 Strikes so far in my book.
 


So what would you have done different ? I know the Intel could have most likely went to 4.0GHz. The intel had an inferior vid card set up. But what would you do to change up that AMD rig ? Let's hear it.
 
Wow...11 pages and this won't be the end. Some of you guys I don't see why you're feeling AMD is still getting slighted somehow. Cleeve was extremely fair about the fact that the AMD setup held its own particularly at the most relevant 1200x1920 rez, even when driving a relatively heavy-hitting crossfire setup. Remember ppl I don't think he even had any obligation to redo this test. I think some of you are having too hard a time letting go of the previous results.

Anyway...the points about the triple core Phenom II being a fantastic value are well-deserved. I've been suggesting that chip to a lot of budget builders lately. For the money you save versus an i7 rig, you can buy an additional 4890. Core i7 driving one 4890 versus 720BE driving a pair of 4890s X-fired? Now that would be a test...
 
[citation][nom]Why_Me[/nom]So what would you have done different ? I know the Intel could have most likely went to 4.0GHz. The intel had an inferior vid card set up. But what would you do to change up that AMD rig ? Let's hear it.[/citation]

Its been posted by already, Flaws have to do with Memory choice esp concidering how much he spent, then look at those timings combined with HT and NB frequency as well as the OC. Was this gonna be used as just a word processor?, since the 940's release 3.8 was the norm oc to compare, many are good for more than 3.9 on air, but this was a 955 and likely good for another 200mhz with ease. Plainly didnt know what he was doing looking at his recipe, I can't believe this guy would have done anything intentionally as others jump on him for, that’s just stupid.




 
[citation][nom]cmmcnamara[/nom]Bah, this review is slightly flawed IMO. It can be difficult to get different pieces of hardware from different companies together in similar configurations but the video cards are different...very similar yes but different, and the performance difference between the two could through the results off a bit...the machines obviously are very close performance wise, why not use two 4890's in both rigs.[/citation]

obviously skipped page 2 and went straight to the results.

and as far as pricing, go back to the cyberpower comments, it took over a week to get this article published from its completion, of course the prices will be different.

Read through the article and the comments thread from the cyberpower, you will see why this article was done the way it is. keep as much the same as possible, yes, there are better options out there, but that goes for BOTH systems. Both systems can achieve a higher overclock POSSIBLY, but nothing is guaranteed.

I bet i can overclock my cpu higher in my house with the A/C set at 65 than my neighbor can with his cold blood A/C turned off and sitting at 95.
 
[citation][nom]imaxamd[/nom]Anyone who knows how to set up a half way decent AMD system can spot the flaws and that the author wont show is face and respond to those questions seriously underminds this being legit. [/citation]

Not true, I'm happy to respond to anyone who is polite.

I've heard a lot of complaints about the setup regarding the latency and hypertransport speeds. What all the complainers seem to gloss over the fact that, at best, it might increase the final numbers by a percentage point or two.
The irony is, those who left angry comments about imperfect latency and HT speeds know that optimizing the minutia wouldn't make a lick of difference in the big picture. Results and conclusion remain intact.

You want me to apologize for not making the bestest, super-duper ultimate AMD setup in the world? Sure, I'm sorry. This was an unscheduled article, I was pressed for time to get it out and I did what I could given the resources I had at my disposal. Maybe not ideal, but let's not pretend it would have changed the parts that count.

At the end of the day, even the complainers know it wouldn't have changed anything that matters, especially since the Phenom II ended up with a generous overclock compared to the i7. I don't see you guys complaining about that, by the way. I guess it's easier to complain about the minutia and pretend the overclock discrepancy doesn't exist.

I'm a bottom-line oriented kind of guy, real-world builds and a price/performance focus. That's my style. Some of you may hate that; Maybe I'm not the author for you. I can't please everybody and I'm not trying to.

If you want to pretend a couple percentage points here or there make a mountain of difference, well, you certainly have the right to think that. But I also have the right to disagree.

Bottom line is, I'm still more than satisfied the results of these tests are valid, and support a valid conclusion. To me, that's the important part. The guts of this are solid, and if the wost complaint people can come up with is that they think the latency could be better optimized - well, I couldn't be happier.
 
Cleeve I liked your article although as a stated earlier newegg had a substantial savings on that 955 CPU and ASUS motherboard just hours after the article was posted.I would like to see Flight Simulator X included for CPU benchmarks though since that is my favorite genre plus it would make a great benchmark for CPU's.
I fully recognize that the Core i7 920 is a more powerful CPU than the Phenom II X4 955.
 


I've heard this before, but there's a fundamental problem with this argument.

Given the choice between two identically priced rigs, are you saying you would consciously choose the slower one because the benefits of the faster one aren't fully realized yet?

Really, how is that a sensible argument? What possible rationalization would back such a decision?

Alternatively, I can totally understand the argument that a lower price point could be sufficient; I'm a big fan of the Phenom II X3 720, and frankly if I were going to build a gaming machine for a friend it's probably the way I'd advocate they went. But for argument's sake, if I were to choose between the rigs in this article, I'd go with the i7. I'd choose it even if the 955 had super-perfect latency and HT overclock settings that gave it a 2% performance increase over these results (blasphemy! I must be an AMD hater! 😛). I don't think that's bias, I think it simply makes sense.


 
Its important that people realize that these are not to put a certain brands in the spot light more than others. Its nothing more than test results. If the test results are not what you expect prove them wrong or accept the fact they are what they are. Yes the concolusion is based off the author's own opipion but like noted above they are qualified to be able to state their opipion on this topic. Great Article!
 
[citation][nom]Cleeve[/nom]Not true, I'm happy to respond to anyone who is polite.I've heard a lot of complaints about the setup regarding the latency and hypertransport speeds. What all the complainers seem to gloss over the fact that, at best, it might increase the final numbers by a percentage point or two.The irony is, those who left angry comments about imperfect latency and HT speeds know that optimizing the minutia wouldn't make a lick of difference in the big picture. Snip...[/citation]

Ok, So you did the review? The statement above you just made shows some major ignorance on you part. A percentage point or two? Are you kidding? Are you really the author? If that is true you guys here know nothing about setup and tuning, I'm sorry to say that but Just google it if you can't be bothered to know by testing, Any game that can take advantage of multiple core can benefit by up to 5-10% especialy if you a running overclocked. Dude...it just takes benchmarking to know that. That was one crippled rig and if you keep pushing on like this about"it doesn't matter" it will just make this more laughable, You take care.
 


Apology accepted.

And you should apologize, because if you're telling people that a game will show a 5-10% advantage from running a point or two lower CAS latency - as opposed to the more optimistic overclock the Phenom II enjoyed in this review compared to the i7 - then apologizing is exactly what you should be doing for misleading folks. :non:
 
[citation][nom]Cleeve[/nom]True enough, but realistically we can't be expected to re-edit the article on a daily basis as prices fluctuate. The best we can do is take a snapshot of what's available when we test and go from there.The onus is of course on the buyer to look into things at the time of purchase. If they find a better deal on parts, then the benchmark information is still useful, but the conclusions must be adjusted accordingly.That's the only reasonable way to do it.[/citation]

So Phenom II (any model) is clearly a better deal with a superior upgrade path to protect your investment and allow you more options - already - but if the price gets even better we should contemplate spending more money anyway, just so i7's feelings are not hurt.

Does any of this apply in the case of i7-975? Or is it only about certain low end models.

I think all Phenom II models work with this idea. Especially the cute little 550 Black Edition @3.1Ghz, which is really almost a 955 in diguise/ with 2 disabled cores which might become active also. Spintel scared of that? What a deal. Regardless, all that L3 cache is still waiting and fully functional.

(bring on the i7 vs 550BE) :) (gauntlet thrown) :) Even if it wins, it loses. :) Show us the reality of it. :) Is this difficult to do? :)

This so reminds me of the good old days when the little Athlons busted the bogus P4's in the race for 4Ghz - it happened right here on THG. But the marketing spin = people still bought the P4. This is SO no different - and you wonder why I say spintel. - and you think I am just a lying fanboy. - I can wait, someone will do this comparison, and we will see it. Even if they win....... :)
 
[citation][nom]sighQ2[/nom]and now - I wonder why I'm here - or why I have returned[/citation]

You're not alone. Many of us are wondering why you are here.
 
[citation][nom]marraco[/nom]hey, the intel system can use better memory:OCZ OCZ3G1600LV6GK DDR3 PC3-12800 1600 MHz Gold XTC 6GB Triple Channel Kitshttp://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ [...] F&v=glanceI know that most benchmarcks will not measure any difference (except winRar, winzip, and 7-zip), but is the same price for faster memory (I did not checked the overclocability of the article g.Skill modules, but I also did not searched hard for a good bargain in Amazon)[/citation]

Better Memory?

Here is better memory again - "designed for AMD systems by OCZ" - this is the Platinum version: (really similar to what you are showing - there are Gold and Platinum)

timings (7-7-7-24) (1600 mhz)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227447&Tpk=OCZ3P1600LVAM4GK

Also see this mobo by MSI = the GD-70 model - it will use ridiculous memory >2000 mhz DDR3, and you only need 2 sticks.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813130223&Tpk=GD-70

- and whoops, it just dropped price from $180 to $170.

The crazy ocloxr's are all raving about this mobo - some like the Asus eqivalent. And some the Giga, of course.

But sorry - i7 has no exclusive on memory either. :)
 
[citation][nom]sanmanx[/nom]IMPORTANT!!!!I researched long and hard for my new system that I paid $1075 roughly for. I was sold on the x4 940 for the longest time. I love AMD, my XP 3200+ with my 7600GS is still running at home (until I get home from work today becuase my case will be delivered today ) and has been nothing but great to me. I looked at the i7 920 and just thought it was too expensive at the time. All in all I have read these articles on Tomshardware and Maximumpc and looked up benchmarks, I have even made two spread sheets that lists all the componets and had a colunm for price and have updated them for the last 5 months. One thing that I noticed nobody mentions...is the upgrade path. I did it with my 3200+ it was the best CPU for that chipset, I had no ugrade path except for my vid card. lol yes i was one of those guys that bought another AGP well into the PCIe times. Anyway, my conclusion was I don't want to buy a 940 or a 955 and be stuck with no upgrade path. So i went with a i7 920 and 1 ATI 4890 xtreme. Now I feel good that I can buy a 975 or whatever intel puts out for the 1366 type when they get cheaper later down the road. Like Don Woligrosky mentions too is that I will be doing other stuff with my pc and as of right now intel is ahead in most areas. I hope that helps some people. Now for my bedroom media center pc this will be a different story as it will be all AMD!!!Anyway...think about your upgrade path too when building a PC.[/citation]
I LIKE this post - check the current upgrade path.

This is genuine real world user experience. AMD's customer were really upset when AMD found it had to change sockets from the old sok 939 and sok 940 - and then finally moved to sok AM2.

But they heard the complaints and collaborated with customers since scket AM2. Phenom II for sok AM3 is now backwards compatible to all socket AM2+ and some AM2 mobos - this is a powerful upg path.

But it is true - things were messy before AM2 socket.

Socket changes are done of necessity. AMD has done a lot to preserve upgrade path thru the last 3 generations. What is also interesting is that there are a couple of unused pins (holes) in the AM3 socket - and nobody knows why - yet. But the AM3 socket processors and chipsets are in full rollout now. It is like an ongoing parade of new hardware that will continue on AM3 until end of 2010.

The recommendation to check the upgrade path is excellent advice. If you don't see where it is going, you might be surprised or disappointed down the road - and end up having to purchase all new mobo, cpu, ram, video, etc. A strong upgrade path is where it's at.

To existing AM2+ customers, and AM3 cpu is a drop in solution - add bios upgrade, job done. The decision to move to DDR3/new mobo is left for the customer to decide - anytime.

Good post = thx.

Is it possible to outline the i7 upgrade path?? I am not familiar with that.
 
[citation][nom]Cleeve[/nom]That's what i alluded to at the end of this review, dude. I spent a couple paragraphs on that in the conclusion, you should read it.The Phenom II 550 BE or Phenom II X3 720 are excellent buys for the dollar. Will they beat an i7 when overclocked? Probably not, but they probably won't be embarrassed, either. And they'll do it for hundreds less.We covered that.[/citation]

Yes, almost. You then said you would buy i7 anyway - to run unmentioned apps - you later mentioned standard everyday - simple apps.

I an CHALLENGING THG to run the i7 against a little 550BE dual core. You did not cover that - you seem to mostly admit that this might be a REALLY EXCITING REVIEW - but you aren't saying that flat out blatantly. I think it would cause a riot here - but that's not the purpose. The purpose is show gamers what price/performance can REALLY DO FOR GAMERS.
That's the amazing story lurking in the background of all this - and if you ignore that - well, WHY WOULD YOU HIDE THAT INFORMATION??

Go ahead - let the i7 win - let the people see the ACTUAL HEAD TO HEAD comparison with the actual identical peripheral hardware.

DO YOU THINK IT MIGHT BOOST READERSHIP?? I do. :) So THG wins too! :)

It would GO VIRAL ALL OVER THE NET. :) :) :) :)

Somebody is going to do this comparative test - want to be first?? Use identical peripherals, and let the chips fall.

I don't see how you could overlook this attractive demonstration - it will attract people like flies to honey. :)



BTW - apart from my criticisms - you really came close to running a good test here. Peace.

sigh
.
 
[citation][nom]Cleeve[/nom]I've heard this before, but there's a fundamental problem with this argument.Given the choice between two identically priced rigs, are you saying you would consciously choose the slower one because the benefits of the faster one aren't fully realized yet?Really, how is that a sensible argument? What possible rationalization would back such a decision?Alternatively, I can totally understand the argument that a lower price point could be sufficient; I'm a big fan of the Phenom II X3 720, and frankly if I were going to build a gaming machine for a friend it's probably the way I'd advocate they went. But for argument's sake, if I were to choose between the rigs in this article, I'd go with the i7. I'd choose it even if the 955 had super-perfect latency and HT overclock settings that gave it a 2% performance increase over these results (blasphemy! I must be an AMD hater! ). I don't think that's bias, I think it simply makes sense.[/citation]

Exactly. When I went to build my first new rig in 4 years, I chose the i7 920 for this very same reason, and I had the money to afford it. Others who don't have the money or chose to spend their money differently, no problem. There is nothing wrong with AMD, and in the end you may save some cash, if that is your priority. But for those of us who want to build a rig with the most up to date processor possible without having to worry about upgrading for some time, the i7 serves just that purpose.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom