Q9550 vs I3 3xxx for Video Rendering

[kojack69]

As the title said, which is better for video rendering? I'm Using CS5. After effect and Premiere Pro.

My current setup is Q8300 on ASRock G41C-VS with 4g ram running 1333. and GT220 VC.

I know upgrading to I series would cost me to buy new mobo.

Or any Advice which is better to do with my current rig. Thank you in advance

 

[rgd1101]

Q9550, with 4 core is better then i3 3xxx with 2 core/HT

 

[clutchc]

When it comes to video rendering, more cores are better. However, the dual core i3-3xxx processors w/hyper-threading are quite a step up from the C2Q era. Use this comparison with the i3-3220 as a guide:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/50?vs=677

 

[rgd1101]

When it comes to video rendering, more cores are better. However, the dual core i3-3xxx processors w/hyper-threading are quite a step up from the C2Q era. Use this comparison with the i3-3220 as a guide:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/50?vs=677

that a nice tools.

 

[clutchc]

When it comes to video rendering, more cores are better. However, the dual core i3-3xxx processors w/hyper-threading are quite a step up from the C2Q era. Use this comparison with the i3-3220 as a guide:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/50?vs=677

that a nice tools.

Yes, one everyone should have bookmarked for quick reference. The result of years of compiling benchmarks, no doubt.

 

[kojack69]

@clutchc ty for the link, as for my understanding, I3 3xxx is the way to go rather than q9550. Thus HT of I3 would kick of the Q9550's physical core? Not to tech savvy when it comes on PC components.
Ty for this quick reply's.

 

[clutchc]

@clutchc ty for the link, as for my understanding, I3 3xxx is the way to go rather than q9550. Thus HT of I3 would kick of the Q9550's physical core? Not to tech savvy when it comes on PC components.
Ty for this quick reply's.

Normally, I wouldn't recommend a dual core over a quad. But the generational difference (IPC) between the C2Q and the Core-i is so great that the newer dual core (w/H-T) surpasses the older quad in most instances. For strictly gaming, the i3 SB or IB is noticeably superior.

 

[kojack69]

I see.. how about this L2/L3 cache? is this something to do with performance? Core2 comes with L2 and Core I is with L3. thus this help? Sorry for my english btw.

 

[clutchc]

I see.. how about this L2/L3 cache? is this something to do with performance? Core2 comes with L2 and Core I is with L3. thus this help? Sorry for my english btw.

Cache memory is expensive, super fast memory that is "wired" directly to the processor it is part of, and its name/number is designated by its position in the processor's access chain. The first cache it accesses is the level 1 cache (L1), next the L2, and if available the L3 cache. So if a processor has more levels of cache, it is usually faster at its executions of instructions based on the data in the cache(s). Also, the more cache in each level, the better.

Here is a comparison of the features of the two processor you mention (using the i3-3220 as example):
http://www.cpu-world.com/Compare/616/Intel_Core_2_Quad_Q9550_vs_Intel_Core_i3_i3-3220.html

Even though the Q9550 has more L2 cache, the i3-3220 is faster due to its greater IPC (instruction per clock cycle) and extra L3 cache, etc...

 

[rgd1101]

clutchc is right, go with the i3-3220, it faster, cheaper, and run on lower TDP.