One for the techies, I’ve JFGI but I can’t seem to find a straight answer. When it comes to gaming computers, will it make a big difference to go with the i7 over the i5 or should I save the cash?
If I can tack a rider question on - in terms of bang for buck, which GPU is best - the GTX 460 768MB, the GTX 550 1024MB, or the GTX 460 2048MB?
Or are all those options crap for a gaming computer? Answers much appreciated.
Here’s an article detailing the difference between Intel’s i-x series CPUs in layman’s terms, though it may not actually answer your question.
Here is a much more detailed and technical comparison.
The only significant difference between the i5 and i7 processors is hyperthreading. This is a way the processor can seem to have more logical cores that physical ones (windows will see a 4 core Hyper-threaded CPU as 8 cores), boosting highly parallel processes/applications.
Most games only take advantage of 1 or 2 cores, only recently have they started to utilize more than that, so in gaming, you won’t see much if any performance increase from hyperthreading cores.
So I’d stick with the i5, and spend the extra money on a better GPU.
The GTX460 2 Gig, is technically better, but only in certain scenarios. The larger buffer is good for when gaming at higher resolutions and when dealing with very high resolution textures. You’ll probably be doing one of those two things at some point int he near future, so I would suggest the 2 gig buffer.
In terms of performance, the GTX 460 is really good. With it, I cna play most modern games at 1080p 40+ FPS at high or max settings.
The GTX 560 Ti seems to be the sweet spot however.
Take a look at Tom’s hardware’s current “Best GPU for the money” feature to see what they recommend for various budgets.
Here is September’s article:
A non-scientific answer:
While playing Fallout: New Vegas last night, it was only hitting my quad core i5 CPU for about 25%. The GPU doesn’t offer a % usage (that I’m aware of) but it’s temps were the highest I’ve seen them go. GPU is a GeForce GTS 450. Fallout runs on damn near max visual settings, though it’s not exactly a new game.
I’d put the money on the video card, not the CPU, for games.
Thanks fellas for the useful links, seems like if I plumped with the i7 I’d be paying for something that’s not gonna make a tremendous difference. You’re bang on that for games the money is best invested in a decent GPU, although the GTX 560 Ti is a bit outside my price range. Out of those two, the GTX 460 2Gb is best bang for my buck?
How much RAM would you chaps recommend? I’m thinking 4GB DDR3.
Can you tell it’s been a while since I thought about upgrading? Last time I did my 9500 GT was cutting edge…
I built a new machine a couple of months ago, with an eye towards gaming, and after research and talking to the salesman, this is the route I went. The thought of a shiny i7 was certainly tempting, but there just isn’t enough software that takes advantage of it to pay the premium cost.
A 2GB GTX 460 isn’t going to be the best value, since non-reference cards loaded with RAM are always poorly priced. Never mind that a 2GB GTX 460 isn’t an official spec, so it may be based on either the slower 768MB GTX 460 or based on the faster 1GB GTX 460, what complicates figuring out its worth (but it doesn’t matter since it won’t be a good value regardless.)
Get a Radeon HD6850. It’s better than any GTX 460 and I’m 90% sure it’s going to cost you less than a 2GB GTX 460 would.
For the vast majority of users, there is little difference between an i5 and an i7. There is actually more difference inside the i5 range, as some are dual core and some are quad core. It is worth having more than two cores these days, so I’d go for a quad-core i5.
I would go with the 2 Gigabyte one, yes, as a way of future proofing. Games are starting to include high resolution texture packs, either right out of the gate, as a patch after, or as part of community created mods. Some effects, and certainly your resolution will also impact the size of the video buffer.
There is also a 1 GB model available, you might want to check that out and see how much that would save you.
But if you’re gaming at 1080p now, I’d say go with the 2 Gig. If you plan on gaming at 1080p in the near future, ditto.
Hmm, forgot that, as Palooka pointed out, the 2 gig is not part of the reference spec for the 460…
The Hd 6850 seems like the better deal.
>1GB doesn’t really become relevant until 2560 x 1600 with tons of anti-aliasing. It certainly won’t help at any resolution that a GTX 460 is going to handle.
Hopefully this isn’t considered too much of a bump…
After much research, benchmark tests and wringing of hands I’ve ordered the components for this machine, would greatly appreciate any further feedback from you fellas (plus I’m just looking to brag a little bit too, heheh):
Windows 7 Home Premium 64Bit
GeForce GTX560TI 1GB
Intel Core i5 (2400) 3.1GHz Quad Core
4GB (2x2) PC3-10600 1333MHz DDR3 Memory
2TB 7200rpm SATA 32MB HD
850W PSU
Resolution 1366 x 768
I ditched the GTX460 idea as I managed to pick up the GTX560TI online cheaper than what I could get hold of the 460 for (!), and with a resolution that’s not exactly massive I figured the 2GB wouldn’t really come in handy - I’m not really looking to buy a new monitor any time soon, so thanks to Palooka for his feedback there. I was a bit enamoured with the idea of a 2GB card without thinking about it. Went with i5 since I wanted to splash the extra cash on a decent GPU rather than a less decent GPU but i7 bragging rights.
Sweet spot is right, Kinthalis’ advice was very valuable - the 560Ti from everything I could get hold of looked to be the most bang for my buck - any higher and it’s megabuck 580s and what have you, any lower and the 560 just makes more sense economically. In benchmark tests I looked up it appeared very, very similar to the HD 6950 which was a bit more expensive when I looked it up.
Could I do with any more RAM with the 64 Bit OS or will I not really notice a difference? I know it’s a common trap to waste money on pointless RAM.
I have a similar setup.
Intel i5 760 OC’d to 4.0
GTX 470 OC’d to 725
4 gigs of ram
Windows 7
Runs everything (games) I throw at it (1680x1050 resolution) with max or near max settings. Sometimes the higher AA settings can bog the min frame rates.
You should be good if you’re a gamer though, especially since you run a lower resolution.
Gah sorry, I didn’t answer the OP very well.
As a gamer, I build my computers with that in mind. Stated earlier in this thread, i7 procs have hyperthreading (and are more efficient in general) but most games will only use 2 cores. The only game I’ve run across that uses 4 cores is APB. I’m sure there there are more coming though since 4 cores are becoming the mainstream.
I was looking at MacBook Pros and the choice is either a two-core i5 or a four-core i7. If I’m not going to be doing a lot of intensive gaming (since it’s a laptop) and am mostly interested in being able to easily run a virtual machine, will the CPU make a real difference or would money be better spent on RAM?