Tweet
So I am looking at either a top end i5, or a mid i7, but for gaming will I really see that much difference?
-
Hmm...
i7's are generally all quad core, have larger caches, have got the experience of another few years of expertise being put into them and they clock better, not to mention better integration with hyper-threading technology.
That said, the performance gain on stock chips between an i7 and an i5 is only about 5%, so unless you're mad on getting high bench scores or having the sort of clock going on that makes everything scream, then unless you want to splash the cash, you'll be fine with an i5 imo
GIGABYTE Z97MX-Gaming 5 Intel Z97 (1150 Socket) ATX Intel i5-4690 3.5GHz (Devil's Canyon) MSi TwinFrozr 970 8Gb Crucial Ballistix Sport 1600MHz Corsair AX760i PSU
-
most games not really no. some new titles scale well and do give a more stable fps and with dx12 this should keep improving.
but for most games a good quad is still king."Those able to see beyond the shadows and lies of their culture will never be understood, let alone believed, by the masses."Plato
Comment
-
Just to check because what you mean by mid i7.
High end i5 you obviously mean the "k" variant which you can overclock but by mid i7 do you mean a non-k variant on the same 1150 platform or still a "k" variant as the i7 range goes all the way up onto the enthusiast X99 platform?i7 2600K @ 4.5| Asrock Z68 Extreme4| 16GB 1866Mhz Crucial Ballistix |AMD R9 290| 120GB SSD |Win7 64bitComment
-
It does vary by game. But 90% of the time the answer is 'no', in my experience.Originally posted by Mr Banana View Post
I'd say i7 is really more of an 'applications' thing, or for enthusiasts willing to pay the premium to get top performance in the same way that you'd pay the premium to get a sports car (but still drive at 70 on public roads).Comment
-
Example of the above, I bought an i7 950 in 2010 and it's still doing a great job in my gaming PC. Longevity is also an advantage.My local hospital has a sign which reads "This way for accidents and emergencies." Haven't people in hospital got enough to worry about without looking for further misfortune?
Comment
-
-
Yeah but it's not as cool as mine and yours is a generation newer lol.My local hospital has a sign which reads "This way for accidents and emergencies." Haven't people in hospital got enough to worry about without looking for further misfortune?
Comment
-
Yeah early 2011 I think actually, so slightly newer. And i7s are better, no doubt. I keep trying to find a way to justify getting one lol, but then I check out how much of a performance boost I would get over my 2500k on *insert name of game or application here* and the differences are underwhelming. Which is annoying, as I REALLY want to upgrade the damn thing, but it just keeps going
.
There are a few use-cases where you definitely want an i7, video editing, 3d rendering, and mucking around with a bunch of VMs or using the machine as a hypervisor are the classic examples.Comment
-
Same here. I cannot justify the £1000 I would have to spend to see an improvement.My local hospital has a sign which reads "This way for accidents and emergencies." Haven't people in hospital got enough to worry about without looking for further misfortune?
Comment
-
Haven't noticed any improvement in gaming going from an x58 i7 to a 2011 i7 although rendering time has improved slightly.
Comment
-
Honestly from what I gather unless you have LOADS of stuff running in your background or are running very high resolutions (moreso if you run AMD cards) you can get by fine with an i5. The only game I ever had issues with processorwise was Watchdogs and thats just because it was hideously optimized. Been playing the Witcher etc recently and it runs perfectly fine with my i5 still!MSI Z77A-G43 , i7 3770K@4.5Ghz, Noctua NH-D14, ASUS R9 290x DirectCU II, 4x4gb Crucial Ballistix Sport, 120gb Crucial M4, 240gb Crucial MX500, 500gb Seagate Barracuda, 2Tb Seagate Barracuda, NZXT H440, Corsair RM 850W Gold PSUComment
-
More so if you run AMD cards? Care to elaborate on that?ASUS Crosshair VI Hero | AMD Ryzen R7 1700 @ 3.95 GHz | be quiet! Dark Rock Pro 3 | G.SKILL TridentZ RGB 2x8GB @ 3333 MHz C14 | ASUS ROG STRIX GTX 1080 OC | Samsung SM951 256GB NVMe + 2x Samsung 850 EVO 250GB in RAID0 | EVGA SuperNOVA G3 850w | be quiet! Pure Base 600 Tempered Glass | CM Masterkeys Pro L | Logitech G502 | Logitech G920 | ASUS ZenBook UX305FComment
-
probably means AMD cards prefer more CPU grunt, than Nvidia cardsOriginally posted by TheMadDutchDude View Post
I do recall NV cards doing all right with fast dual core compared to AMD cards performing slightly worse with slower cpu
Most likely due to how driver handles APi calls on AMD cards vs NV cards
4770k @ 4.6, XSPC Raystorm, Avexir 4x4GB 2400MHz, ASUS Z87 Maximus Hero VI, Tri-fire 290x/290x/290 Reference EK 290X CSQ Full Nickel Blocks, Alphacool 240 ST-30, Alphacool 360 ST-30, Asus Xonar, Alphacool D5, Corsair AX 1200i, Carbide 540Comment
-
i5 to an i7 is the same as the GTX 970 to a GTX 980...
IF you overclock you get an i5 that is as good as a i7.
The thing is with i5 is that you will have problems doing multiple stuff such as,
Streaming to Twitch, while a game is open with another screen showing Google Chrome browser also doing some photoshop for your Uni assignment for example...
All that will make your CPU work at its fullest capacity making it a bit laggy time to time and then it wears off faster.
an i7 solves these problems by having hyperthreading in all i7 CPUs...
i5 only the ones that have all 4 true cores DONT feature hyperthreading...
Hyperthreading on i5 transforms its natural dual core to a single core cpu when its running a thread...
and on top of that you got Cache etc...
In terms of performance in games its almost the same.
Photoshop it would get destroyed by an i7Comment
Comment