are 1st gen i7s still relavent?

[Clyne]

Buying a first generation i7 doesn't make much sense when you can buy brand new Haswell i5s for $175 with $65 H97 boards.

Unless you find some idiot who sells a i7 920 + LGA 1366 X58 board for sub 200, then it's not really worth it.

[FruitBasketSilex]

^This. Although truth be told, it really does depend on the game. Some aren't gonna care about the CPU that much, but others will totally choke on a Core 2 Quad. For entry-level gaming rigs, they're totally fine. I have a Q6600 hooked up to a 7770 and it does really well. Just can't overclock, because... well, it has a low-profile cooler. Also, being that Core 2 Quads were around when the Nvidia 8000 series was the thing, they've held their own impressively.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't most, if not all Core 2 Quads essentially a couple of Core 2 Duo dies superglued together? I would imagine that the move from dual dies to all cores on a single die made a lot of the difference between Core 2 Quads and Nehalem. I also imagine that the hyperthreading in the i7 made a lot of difference too.

Read that as nephalem first. Thought it sounded badass.

[Decon]

+1

Just bought another rampage gene iii with a x5670 for my HTPC.

6-core gaming rig in the lounge room for under $500 FTW.

I picked up a combo on ebay this year with an i7 930, cooler, 6gb XMS3, and a rampage ii gene for 180 shipped this year.  Terrific deal

[Cheddle]

yeah - they are. provided the price is right - the early i7's are great.

 

for comparison a 980x (6-core 32nm 1366 cpu) is about 12% off 5820k clock for clock in firestrike physics and can be had for less than half the price.

 

if anything the bigger considerations (rather than raw power) are:

 

• ease of overclocking (1st gens are more difficult than 4th gen)
• slower i/o - not all mobos have sata 3/usb 3 and they are all PCIE 2.0

in firestrike at least, my mates o/c i7-920 was well over 25% faster than my o/c i5-4690k

[WaterproofBeanie]

yeah at least the mobile quadcores were fuzes dual core chips 

And this is true for the desktop processors as well. One of AMDs selling points was that they had 'true' quad cores. Not that it made a huge difference at the time.

[D2ultima]

The C2Q is still very relevant. An overclocked Q6600/Q9400 won't bottleneck a 970/390.

That is absolutely a lie and everybody but you seems to know it.

 

yeah - they are. provided the price is right - the early i7's are great.

 

for comparison a 980x (6-core 32nm 1366 cpu) is about 12% off 5820k clock for clock in firestrike physics and can be had for less than half the price.

 

in firestrike at least, my mates o/c i7-920 was well over 25% faster than my o/c i5-4690k

If it's real cheap, but honestly, they're about as useful as AMD Piledriver CPUs right now. Their IPC is still better, more or less around what Phenom II was, but I wouldn't recommend anyone make a build with one, especially a Bloomfield one with that triple channel memory, today.

 

That. Is. Not. Possible. 980X gets DESTROYED by 4960X, far less a 5820K. It's not 12%. It should be closer to 50% versus haswell.

 

Were you on Windows 7 and he on 8/8.1/10? Win 7 gives lower firestrike physics scores than Win 8/8.1; it's a known fact there. A lot of overclockers dual boot 7 and 8.1 and only use 8.1 for firestrike, and use 7 for 3DM11 and other benches. I had an i7-950 and I went to a 4800MQ and the difference was massive, and I'm considering CPU usage when streaming with OBS for the most comparisons. I also had a friend upgrade from an i5-750 to a 4690 and get HUGE benefits in a lot of his games (granted he plays many indie/CPU-heavy games like Project Zomboid and DayZ Epoch etc). But he only had a Radeon 6870, so it's not like his GPU was particularly starved.

[Nena Trinity]

Weaker than AMD FX but still good!  (people still use Q6600 and Phenom II X4 955s!)

[juretrn]

As an owner of one (i7 920 <3 ) I'd like to think that's the case, but seeing comparison's with modern i7's is not even funny anymore. But it still works well enough in games and in processing photos or video. 

[juretrn]

yeah - they are. provided the price is right - the early i7's are great.

 

for comparison a 980x (6-core 32nm 1366 cpu) is about 12% off 5820k clock for clock in firestrike physics and can be had for less than half the price.

 

if anything the bigger considerations (rather than raw power) are:

 

• ease of overclocking (1st gens are more difficult than 4th gen)
• slower i/o - not all mobos have sata 3/usb 3 and they are all PCIE 2.0

in firestrike at least, my mates o/c i7-920 was well over 25% faster than my o/c i5-4690k

While I'd love to get my hands on a 980X or 990X (!!!!!) , getting a 2600K would be a much better option for fooling around in overclocking. But it's true- that'd require a new mobo. 

 

On the other hand, you can buy a USB 3.0 PCI-e card and it works just fine, and PCI-e 2.0 doesn't really matter for GPUs. 

Sorry for double post

[Ivelin__]

1366 mobos are too expensive, so - not worth it.

[Cheddle]

That is absolutely a lie and everybody but you seems to know it.

 

If it's real cheap, but honestly, they're about as useful as AMD Piledriver CPUs right now. Their IPC is still better, more or less around what Phenom II was, but I wouldn't recommend anyone make a build with one, especially a Bloomfield one with that triple channel memory, today.

 

That. Is. Not. Possible. 980X gets DESTROYED by 4960X, far less a 5820K. It's not 12%. It should be closer to 50% versus haswell.

 

Were you on Windows 7 and he on 8/8.1/10? Win 7 gives lower firestrike physics scores than Win 8/8.1; it's a known fact there. A lot of overclockers dual boot 7 and 8.1 and only use 8.1 for firestrike, and use 7 for 3DM11 and other benches. I had an i7-950 and I went to a 4800MQ and the difference was massive, and I'm considering CPU usage when streaming with OBS for the most comparisons. I also had a friend upgrade from an i5-750 to a 4690 and get HUGE benefits in a lot of his games (granted he plays many indie/CPU-heavy games like Project Zomboid and DayZ Epoch etc). But he only had a Radeon 6870, so it's not like his GPU was particularly starved.

 

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/6169513/fs/5172626

 

both CPU's at 4.5ghz - 18%

[s3ns3]

yes they are. they overclock very very well. but 1366 mobos are expensive. i suggest you go with a sandy bridge i5 2500k or i7 2600k

[Footy]

I recently upgraded from a i7 980x because it died after a 5year overclock.

 

I replaced my mobo, ram, cpu

I ran 3dMark tests on the old and new system. ( http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/3188916/fs/6084921/fs/6132883 )

I have 2x 980's in SLI

 

I currently have tests with the same GPU/CPU clocks but the results are what would be expected.

 

980x - 17654

CPU 12 threads 4ghz

GPU clocks 1272/1787mhz

 

6700K (1) - 19741

CPU 8 threads 4.6ghz

GPU clocks 1178/1753mhz

 

6700K (2) - 22176

CPU 8 threads 4.6ghz

GPU clocks 1398/2080mhz

 

I tried some higher CPU clocks and it made little difference to the overall score.

On 6700K (2) test run the GPUs were starting to show a few errors

Also note that the GPU driver is quite a bit different, this was not planned as a like for like test but as far as having common hardware to test this is as close as I personally can get.

 

My conclusion to all this is the 1st gen i7 (at least the 980x) is still a very good CPU.

I can get a 10% performance improvement in games by upgrading, however I wouldn't have bothered as gaming on the 980x was fine, but it finally died.

I doubt I would see much of a difference at all with just 1x GPU.

 

I hope this helps

 

 

 

fuck nah bruh. unless you only want to play CP

 

 

just a slight query as i was having a look around on eBay at some used i7 950s they seem to be pretty good value but 1366 boards are a) stupidly overpriced and B) hard to come by.

and i also think it would be a decent upgrade for my current system.

 

 

that i highly doubt

 

 

That is absolutely a lie and everybody but you seems to know it.

 

If it's real cheap, but honestly, they're about as useful as AMD Piledriver CPUs right now. Their IPC is still better, more or less around what Phenom II was, but I wouldn't recommend anyone make a build with one, especially a Bloomfield one with that triple channel memory, today.

 

That. Is. Not. Possible. 980X gets DESTROYED by 4960X, far less a 5820K. It's not 12%. It should be closer to 50% versus haswell.

 

Were you on Windows 7 and he on 8/8.1/10? Win 7 gives lower firestrike physics scores than Win 8/8.1; it's a known fact there. A lot of overclockers dual boot 7 and 8.1 and only use 8.1 for firestrike, and use 7 for 3DM11 and other benches. I had an i7-950 and I went to a 4800MQ and the difference was massive, and I'm considering CPU usage when streaming with OBS for the most comparisons. I also had a friend upgrade from an i5-750 to a 4690 and get HUGE benefits in a lot of his games (granted he plays many indie/CPU-heavy games like Project Zomboid and DayZ Epoch etc). But he only had a Radeon 6870, so it's not like his GPU was particularly starved.

 

 

As an owner of one (i7 920 <3 ) I'd like to think that's the case, but seeing comparison's with modern i7's is not even funny anymore. But it still works well enough in games and in processing photos or video. 

[D2ultima]

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/6169513/fs/5172626

 

both CPU's at 4.5ghz - 18%

This is going to be slightly nitpicky, but I need the 5820K to be on Windows 8.1

 

Firestrike has score differences between Win 7, 8/8.1 and 10, even on the same CPUs.

 

But that is really interesting... it should be much higher. I'm wondering why.

[harrynowl]

Overclocked yes; stock no.

 

The real problem is the X58 platform is both outdated and expensive.

[Cheddle]

This is going to be slightly nitpicky, but I need the 5820K to be on Windows 8.1

 

Firestrike has score differences between Win 7, 8/8.1 and 10, even on the same CPUs.

 

But that is really interesting... it should be much higher. I'm wondering why.

 

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/6138749/fs/6169674

 

Here is another example. 

 

my cpu at 4.8ghz - 18977 physics - my score is perfectly in line with other 5820ks

 

my mates 980x at 4.65ghz - 16068 physics

 

He paid $400 AUD for his mobo/cpu/ram - it came in a case with a power supply and a 5770 - no HDD's 

 

I paid $1150 AUD for my mobo/cpu/ram

[D2ultima]

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/6138749/fs/6169674

 

Here is another example. 

 

my cpu at 4.8ghz - 18977 physics - my score is perfectly in line with other 5820ks

 

my mates 980x at 4.65ghz - 16068 physics

 

He paid $400 AUD for his mobo/cpu/ram - it came in a case with a power supply and a 5770 - no HDD's 

 

I paid $1150 AUD for my mobo/cpu/ram

Well I can't argue with that one. I wonder why the 980X is so close to the 5820K? I know the mainstream models rip them to shreds, and my 4800MQ beats my old i7-950 so bad it's like a very funny joke.

 

What's the difference like in gaming? Crysis 3, GTA V, Dying Light and DayZ Epoch Arma 2 mod would be good examples where the CPU should make a big difference. Witcher 3 as well, maybe.

[Cheddle]

Well I can't argue with that one. I wonder why the 980X is so close to the 5820K? I know the mainstream models rip them to shreds, and my 4800MQ beats my old i7-950 so bad it's like a very funny joke.

 

What's the difference like in gaming? Crysis 3, GTA V, Dying Light and DayZ Epoch Arma 2 mod would be good examples where the CPU should make a big difference. Witcher 3 as well, maybe.

 

the 980x is a 32nm 6-core 12-thread CPU... the i7-950 is a 45nm 4-core 8-thread CPU... they just happen to fit the same socket :-P

 

There are a bunch of 6-core Xeons that are available quite cheaply for 1366 boards.

 

My mate with the 980x has SLI 980ti and a 40inch 4k monitor. he gets 60fps flat in everything. (except ARK survival untold, but that game is fucked)

[i_build_nanosuits]

just a slight query as i was having a look around on eBay at some used i7 950s they seem to be pretty good value but 1366 boards are a) stupidly overpriced and B) hard to come by.

and i also think it would be a decent upgrade for my current system.

not really they are getting long in the tooth for sure and they are far from the performance of modern intel CPU's...they are still good with mid-range graphics cards once overclocked...depends what you plan to do with it but there are surely better options than outdated CPU's out there fore sure!

The C2Q is still very relevant. An overclocked Q6600/Q9400 won't bottleneck a 970/390.

you're kidding right? this has to be the most stupidest thing i,ve read today!

look son: i owned an intel Q6600 for over 7 years...it's been a FLAWLESS CPU and the best tech purchase i,ve done to date...mine was heavily overclocked to 3.6ghz (that's a 50% overclock over the stock 2.4ghz) and i had it paired with a 8800GT 512mb at first, then upgraded to an HD5870 1GB and then to an HD7950 3GB...the first two cards where fully utilised and the chip coped with them perfectly fine, but when i trew in the HD7950 (R9 280/ same thing) then the CPU limitation was OBVIOUS...so a GTX 970/R9390 you where saying?! NOT EVEN CLOSE...unless maybe you can run it at like 6.2ghz or something it just aint happening!

[D2ultima]

the 980x is a 32nm 6-core 12-thread CPU... the i7-950 is a 45nm 4-core 8-thread CPU... they just happen to fit the same socket :-P

 

There are a bunch of 6-core Xeons that are available quite cheaply for 1366 boards.

 

My mate with the 980x has SLI 980ti and a 40inch 4k monitor. he gets 60fps flat in everything. (except ARK survival untold, but that game is fucked)

Yes, I know. The 950 is quadcore with hyperthreading, which is why I compared it to my 4800MQ, which is quadcore + hyperthreading as well.

 

I compared the 980X to the hexacore CPUs of later gens because they're all hexacore. But I still believe something is... better... with the 980X. That IPC is too high for 1st gen. The quadcores show a larger difference. It's like you were comparing a chip that had an incremental jump like Sandy Bridge had to Ivy Bridge. The jump between Sandy and Haswell is not much at all, but the jump from Bloomfield/Clarksfield/Lynnfield to Sandy Bridge (excepting apparently the 980X and 990X) is HUGE.

[Cheddle]

Yes, I know. The 950 is quadcore with hyperthreading, which is why I compared it to my 4800MQ, which is quadcore + hyperthreading as well.

 

I compared the 980X to the hexacore CPUs of later gens because they're all hexacore. But I still believe something is... better... with the 980X. That IPC is too high for 1st gen. The quadcores show a larger difference. It's like you were comparing a chip that had an incremental jump like Sandy Bridge had to Ivy Bridge. The jump between Sandy and Haswell is not much at all, but the jump from Bloomfield/Clarksfield/Lynnfield to Sandy Bridge (excepting apparently the 980X and 990X) is HUGE.

 

the i7-970 / 980 / 980x / 990x are all "Gulftown" architecture - while they are "1st" gen - they have an architecture that is used only by them and by certain Xeons - they are really a good step up on bloomfield/lynnfield and honestly, since gulftown the IPC gains in each generation have been minimal.

[D2ultima]

the i7-970 / 980 / 980x / 990x are all "Gulftown" architecture - while they are "1st" gen - they have an architecture that is used only by them and by certain Xeons - they are really a good step up on bloomfield/lynnfield and honestly, since gulftown the IPC gains in each generation have been minimal.

Yeah that makes sense. I wasn't aware that those specific CPUs had a step up in IPC even though they were 1st gen. That explains entirely why the difference is so small.