New AMD 880K vs old Intel i7 950?

[Gdourado]

Hello, how are you?

So, I am curious about this...

How does a new AMD 880K setup performs in gaming against an already ancient I7 950?

 

Cheers!

[MoonlightSylv]

The 950 is better.

 

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-950-vs-AMD-Athlon-X4-880K/617vsm121029

 

[don_svetlio]

7 minutes ago, ShadowTechXTS said:

The 950 is better.

 

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-950-vs-AMD-Athlon-X4-880K/617vsm121029

 

And also runs hotter.

 

13 minutes ago, Gdourado said:

Hello, how are you?

So, I am curious about this...

How does a new AMD 880K setup performs in gaming against an already ancient I7 950?

 

Cheers!

Well, performance will be similar but the i7 uses more power thus runs hotter and the motherboard is harder to find. If you add some higher speed RAM and a proper OC, the 880K would be a more efficient choice

[Nena Trinity]

4 minutes ago, ShadowTechXTS said:

The 950 is better.

 

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-950-vs-AMD-Athlon-X4-880K/617vsm121029

 

Only around 13% and the 880K can be OCed quite well!

[SLAYR]

32 minutes ago, Nena360 said:

Only around 13% and the 880K can be OCed quite well!

Userbenchmark also shows overclcoked results and the 950 still wins out, and the 880k will max out at about 4.3-4.5GHz, and it is already at 4.0 stock.

[Nena Trinity]

9 minutes ago, SLAYR said:

Userbenchmark also shows overclcoked results and the 950 still wins out, and the 880k will max out at about 4.3-4.5GHz, and it is already at 4.0 stock.

4.2 is stock...

[don_svetlio]

37 minutes ago, SLAYR said:

Userbenchmark also shows overclcoked results and the 950 still wins out, and the 880k will max out at about 4.3-4.5GHz, and it is already at 4.0 stock.

And the 880K is a 125W CPU at MOST (and that is a big IF) whereas the 950 goes over 200W so fast it's not funny

[i_build_nanosuits]

how pathetic is it that the intel i7-950 launched in early 2009...so a little over 7 years ago now...and yet AMD does not have any cpu out that can really defeat it...even the FX-9590 is barely any faster.

[i_build_nanosuits]

1 hour ago, Nena360 said:

Only around 13% and the 880K can be OCed quite well!

 

45 minutes ago, SLAYR said:

Userbenchmark also shows overclcoked results and the 950 still wins out, and the 880k will max out at about 4.3-4.5GHz, and it is already at 4.0 stock.

not only does the intel cpu ''still wins out''...but it's winning even MORE when you looked at the overclocked submitted results vs stock.

[don_svetlio]

3 minutes ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

 

not only does the intel cpu ''still wins out''...but it's winning even MORE when you looked at the overclocked submitted results vs stock.

The Intel CPU was several times more expensive back then and uses double the power and produces double the heat to achieve the same results as a low-end AMD CPU released in 2015. Fun eh? Nahalem is old and decrepit. Doesn't even support USB 3.0 or anything modern. The Athlon does. Fucks sake, be more realistic.

[i_build_nanosuits]

3 minutes ago, don_svetlio said:

The Intel CPU was several times more expensive back then and uses double the power and produces double the heat to achieve the same results as a low-end AMD CPU released in 2015. Fun eh? Nahalem is old and decrepit. Doesn't even support USB 3.0 or anything modern. The Athlon does. Fucks sake, be more realistic.

since when power consumption is an interest of yours?!

this was NOT at all a factor when it was time to consider R9 390 vs GTX 970 a few month ago?!

[don_svetlio]

1 minute ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

since when does power consumption is an interest of yours?!

this was NOT at all a factor when it was time to consider R9 390 vs GTX 970 a few month ago?!

The difference between those is 80W. Here it's 100-120W and it's not about the power draw but the heat. CPU heat dissipation is not the same as the die itself is MUCH smaller than GPUs thus cooling it is a bigger challenge. Not to mention intel's TERRIBLE TIM.

[i_build_nanosuits]

3 minutes ago, don_svetlio said:

The difference between those is 80W. Here it's 100-120W and it's not about the power draw but the heat. CPU heat dissipation is not the same as the die itself is MUCH smaller than GPUs thus cooling it is a bigger challenge. Not to mention intel's TERRIBLE TIM.

wo wo calm your tits the i7-950 is 130W and the 880K is 95W...so it's not even a 50W difference...much less then between say an R9 390 vs GTX 970.

http://ark.intel.com/products/37150/Intel-Core-i7-950-Processor-8M-Cache-3_06-GHz-4_80-GTs-Intel-QPI

also...those cpu's where soldered to the IHS back then...so no tim..is direct contact.

[don_svetlio]

1 minute ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

wo wo calm your tits the i7-950 is 130W and the 880K is like 95W...so it's not even a 50W difference...much less then between say an R9 390 vs GTX 970.

http://ark.intel.com/products/37150/Intel-Core-i7-950-Processor-8M-Cache-3_06-GHz-4_80-GTs-Intel-QPI

Once you OC Nahalem you could break 220W - more than the 9590. 880K doesn't really go past 120W most of the time.

[i_build_nanosuits]

3 minutes ago, don_svetlio said:

Once you OC Nahalem you could break 220W - more than the 9590. 880K doesn't really go past 120W most of the time.

220W...yeah

anyways all this irrelevant OP didnt asked which is the better CPU he said '' How does a new AMD 880K setup performs in gaming against an already ancient I7 950? ''

Answer is: pretty much the same, a little worse but you get a more modern platform with AMD.

[don_svetlio]

1 minute ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

220W...yeah

anyways all this irrelevant OP didnt asked which is the better CPU he said '' How does a new AMD 880K setup performs in gaming against an already ancient I7 950? ''

The same. But runs cooler, supports newer features and is an overall more modern entry-level system.

[Morgan MLGman]

When going i7-950 I'd only have concerns about it not having support for some modern instruction sets and the potential cost of a motherboard, because older mobos tend to be rare and expensive nowadays

 

Though my friend has an i7-870, I OC'd it for him to 4,3gHz and while it's true it runs hot, the performance is satisfactory for some gaming etc. Especially when paired with a lower-end GPU like a GTX 660 in his case

 

If I were OP I'd look for a used i5-2500/2500k instead or an i7-2600 if within the budget

[Nena Trinity]

20 minutes ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

 

not only does the intel cpu ''still wins out''...but it's winning even MORE when you looked at the overclocked submitted results vs stock.

How many samples are there in comparison? Also what about instruction set?

[don_svetlio]

2 minutes ago, Nena360 said:

How many samples are there in comparison? Also what about instruction set?

And what thermals/heat output? If the intel gets a 10% lead at the cost of 75W more heat than the Athlon I'd say that's not exactly a good trade.

[i_build_nanosuits]

19 minutes ago, don_svetlio said:

The same. But runs cooler, supports newer features and is an overall more modern entry-level system.

obviously