I was going to wait for Sandy Bridge but...

[SickBeast]

Bad idea.. phenom can't play starcraft 2 for shit.. so unless you plan on not playing strategy games "in general", then you MUST wait for SB

SB is the only chip that will run Starcraft 2 at 60fps.. obviously this excludes people with i7s that do 4.5ghz+ on water and exotics.

Starcraft 2 can only take advantage of 2 CPU cores. If it were properly multi-threaded, you would see the Phenom II's at 3.8ghz competing with the i7's.

http://www.techspot.com/review/305-starcraft2-performance/page13.html

The Core i7 can already run SC2 at 60FPS.

 

[amenx]

^That link shows a lowly i3-540 @ 3.7ghz beating a phenom at 965 @ 3.8. OK thats with 2 cores. Any multi-core games we can see where the phenom shines vs an i5 (let alone an i7)?

 

[SickBeast]

^That link shows a lowly i3-540 @ 3.7ghz beating a phenom at 965 @ 3.8. OK thats with 2 cores. Any multi-core games we can see where the phenom shines vs an i5 (let alone an i7)?

http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=22167

That article is quite thorough and shows only a 7% difference between an i7 and a Phenom II at 3.8ghz on average. Sometimes the Phenom II can actually beat the i7.

Starcraft 2 looks like it actually only uses 1 core to its full potential. Hopefully they will patch that game to run better on quads.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Starcraft 2 looks like it actually only uses 1 core to its full potential. Hopefully they will patch that game to run better on quads.

I've seen benches which showed the quad core i7's having significant advantage over the dual core ones, like 15-20% per clock. Earlier results from beta showed it did gain performance from 1-4 cores, and the 1-2 was quite significant.

 

[Kuzi]

Bad idea.. phenom can't play starcraft 2 for shit.. so unless you plan on not playing strategy games "in general", then you MUST wait for SB

Check Anand's findings at the link below:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3877/...investigation-of-thuban-performance-scaling/7

Notice how a stock Phenom II at 3.2GHz/2GHz NB is averaging 51 fps. Once it's OCed to 4GHz/3GHz NB, the fps jumps to 73, that's a 43% increase in performance from only a 25% CPU overclock! The secret here is in the NB frequency which SC2 benefits a lot from, that's why Phenom owners should OC both the CPU and NB to get the highest gain possible.

SB is the only chip that will run Starcraft 2 at 60fps.. obviously this excludes people with i7s that do 4.5ghz+ on water and exotics.

As you saw in the link above, the OCed PII got 73 average fps (~32 min fps). Or do you mean 60fps as a minimum? Because even SandyBridge will not be able to run SC2 at a stable 60fps or higher, there will be fluctuations probably from around 30fps to +100fps. It all depends on the action, and of course the settings you are using.

In general strategy games run perfectly fine even at a lowly 30 fps, and I think most people would be hard pressed to tell the difference in SC2 running at 40, 50, or 60fps, so I don't see why fps is so important to you in this game. And I've been playing SC2 for months now at 1920x1080 Ultra settings (Medium shadows), and almost never notice any lag.

 

[exar333]

The lack of overclocking on the platform killed it for me. Why should I pay $200+ for a "K" chip that can overclock, when I can get a Phenom II and a motherboard for $140? I did just that and am running happily at 3.8ghz.
I just don't understand Intel. To me, this just proves that they do not care about the enthusiast market.

I would have waited for Bulldozer but the Black Friday deal I got was too good to pass up on.

So you are happy with your build and don't need anything faster. Some people do need a faster rig, and SB is a great option.

Intel's prices are really only "not too great" on the low end (<$150) and the high end end (<$500). Intel offers some great options between $150 and $300. How many 920/930's were sold for <$200? A TON.

As for MB options, yeah they are expensive these days. I do miss most mainstream boards being ~$100, but there are still plenty of options around these days as well.

OP, did you have that PHII rig over years ago? No. I bought my i7 in 11/08 and it is STILL very fast. The CPU $300, MB $250, and RAM $200 was reasonable then; sure it's cheaper now, but its been two years.

SB is priced to directly replace the existing i7 line-up for no extra cost. That's pretty cool if you ask me. Give me the same price with extra performance and OC additional room any day.

 

[ilkhan]

OK. Theres budget enthusiasts and theres performance enthusiasts where money is less of an issue. Performance enthusiasts usually stay clear of AMD. Like from the $200 mark and up (which is considered mainstream).

There are performance enthusiasts and value enthusiasts, and what do you know they already have categories for both of those. If you want the best performance, you need to pay for it. If you want the best value overclocking chip, without regard for performance, Intel is saying either pay for the performance, or go AMD.
Personally, theres a 2500K on my build list, so I'll choose to pay for it.

 

[aigomorla]

The enthusiast market does not have a defined budget. By "enthusiast", I simply meant people who are into computer hardware and overclocking. If you're into overclocking, it's way more fun to clock a CPU from 2.5ghz to 3.8ghz than it is to take a 3.4ghz CPU up to 3.8ghz.

By comparing an $80 AMD CPU to something that Intel makes for around the same price, I'm basically looking at a price/performance comparison, regardless of how each CPU performs in its own right.

no... the enthusiast market to your definition does not mean the same as marketing.

The Enthusiast market is the echelon of the top ranked parts which this thread hasnt mentioned anything yet of.

When you say enthusaist, its general assumed, your going to be pitted next to enterprise gear in price.

And when you talk enterprise gear, even AMD's get expensive in that sector.

Cheap parts, even overclocked, will always be cheap parts.. that is not the definition of enthusiast in market.

There are performance enthusiasts and value enthusiasts, and what do you know they already have categories for both of those. If you want the best performance, you need to pay for it. If you want the best value overclocking chip, without regard for performance, Intel is saying either pay for the performance, or go AMD.
Personally, theres a 2500K on my build list, so I'll choose to pay for it.

Why are you guys trying to make the term overclocker more compilcated, by using a mid level SAT word Enthusiast.

Guys... CHEAP PARTS ARE NOT IN THIS CATIGORY PERIOD.
Taking CHEAP Parts, and Overclocking it butfungulo and back, and called OVERCLOCKER.
Dont try to push yourself in this higher tier when your parts arent in the definition.

Bring in the top 2&#37; of hardware... im talking 480GTX, 580GTX, 5970, 5870, 980X, 990X, 975X, 965X, SR-2, Classy, R3G....
Then you can say your in the enthusiast market.

U dont bring in a dual core sempron, on a 49 dollar budget board, and call yourself a enthusiast lvl part builder.

I dont want to seem mean or like a snob... but its like trying to mesh consumer with enterprise... its a totally different catigory which came up, because ultra high gamers didnt want the term, enterprise.

 

[SickBeast]

Phenom owners should OC both the CPU and NB to get the highest gain possible.

Thank-you very much for posting that, along with your link. I was under the impression that the HT link speed had no effect on performance. I'm now running it at 2700mhz with a moderate bump to the CPU HT link voltage. :thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[alkemyst]

I am at 3800/2800 on my 955.

 

[darkewaffle]

Bring in the top 2&#37; of hardware... im talking 480GTX, 580GTX, 5970, 5870, 980X, 990X, 975X, 965X, SR-2, Classy, R3G....
Then you can say your in the enthusiast market.

U dont bring in a dual core sempron, on a 49 dollar budget board, and call yourself a enthusiast lvl part builder.

I dont want to seem mean or like a snob... but its like trying to mesh consumer with enterprise... its a totally different catigory which came up, because ultra high gamers didnt want the term, enterprise.

Enthusiast, by definition, is merely being enthusiastic; rather, eagerly interested in what you're doing. I'd wager you'd find just as many (hell, maybe more) people with budget homebuilts that know what they're doing as you would people with your 'enthusiast' gear.

Having expensive parts doesn't mean anything more than you've got money to burn, and (watch General Hardware to see this play out) is proof of ignorance just as often as enthusiasm.

 

[Edrick]

Having expensive parts doesn't mean anything more than you've got money to burn, and (watch General Hardware to see this play out) is proof of ignorance just as often as enthusiasm.

So people who spend $500 for a GTX 580 just waste their money and a $199 GTX 460 would have served them just as good and got the same frame rates?

And people who spend $899 for an Intel 6-core westmere CPU would be just as happy with a OC $100 budget CPU?

I do not know about you, but if I were to ever spend that much money on a CPU and/or any other component, I would make damn sure I did my research and was not "ignorant" on the subject. People do save for their "dream" system who do not have money to burn.

I think your statement is just your opinion, which does seem a little bias.

 

[darkewaffle]

So people who spend $500 for a GTX 580 just waste their money and a $199 GTX 460 would have served them just as good and got the same frame rates?

And people who spend $899 for an Intel 6-core westmere CPU would be just as happy with a OC $100 budget CPU?

I do not know about you, but if I were to ever spend that much money on a CPU and/or any other component, I would make damn sure I did my research and was not "ignorant" on the subject. People do save for their "dream" system who do not have money to burn.

I think your statement is just your opinion, which does seem a little bias.

Waste? No, they just have greater funds at their disposal.

There have been countless examples in GH of people opening Newegg, sorting their gear by highest price, and literally picking the first result.

Is someone really an enthusiast if they pick a i7 960 over a 950? If they have a $400 motherboard? If they buy 12GB of ram to play counter strike? If they buy a 580 to game at 1280x1024? If they buy a 1200w powersupply for a single CPU and GPU? If they get 24GB of DDR2 for their i7? If they buy a $300 1156 mobo for their i7 980x? This type of thing happens every day.

That's not to say everyone with a high end system would make such a mistake, but I think assuming that someone's an enthusiast because they have shiny toys is a really poor idea. Some of the most knowledgable, experienced people on this and other forums have perfectly modest systems. Yet they're some of the most dedicated, interested, and most of all enthusiastic.

 

[SickBeast]

I just don't see why people bash overclockers and say they're not enthusiasts. By saving money on our CPU by overclocking, we have more money to spend on things like a good GPU or an SSD which could give us a much better system overall compared to someone who drops $400 on an i7 CPU and then skimps on everything else.

I just don't see the fun in overclocking a $300 CPU to gain 10&#37;, personally. I also wouldn't want to risk burning out such an expensive processor.

TBH, the "enthusiasts" that some people here are defining are basically just filling Intel's coffers and encouraging the maintenance of the status quo. I applaud the people here who agree that $100 should purchase a good CPU.

 

[aigomorla]

Having expensive parts doesn't mean anything more than you've got money to burn, and (watch General Hardware to see this play out) is proof of ignorance just as often as enthusiasm.

OK once again... incase anyone missed it...

no... the enthusiast market to your definition does not mean the same as marketing.

The Enthusiast market is the echelon of the top ranked parts which this thread hasnt mentioned anything yet of.

When you say enthusaist, its general assumed, your going to be pitted next to enterprise gear in price.

For the very last time...

Its a marketing niche created by ultra high end gamers, because they wanted a separate category outside ENTERPRISE.

Enterprise Gear is insanely expensive.... and its also priced on PAR with the top 2&#37; consumer gear.

Enthusiest for the 9 millionth time in marketing, means ultra high end gamers gear which would/could double for enterprise, but has a consumer friendlier BIOS.

That's not to say everyone with a high end system would make such a mistake, but I think assuming that someone's an enthusiast because they have shiny toys is a really poor idea. Some of the most knowledgable, experienced people on this and other forums have perfectly modest systems. Yet they're some of the most dedicated, interested, and most of all enthusiastic.

Ok your becoming just plain silly..

To me now it sounds like jealously.

And if you want to think of it from a pure sport / fun event... yes a guy with a gulftown has a higher ceiling then a guy with a quadcore.
The chips on the higher epoch are nicer.
They have a higher wall then the lower budget stuff.

The higher end GPU's allow the ultra high gamer to play his games on 30inch LCD's with insane pixils flawlessly.
Do you really think gaming on a 30inch with max settings is the same as a 19 inch with half settings?

Even in the car racing hobby, If someone comes with a indy class Clocksworth V8, are you gonna class them with a turbo charged I4?

Does this make sense to you?

 

[taltamir]

enthusiast has nothing to do with enthusiasm. It is a marketing term that means "expensive/highest end". Just like "value" means "cheap".
You can have the most enthusiasm in the history of humanity, and buy "value" gear due to your economic condition, or vice versa.

enterprise is not necessarily high end (but it can be), it is often lower performance but much more reliable, or has been vetted to a greater extent.

 

[aigomorla]

enterprise is not necessarily high end (but it can be), it is often lower performance but much more reliable, or has been vetted to a greater extent.

Thats very true...

some of the real enterprise gear has less options and accessories the high end stuff has.

Also the cooling and power regulations on gamers gear is more advanced then enterprise gear.

But a cheapo enterprise gear part will still run 2x-5x more expensive.

 

[nyker96]

The lack of overclocking on the platform killed it for me. Why should I pay $200+ for a "K" chip that can overclock, when I can get a Phenom II and a motherboard for $140? I did just that and am running happily at 3.8ghz.

I just don't understand Intel. To me, this just proves that they do not care about the enthusiast market.

I would have waited for Bulldozer but the Black Friday deal I got was too good to pass up on.

nothing wrong with a P2+mb for 140, great deal and at 3,8 packs a lot of punch. But if you want performance/$$ then this is the right solution, however, Sandy isn't more about performance regardless of $$. Sandy will probably clock to 4+ and even at 3,8 will be a good 20% faster than P2 if not more judging from the preliminary benchmarks.

 

[ilkhan]

$100 should purchase a good CPU.

$100 SHOULD buy you a good CPU.
$100 DOES buy you a good CPU.
$100 does NOT and should NOT buy you the BEST CPU.

Having the money to and/or choosing to buy the best does not make you an enthusiast.
I'll agree with aigomorla, the marketing term is different than the real-world term.

 

[SickBeast]

$100 SHOULD buy you a good CPU.
$100 DOES buy you a good CPU.
$100 does NOT and should NOT buy you the BEST CPU.

Having the money to and/or choosing to buy the best does not make you an enthusiast.
I'll agree with aigomorla, the marketing term is different than the real-world term.

$100 used to buy you the best CPU if you knew how to overclock. My Athlon 2500+ Mobile Barton clocked up to 2.5ghz, making it the fastest CPU out there for quite some time. Even my old Opteron 165 could be overclocked to 2.6ghz, making it faster than anything else for a short period of time, again, for little over $100.

I guess I'm a bit of a cheapskate when it comes to CPUs. ()

 

[aigomorla]

$100 used to buy you the best CPU if you knew how to overclock.

Thats so not true...

The best clocking cpu's i had were Xeons, then followed the Extreme Edition Processors and also Opterons.

You think an Opty is consumer level? lol...

:wub:

Ask gillbot about the X6800 i had... lol... that was my first gateway into 4ghz territory when people were crusing @ 3.2

 

[SickBeast]

Thats so not true...

The best clocking cpu's i had were Xeons, then followed the Extreme Edition Processors and also Opterons.

You think an Opty is consumer level? lol...

:wub:

Ask gillbot about the X6800 i had... lol... that was my first gateway into 4ghz territory when people were crusing @ 3.2

I'm guessing you've never heard of the Celeron 300A? I had two of them running on a cheap Abit motherboard, both overclocked to 450mhz. Nothing could touch them at the time. The same goes for my PII 233 that I highly overclocked to be equivalent to Intel's fastest CPU at the time.

 

[taltamir]

$100 used to buy you the best CPU if you knew how to overclock

Overclocking a 100$ chip to outperform a STOCK 1000$ chip does not make it the best.
That 1000$ chip will overclock higher.

 

[SickBeast]

Thats so not true...

You think an Opty is consumer level? lol...

:wub:

Dude what is your problem? The Opteron 165 at $100 is certainly consumer level. Why are you so caught up in your own personal definitions of which product is at which "level"? Does it make you feel better after having spent $500 on your CPU?

I don't care what you want to define these things as. My point stands that for $100, the following processors have been easily overclockable to become the fastest CPU on the market:

Celeron 300A to 450mhz
Athlon XP "mobile barton" to 2500mhz
Opteron 165 to 2700mhz

 

[SickBeast]

Overclocking a 100$ chip to outperform a STOCK 1000$ chip does not make it the best.
That 1000$ chip will overclock higher.

Not necessarily. All of the cores are cut from the same wafer in most cases. In the case of the mobile barton I mentioned, they were among the best chips available as they needed to run at a lower voltage.