Upgrade to i5 or i7?

[aznmystik]

HI guys, so here is my current system:

Intel
Q9450 12mb cache 2.66ghz (currently OC to 3.2ghz)
4g Ram corsair
EVGA GTX 280

So I have a couple of questions regarding upgrading

1) Is it worth it to upgrade to i7 (cpu + board + ram)?
2) Isit worth it to upgrade to i5 (cpu+board+ram)? Also if i upgraded to i5 system, I still have some extra
cash for another GTX 280 card and I can run it in SLI with my current GTX 280.

 

[adairusmc]

I think that if you are going to upgrade, just go for i7.

I just made the jump from a Q9550 @3.4 to an i7 860 myself, and I am loving the upgrade. Whether or not it is worth it is up to you, for me it was (since I like playing with new hardware more than gaming).

To me, the i5 would be just the same thing you had with DDR3 memory. At least go i7 for the HT support, and overclock the hell out of it. Whether you go for 1366 or 1156 is up to you really, but if you have your eye on multi-GPU then go with a 1366 i7.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Personally, if it were me I'd wait. I could have upgraded my current rig to an i7 + x58 combo but I am waiting. What I have is more than sufficient for everything I do and I don't crunch numbers or run folding@home etc so it's not something I see myself needing at the moment. My next upgrade will likely be 32nm CPUs.

 

[rudder]

What are you using the system for? I have the same CPU and same overclock... I have been debating an upgrade as well.. but will most likely wait. I don't play the latest games and although I do use it a lot for photoshop.. I am not doing extensive batch processing so the 9450 is more than adequate.

If the ATI video gpu video conversion software improves quality... then I would probably wait even longer to upgrade.

 

[RussianSensation]

Is 3.2ghz the maximum your processor will do on your board?

If your computer use is mainly gaming, I would say sell GTX 280 and get a 5870 instead.

Of course if you like playing with new hardware then youcan sell your current CPU+MOBO+Ram for a good price. Then you may be able to upgrade to Core i5/i7 pretty cheap.

Otherwise, your system is still fast.

 

[Whitedog]

Odd you would want to upgrade from a system like that.

 

[rpglord]

Originally posted by: adairusmc


To me, the i5 would be just the same thing you had with DDR3 memory.

You are really clueless. i5 uses new architecture,and is much faster per clock then core 2 quad.
It's pretty much same thing as i7,just without HT. It's not same thing as core 2 quad but with ddr3 memory by any stretch of imagination

 

[cubeless]

Originally posted by: rpglord

Originally posted by: adairusmc


To me, the i5 would be just the same thing you had with DDR3 memory.

You are really clueless. i5 uses new architecture,and is much faster per clock then core 2 quad.
It's pretty much same thing as i7,just without HT. It's not same thing as core 2 quad but with ddr3 memory by any stretch of imagination

take a deep breath... relax... you'll never grow old around here if you get that excited...

for most things an i at the same clockspeed just doesn't make that big a real difference from a c2...

and as to why upgrade? if you have to ask you'll never understand...

 

[CurseTheSky]

Originally posted by: rpglord

Originally posted by: adairusmc


To me, the i5 would be just the same thing you had with DDR3 memory.

You are really clueless. i5 uses new architecture,and is much faster per clock then core 2 quad.
It's pretty much same thing as i7,just without HT. It's not same thing as core 2 quad but with ddr3 memory by any stretch of imagination

An i5 or i7 is NOT much faster per clock than a Core 2 Quad.

OP: Unless you do video encoding, folding@home, or something similar, don't bother. Your current system should be plenty fast.

 

[KIAman]

I have a similar setup (except Q9550) and similar situation and after weighing all options, I decided just to hold on upgrading. The only real upgrade I will do is Windows 7 Pro, which is more efficient than Vista so it's a wash.

The only upgrade I will consider at this point is something I can take with me for my next big upgrade. Monitor (30+inches) or SSD drive.

 

[cbn]

Originally posted by: aznmystik
HI guys, so here is my current system:

Intel
Q9450 12mb cache 2.66ghz (currently OC to 3.2ghz)
4g Ram corsair
EVGA GTX 280

So I have a couple of questions regarding upgrading

1) Is it worth it to upgrade to i7 (cpu + board + ram)?
2) Isit worth it to upgrade to i5 (cpu+board+ram)? Also if i upgraded to i5 system, I still have some extra
cash for another GTX 280 card and I can run it in SLI with my current GTX 280.

Switching from one 45nm CPU to another 45nm CPU (even if it has new new micro architecture) isn't going to be earthshaking. But if you can sell your parts for a decent price and have the time then why not?

I think an SSD with "trim" coupled with windows 7 might be a better upgrade path.

 

[deimos3428]

Originally posted by: aznmystik

I see no reason to upgrade that system at this point. What you need to ask yourself is "What do I want to do that this machine can't?"

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Originally posted by: Just learning

Originally posted by: aznmystik
HI guys, so here is my current system:

Intel
Q9450 12mb cache 2.66ghz (currently OC to 3.2ghz)
4g Ram corsair
EVGA GTX 280

So I have a couple of questions regarding upgrading

1) Is it worth it to upgrade to i7 (cpu + board + ram)?
2) Isit worth it to upgrade to i5 (cpu+board+ram)? Also if i upgraded to i5 system, I still have some extra
cash for another GTX 280 card and I can run it in SLI with my current GTX 280.

Switching from one 45nm CPU to another 45nm CPU (even if it has new new micro architecture) isn't going to be earthshaking. But if you can sell your parts for a decent price and have the time then why not?

I think an SSD with "trim" coupled with windows 7 might be a better upgrade path.

QFT

The biggest upgrade the OP can give his system right now is a nice and fast SSD (or two or three or...and then RAID0 however many )

Upgrading to a Core i5 or i7 from a Q9450 @ 3.2GHz would most likely have most of its worth in the fun of tinkering with new hardware and then having e-peen bragging rights; the Q9450 is far from the bottleneck of the OP's system.

Upgrading the hard drive system and/or monitor(s) would be my next step, then maybe the GPU (the 5800's are hitting 1+GHz on the GPU pretty easily), and then it would be the CPU/mobo/ram.

 

[nyker96]

i think q9450 at 3.2 is quite fast. nevertheless if you go 1366 for instance and oc an i7 to about 4ghz you will definitely feel the difference. for instance, I'd put a 4ghz i7 at about a 4.5ghz equivalent to a 775 chip like q9450. in other words a 30% boost in cpu power which is quite respectable and very noticeable.

now the ultimate question is why you need an upgrade? if your daily usage is cpu limited say when you compress video etc. then this extra 30% speed will help you a lot. but if say you feel your gaming side is bit weak, then I'd just sell off your current gcard and get a single hd5870 with that cash and you will see a boost in fps or like you suggest get another gtx280 to go sli.

I've done a few upgrades for myself and others in the past two years, what I've found is that extra speed doesn't always translate into any tangible benefit if you don't put the cash in the right spot.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Originally posted by: nyker96
i think q9450 at 3.2 is quite fast. nevertheless if you go 1366 for instance and oc an i7 to about 4ghz you will definitely feel the difference. for instance, I'd put a 4ghz i7 at about a 4.5ghz equivalent to a 775 chip like q9450. in other words a 30% boost in cpu power which is quite respectable and very noticeable.

now the ultimate question is why you need an upgrade? if your daily usage is cpu limited say when you compress video etc. then this extra 30% speed will help you a lot. but if say you feel your gaming side is bit weak, then I'd just sell off your current gcard and get a single hd5870 with that cash and you will see a boost in fps or like you suggest get another gtx280 to go sli.

I've done a few upgrades for myself and others in the past two years, what I've found is that extra speed doesn't always translate into any tangible benefit if you don't put the cash in the right spot.

Its only noticeable if you're actually using the processing power to crunch some processor intensive tasks (like encoding), it won't show up in gaming or general usage unless you're doing some sort of absolutely insane RTS or flight sim stuff.

I'll still stick by what I said in that the biggest single change he can make to his computing experience is a fast SSD (or set of more than one in RAID)

 

[rpglord]

You guys are underestimating i5/i7 speed. First of all,they are not just 30 % faster. They are about 50% to 100 % faster then core 2 quad at same Ghz.
I mean all the info is on the internet,you just have to find the right benchmarks.I can link some if you guys want.
It all comes down to where do you expect to see the speed difference.
For example,in gaming if we take op's rig,he is not going to see even 30 % speedup in games,not to mention 100 %
Why ? Because his gpu will severely bottleneck an i7. However,if he do what he says and actually buy another 280 to put it in sli,situation will change.He will see 30 to 50 % faster fps in games with 2 280's and i5/i7 then with his current cpu.
If he add another 280,his games will run double the speed they would on his current cpu
Bottom line,i5/i7 are faster,and yes they are much faster per clock then core 2 quad
Problem is,you can't see that speed if another part of your rig is going to bottleneck the cpu

 

[Ayah]

If you have money to throw out the door, by all means upgrade.

 

[Qbah]

Originally posted by: rpglord
*snip*

Okay... Whatever:

First comparison, Q9450 and i5 750 stock.
Second - Q9650 and i5 750 stock.

Now the OP is running his CPU at 3.2GHz so it's faster than the Q9650. That sure as hell isn't a lot faster. If faster at all.

Just get a nice SSD and enjoy. Going from your Q9450 to an i5 750 is pointless and a total waste of money. Now if you went with an i7 860 or i7 920 and were using some heavy multi threaded application - then yeah. But to go from a Q9450 to an i5 750 - just don't.

 

[Zaitsevs]

I am in the same situation guys, I have a Q9450. Honestly, I believe for your money/value you won't see a significant speed upgrade if you're not crunching numbers. I use TerraGen 2 a lot and rendering takes quite a load on my CPU.

I have pondered upgrading in the past 6 months and nothing has looked that sexy to me. I believe that for the best dollar/performance ratio -- we should wait until 32nm cpu's.

Then again, when those come out they will be highly priced and we might be forced to wait again. Ah, the joys of upgrading.

 

[tjaisv]

If you have to ask whether u should upgrade, then no it's probably not worth it.

 

[Upgr8er]

Instead of starting a new thread I'll just post my question here. It seems appropriate enough.

I'm looking at the I5 for 200 bucks and the I7 860 for 290 bucks. Is the I7-860 worth the extra $90? It's a little faster and has HT. The next jump up is nearly DOUBLE so the 860 seems to make sense. . . if you're really getting something for the 90 bucks!

Waddayatink?

 

[robertk2012]

I would be interested in your 9450 if you decide to upgrade.

 

[Hyperlite]

I don't think anyone has mentioned turbo mode yet, which IMO is the SINGLE reason to do an upgrade like that. If you think it's a gimmick or don't understand it, read AT's Lynnfield writeup. It's also a compelling reason to go 1156 i5/i7 vs 1366, though 1366 has a potentially longer upgrade path. Check it out!

Instead of starting a new thread I'll just post my question here. It seems appropriate enough.

I'm looking at the I5 for 200 bucks and the I7 860 for 290 bucks. Is the I7-860 worth the extra $90? It's a little faster and has HT. The next jump up is nearly DOUBLE so the 860 seems to make sense. . . if you're really getting something for the 90 bucks!

Waddayatink?

As i said, read AT's lynnfield article. Some direct benching of 1156 i5 vs i7. Frankly, it doesn't seem like HT makes all the difference you'd expect it to, and given that theoretically the i5 should OC a little better due to lack of HT (lower THD/TDP) i'm just not sure it's worth the premium. If you run some very specific SMP-aware programs that you are positive will benefit from HT purely on a thread-processing basis, then yeah, go for it. Otherwise, i don't think so.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3634 link for the lazy

 

[Zstream]

I don't think anyone has mentioned turbo mode yet, which IMO is the SINGLE reason to do an upgrade like that. If you think it's a gimmick or don't understand it, read AT's Lynnfield writeup. It's also a compelling reason to go 1156 i5/i7 vs 1366, though 1366 has a potentially longer upgrade path. Check it out!

Turbo is not worth purchasing a CPU over... Well to each his own but that is a rather silly reason to buy it.

To the OP, I went from a E3110 to a i7-860. It was not worth the cash I paid, what made it attractive was the selling of my previous PC parts. Basically I only paid 220$ for 4gb of ram and a new CPU.

One of the reasons for the 860 was HT. I can place two virtual servers on two cores without having much of an issue.

 

[Hyperlite]

Turbo is not worth purchasing a CPU over... Well to each his own but that is a rather silly reason to buy it.

To the OP, I went from a E3110 to a i7-860. It was not worth the cash I paid, what made it attractive was the selling of my previous PC parts. Basically I only paid 220$ for 4gb of ram and a new CPU.

One of the reasons for the 860 was HT. I can place two virtual servers on two cores without having much of an issue.

I personally consider a 15%-20% speed boost in single threaded functions (IE, OS operations) significant for my daily use.

But yes, as i said and with your specific application, paying for HT is justified.