Originally Posted by cssorkinman
Actually, my I7 Sandy bridge was the most disappointing chip I've ever bought - possibly because it was the most expensive . I was coming from a 965 phII and expected too much apprently. Other than benchmarks, for almost everything I do, the money seemed wasted because I really couldn't tell a freckle of difference. Played with the 2600K for a while, gave it to my 12 year old son and went back to the 965.
Originally Posted by Tsumi
Not in 32nm, and requiring a much larger package than AM3.For most older games, general web browsing and email, there is no discernible difference between a stock Phenom II and an overclocked Haswell.
Originally Posted by BeerPowered
Everyday tasks there is a huge difference.
As for the guy mentioning SSDs. My 965BE rig consists of this:
AMD Edition A60 Armor Tower
Corsair 60GB Force SSD
8GB Gskill 1600 DDR3
2x 5870 1GB Crossfire
Corsair TX750 PSU
1TB Seagate Raid 0
It is MUCH slower in everyday tasks. Not just gaming. Even when my current rig housed the 5870s the 965BE was still slower.
So slow its in the closet collecting dust.
I used to be an AMD fanboy, but AMD CPUS are so slow I switched.
sorta block quoted this convo since this got me thinking. I make computers all the time. My main job with my ministry is to keep the pile of old P4 office computers we've got working with duct-tape and ingenuity. I love working on new machines because it's such a refreshing break from the old stuff. I, being a poor missionary, have a PhIIx4 965be, it's in my sig... you'll also note the rig i'd love to build (its an intel, so i'm no fanboy).
That said i gotta agree with the guy in this convo saying you can't tell the difference. You can't tell the difference from a quad core PhIIx965be and an i5-2500k/3570k/4670k in nearly every daily task you'll use that cpu with. Sure, in some huge multiplayer raid in WoW you might be able to tell the difference, moreso the more overclocked the i5 is... depends. More likely, even then you won't as the chances are the game will remain playable, and generally smooth on the AMD, and basically as long as that's the case it's impossible to tell the difference between 30fps and 120fps; unless there are two computers next to eachother making the difference evident.
The guys talking about the huge difference or that one was noticeable worse then the other... when one system is laggy i'd say it's more likely the result of a poorly optimized build, overclock, or OS. Speaking from experience, i've seen i5 systems that have superior hardware then a PhII system look SLOWER. That's a CASE by CASE situation, depending on a lot of variables, from overclocks to ram speed to malware. So when i read stuff like a chunk of the guys in this thread talking about the massive difference in experience i roll my eyes. Frankly, speaking as someone who's worked on more computers then i can count, nuked more viruses then i can remember, and who's been overclocking and building computers since the 386 days (back when we had to make our own boot disks to play the games we wanted to play... man i still sorta miss that) i usually can't tell the difference from a well built trinity A8 to a well built Haswell without looking in the control panel or bios, or playing with something cpu intensive.
it would be nice if we could have these convos with a little less passion. Back when i got into overclocking the basic motivation was taking a cheap cpu and getting performance equal to if not better then a top of the line cpu... back then you usually had to make some modification to the motherboards, among other things... I don't remember it being about some idiot contest on messageboards (they were bbs then) in some glorified attempt to prove who was the biggest tool. Generally back then overclockers had to deal with magazines for info and local bbs to communicate on 56k baud modems, and generally the talk was about ways to get tomorrows performance out of todays cpu... or ways to save cash and get the same performance as the top of the line stuff.
In that case there is no harm in people buying inferior AMD cpus, overclocking them up to a more expensive core i's performance and being generally happy with their accomplishment. So when i read comments from trolls about how "amd peasants turning down settings to play games and being satisfied" it sorta bugs me. I mean without those peasants keeping AMD in the desktop enthusiast market, intel would have no motive to release any desktop LGA chip for less then 1k. So we should all be hoping that AMD stays in this game... competitive enough to keep intel honest and innovating, else this fun hobby will go the way of the vinyl record.Edited by azanimefan - 6/30/13 at 7:10pm