i7 clock speed question

**NaturalViolence** · 01-11-2011, 05:35 AM **#11**

Quote:But I understand where you are coming from since I know that the duo cores run on 2.5.
I guess the older I7's do too.

What? Core 2 series cpus don't use a QPI bus. They use the old front side bus which is clocked at either 1066MHz or 1333MHz.

QPI is used to connect the cores to each other internally and the L3 cache and the NB. DMI is used to connect the north and south bridge chipsets in LGA1366. DMI was also used to connect the bridge chipsets in the LGA775 platform. LGA1156 has no NB however despite what that page may say the 800 series and below do still have a QPI bus, however they connect to the SB through DMI instead of QPI. However like lamedude said since the memory and pci-e controllers are on the cpu it won't make any difference that it's using DMI.

Quote:you dont need an i7 core 99.9% of software and 100% of emulators are only optimized for dual core CPUs. i have a q6600 overclocked to 2.8ghz and when i monitor system performence windows , linux and mac only use the first 2 cores. unless your trying to run 5 emulators and 3 virtual versions of windows you wont get any better performence with your i7 core then i do with this q6600 if they're clocked at the same speed. what you need to do like the reply above me suggest is to get some triple channell DDR3 supported motherboard and get you a E8000 series core 2 dou or a QX9000 series quad core

First of all triple channel is only supported by the LGA1366 platform, LGA775 is strictly dual channel. Second of all that entire post is totally untrue. Performance per clock is much higher with an i7 processor, and memory bandwidth/read/write performance is much better as well. Dolphin is much faster on an i7 than any other cpu series out at the moment. This is widely excepted as fact on these forums due to the many people that have upgraded from high end core 2 duo/quad to an i7 and noted the massive gains in performance.

tuanming · 01-11-2011, 09:02 AM **#12**

Heck, I need a Core i7! Like right now... haha. Tired of the Core 2 Duo series. However, back in its days, it was AMAZING compared to Pentium 4 CPUs...

**NaturalViolence** · 01-11-2011, 12:14 PM **#13**

We're still getting huge leaps in performance with each new generation it's just that now and days those leaps only apply to heavily multithreaded and/or visual (floating point and/or vector intensive) applications. Whereas in the "olden days" EVERYTHING was much faster with each new generation.

Hell for anyone who isn't running lots of visual and/or heavily multithreaded applications (or a high end server) I still think anything above a core 2 duo is overkill. Single threaded scalar integer performance hasn't come very far since then.

tuanming · 01-11-2011, 12:21 PM **#14**

Multi-tasking sucks on dual core, speaking from experience. Quad core and 4GB of Ram should be today's standards.

**NaturalViolence** · (This post was last modified: 01-11-2011, 12:27 PM by NaturalViolence.)

True, but I think most people these days just use their computer for basic stuff and don't run many applications at once.

lamedude · 01-11-2011, 10:45 PM **#16**

(01-10-2011, 07:38 PM)Squall Leonhart Wrote: my copy to ram performance disagree's with you.

Well they're are exceptions to everything. If you plan on using copy to RAM I suppose the 930 wins.

jontcold · 01-11-2011, 10:57 PM **#17**

before i have dual core x2 5200 2.6 oc a 2.8 with 260 gtx top sp 216 and in gta 4 my cpu was holding my back when i change to phenom 2 x4 965 it was my video card holding me and with my 470gtx phenom 2 x965 all setting at max with no lag at all

new pc games are to heavy some use quad core not many i thing mass effect 2 metro 2033 and gta 4 dual core it is no more a decent pc if you wanna play pc games at max setting

if i say something bad tell me

Cyris · (This post was last modified: 01-12-2011, 06:33 AM by Cyris.)

(01-11-2011, 12:14 PM)NaturalViolence Wrote: We're still getting huge leaps in performance with each new generation it's just that now and days those leaps only apply to heavily multithreaded and/or visual (floating point and/or vector intensive) applications. Whereas in the "olden days" EVERYTHING was much faster with each new generation.

Hell for anyone who isn't running lots of visual and/or heavily multithreaded applications (or a high end server) I still think anything above a core 2 duo is overkill. Single threaded scalar integer performance hasn't come very far since then.

PREACH!!!!!

(01-11-2011, 12:21 PM)tuanming Wrote: Multi-tasking sucks on dual core, speaking from experience. Quad core and 4GB of Ram should be today's standards.

what core 2 duo series did you have and what were you running that multitasking was so bad. you cant be talking about a E8000 series because those perform better at certain thins then my quad core. the only reason i wanted a quad core was for virtualization of windows in linux for PC repairs and running games and emulators windowed while which my DLed TV shows other then that i think a Core 2 Duo is the standard right now because most people dont know what VMware Virtualbox Qemu etc. or what an Emulator is.

**NaturalViolence** · (This post was last modified: 01-12-2011, 06:47 AM by NaturalViolence.)

Quote:PREACH!!!!!

?
I'm confused.

Cyris · 01-12-2011, 06:52 AM **#20**

(01-12-2011, 06:47 AM)NaturalViolence Wrote:
Quote:PREACH!!!!!

?
I'm confused.

i say that when i strongly agree with something. got it from a old mike jones song and its been stuck in for years and cant remember the name of the song