i5 750 vs i7 930

B

Barfish88

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2006
Messages
2,105
Reaction score
3
Location
Queenstown
Sup all

Looking for a new processor and I just wanna know which one will be better for gaming etc.
i5 750 LGA 1156 or the 17 930 LGA 1366
 
You wont see a difference really in games, i5 is considered better due to it's price performance. But If you want the hyper threading and plan on Sli or xfire the i7 is the way to go.
 
I went with the i7 simply because it's the better socket, and because it's more future proof.

Easily overclockable on stock cooling to 3ghz, and far higher if you get a proper fan.

My 2c :)
 
Depends on your budget as well, cause it isn't only the price difference between the cpus that you have to look at.
 
930 is the better of the two since it can handle two GPUs properly. But if its going to be a 100% gaming rig I would take the i5 750 and buy a beast of a GPU with the savings of not going LGA1366. At 1920x1080 resolutions and up any half decent quad (and even most dual cores) will perform within 5% of a high end CPU.
 
If budget is not an issue, then I would say go for the i7.

Just don't forget that the 1366 motherboards are significantly more expensive than the 1156 motherboards. And once you have the 1366 board you'd want triple channel DDR3 1600 memory....

I am actually trying to decide between the two myself, and think I am going to go for the i750 mainly because its pretty good bang-for-buck, and because of the less expensive motherboard and memory.

But since you can afford the i7, go for it :)
 
Last edited:
killadoob said:
high end cpu for high end vga -> sli/xfire setups
mid range cpu for mid range gpu -> single card setups

Something along those lines
Click to expand...

Fixed ;) You can easily run a GTX480 offf a mid range CPU. Its when you go into multiple GPU territory that some extra CPU grunt helps. And even then its not by much iirc, only 3 card setups benefit from a really strong CPU. Let me see if I can find a link
 
I got a feeling a gtx 480 would have far more FPS on a 930 than the i5.

Also depends on the game i guess. I am not saying a mid range cpu cannot run a high end gpu i am just saying the cpu is holding back the gpu. So if you can afford a good cpu and vga then cool but don't buy a high end cpu with a mid range gpu.

Something along those lines, been a long day will just wait for the link for now :D
 
killadoob said:
I got a feeling a gtx 480 would have far more FPS on a 930 than the i5.

Also depends on the game i guess. I am not saying a mid range cpu cannot run a high end gpu i am just saying the cpu is holding back the gpu. So if you can afford a good cpu and vga then cool but don't buy a high end cpu with a mid range gpu.

Something along those lines, been a long day will just wait for the link for now :D
Click to expand...

Nope. They have rather similar fps. Here is one link with various CPU speeds. You can see there is zero difference in fps between different CPU speeds until you start using 3 or more GPUs.
Here is a comparison with several CPUs showing very little difference in the average fps each one attains with a single GPU. Both the i5 750 and Phenom X4 beat the i7 920 no several occasions. Games buy the best GPU you can, and then worry about CPU. Games are GPU limited more often than not so it makes sense to spend your money on the GPU
 
Last edited:
Would it make a difference if the resolution was lower?

Meaning the vga would not bottom out like it seems to be doing at that resolution? Maybe i am wrong but it looks to me like that is the maximum the gpu can out put so the gpu is the bottleneck. Lower resolution may show the cpu's bottlenecking?

Although i am just asking, have no idea really :D. Interesting stuff though.
 
Results are similar at lower resolutions. The CPU is rarely close to 100% while gaming so lowering/raising the res makes no difference. Increasing the number of GPUs though gives the CPU lots more work to do and so a better CPU will give an increase in fps.
 
killadoob said:
Would it make a difference if the resolution was lower?

Meaning the vga would not bottom out like it seems to be doing at that resolution? Maybe i am wrong but it looks to me like that is the maximum the gpu can out put so the gpu is the bottleneck. Lower resolution may show the cpu's bottlenecking?

Although i am just asking, have no idea really :D. Interesting stuff though.
Click to expand...

You are actually correct there.
 
Archer said:
Results are similar at lower resolutions. The CPU is rarely close to 100% while gaming so lowering/raising the res makes no difference. Increasing the number of GPUs though gives the CPU lots more work to do and so a better CPU will give an increase in fps.
Click to expand...

That is just wrong. What is happening is that single-GPU setups are being GPU-bound, which is why increasing CPU frequency doesn't make a difference. When that line becomes horizontal, it means that the GPU is the limiting factor. You same the see thing on the Metro 2033 benchmark even with a multi-card setup. A multi-card setup just increases that limit on performance, and the CPU then becomes the limiting factor, until the frequency is high enough to reach the limit set by the GPU. If you look at the results from the other benchmarks on that site, you will see that CPU frequency can impact performance of single-card setups at lower resolutions, depending on how CPU intensive the game is, because in those cases you are not GPU-bound.

You can think of performance as water and the GPU and CPU as two halves of a cup.

Code: 
 [COLOR="RoyalBlue"]__[/COLOR]
|  |
|__|
Now if you increase just one half of the cup, that doesn't increase the amount of water you can contain:

Code: 
|[COLOR="RoyalBlue"]__[/COLOR]
|  |
|__|

You have to increase both halves to increase the amount of water:
Code: 
 [COLOR="RoyalBlue"]__[/COLOR]
|  |
|  |
|__|

Have a look at BC2, which is well known for being CPU intensive, in a single-card setup - link.
 
Last edited:
Rudimental said:
snip
Click to expand...

Please point out to me where I am wrong? Were the results similar at lower resolutions? Yes, differences only really present themselves above 90fps at which point it really doesnt matter anymore anyway. Just about every quad core (and some dual cores) you can buy will play your games fine. Does adding in extra GPUs give the CPU more work to do? Yes, the GPU gets fed from the CPU. Do games often run a CPU close to 100%? No they do not. Will a better CPU give you more fps in multi GPU setups? Yes.

Perhaps my wording was a bit muddled, so yes, at lower res a good CPU will give some more fps but its hardly a reason to buy a better CPU. If you got the money for an i7 you are definately not gaming at less than HD resolutions, and if you are it really is time to upgrade your monitor. Fact remains though, you buy the best GPU you can and then worry about the CPU.
 
Hmmm check at the high res their is no difference but the at low res the difference is flippin insane.

Archer i think the page linked it very conclusive, drop the res lower and cpu speed makes a major difference.

Whether there is much difference between a stock i5 and stock i7 seems to be up for debate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X