Intel Core i5 and Core i7 Lynnfield review

P

Pe-Killer

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2006
Messages
1,836
Reaction score
20
Conclusion
Intel has created an odd position for its new Lynnfield CPUs by releasing them eight months after the high-performance LGA1366 platform. On the one hand, it's great to see that Intel has finally produced a quad-core CPU that can hold its own against the best dual-core CPUs in games. This means that at long last, you can get the best performance in multi-threaded applications and games from one chip. However, this isn't the same thing as saying that a Lynnfield-core CPU is the perfect upgrade from Core 2.

Beyond its confusing naming scheme, the big problem for Lynnfield is the cost of upgrading - you really need to sit down and do some maths before placing your order. To start with, let's look at the price of building a Lynnfield system. As the earlier table showed, you could build a system with a Core i5-750 for just over £40 more than a system with a Core 2 Quad Q9650. As such, the Core i5-750 is clearly a great deal, as it's 14 to 40 per cent faster than the Q9650.

Intel Core i5 and Core i7 Lynnfield review Results Analysis and Conclusion Intel Core i5 and Core i7 Lynnfield review Results Analysis and Conclusion
Although there are three new Lynnfield-core processors at launch only once is worth buying. Click to enlarge.

In contrast, the fully-fledged LGA1366 Core i7-920 is cheaper than both of the new Lynnfield Core i7 CPUs. With LGA1156 and dual-channel DDR3 memory comparable in price to LGA1366 and triple-channel kits, we don't see the point in opting for an LGA1156 Core i7 CPU at all. If you're too lazy or scared to overclock, the Core i7-860 is faster thanks to Turbo Boost (rev 2), but the Core i7-920 is far faster when manually overclocked.

However, opting for an LGA1366 system has many advantages over an LGA1156 one. There's a wider choice of motherboards and coolers, while the X58 chipset and triple-channel memory are better for gaming than P55 and dual-channel memory. Folders and multi-monitor enthusiasts will also appreciate the extra graphics slots of provided by X58, while having 6GB of memory for much the same price as 4GB is also welcome. Finally, we know that Intel will continue to release CPUs on LGA1366, as the company told us that prototypes of the six-core Gulftown CPU are currently being tested on LGA1366 motherboards. This forthcoming CPU probably won't be cheap, however. Therefore, neither LGA1156 Core i7 CPU is worth buying - you'd be better off with an LGA1366 and Core-i7-920 system.

Of course, there will be cheaper LGA1156 motherboards on the way, which will help to make the Core i5-750 more attractive - the cheapest we are close to forming an opinion on is MSI's P55-GD65 motherboard, but at around £135, it's still priced higher than we would have hoped. For the Core i5-750 to become a truly great purchase, we believe that there need to be a bunch of respectably-featured boards closer to the £100 mark because, even with the P55-GD65 and cheaper memory, the platform costs aren't much lower than a Core i7-920 based system.

With that in mind, even if you like the look of the Core i5-750, you really should decide whether you can stretch to an i7-920 as things currently stand, just to make sure you're getting a good deal. Either way, our advice is to go out and buy a Core i7-920 before Intel realises its mistake and discontinues it.
Click to expand...

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2009/09/08/intel-core-i5-and-i7-lynnfield-cpu-review/11
 
Damn, i miss the days when all you needed to answer to buy a CPU is:

"How many Megahertz can i afford?"

None of this socket/platform/spec quagmire nightmare nonsense.
 
This is why I stay with AMD. They just offer less stuff it seems and it was easier to decide which one to aim for.

It's like my trip to the USA a few years back. All I was craving was some Oreos. I popped in at the store... fek, Oreos with vanilla biscuit and chocolate filling, 1 vanillia biscuit on the top, one dark at the bottom, half white and half dark chocolate, mint oreos, half mint oreos, half mint and dark chocolate with a vanilla biscuit top and dark biscuit underneath or the biscuit made of half vanillia, half dark. And they're all named friggin' Oreo!!!!
 
Intel are shooting themselves in the foot by releasing three sockets simultaneously - while continuing to support the still perfectly adequate lga775. It is a consumer nightmare and evinces a total arrogance and disrespect for the market borne out by a few years of preening dominance.
 
It looks like stock i5's are beating overclocked Phenoms? :confused:

You see the spelling mistake?
 
Last edited:
I like it. More choice is always good for me. Might hurt those who don't do their homework before buying thought.

Looks like it will be i5 for my next system.
 
stefan9 said:
I like it. More choice is always good for me. Might hurt those who don't do their homework before buying thought.

Looks like it will be i5 for my next system.
Click to expand...

thing is, people use numbering to associate with performance/features etc.

Look at BMW, you get the 1series, 3 series, 5 series, 6 series, 7 series, then the Z4.

In each series you have a number of different engines and other niceties. thus this is easy to follow for the consumer, and it is easy for the consumer to get an idea of what to buy, then they do their research, and so on.



With Intel's new naming scheme it's difficult to understand whats better, what has more power, what has more features, what is better for my money, and the naming scheme is also tough.

So you get the i5's and in that "series" you have the 750 and the 750s (now normal people reckon an s, z, x, etc. signifies a better performing product, but intel thinks otherwise).
The i5 750 uses a LGA 1156 motherboard, sports 4 cores, it slower then the bigger brother. So call it a BMW 3-series, but with a decent 3 liter engine.

the i5 750s uses an LGA 1156 motherboard, sports 4 cores, but it's slower then the 750 (wait, how does this naming scheme work? So "s" signifies power saving? alright...), thus this is like calling it a BMW 3-series with a 3-liter engine, that revs only to 3 000rpm (why not call it a 740???)

Now the i7's get horrible.

Lets start with the 860 and 860s (same story with the i5). Only, this i7 has a little extra something wrong.
the 800 series i7's all use the SAME motherboard as the i5's, which is like saying "we will slap on a 5-series badge on a 3-series chassis and body, but you get a more powerful engine and nice features :) ).

that's strange, basically the i7 8xx series is a i5 with more power. why not call it a more powerful i5???

the i7 9xx series all uses another Motherboard, the LGA-1366, yup, which is a fully fledged 5-series as it has faaaaaaaar more features and performs a little better. And of course, the bigger the number, the better the cpu in this range.

So basically you have a weird set of naming.
 
The worst bit of it is that 2 of the 1156 cpu's are being classified as i7's on the spurious basis that the i7's are defined by hyperthreading capabilities instead of socket and memory compatibility. That is going to cause a lot of confusion.
 
And most likely leading to someone making some serious money off that confusion at the expense of the customer.
 
scotty777 said:
thing is, people use numbering to associate with performance/features etc.

Look at BMW, you get the 1series, 3 series, 5 series, 6 series, 7 series, then the Z4.

In each series you have a number of different engines and other niceties. thus this is easy to follow for the consumer, and it is easy for the consumer to get an idea of what to buy, then they do their research, and so on.



With Intel's new naming scheme it's difficult to understand whats better, what has more power, what has more features, what is better for my money, and the naming scheme is also tough.

So you get the i5's and in that "series" you have the 750 and the 750s (now normal people reckon an s, z, x, etc. signifies a better performing product, but intel thinks otherwise).
The i5 750 uses a LGA 1156 motherboard, sports 4 cores, it slower then the bigger brother. So call it a BMW 3-series, but with a decent 3 liter engine.

the i5 750s uses an LGA 1156 motherboard, sports 4 cores, but it's slower then the 750 (wait, how does this naming scheme work? So "s" signifies power saving? alright...), thus this is like calling it a BMW 3-series with a 3-liter engine, that revs only to 3 000rpm (why not call it a 740???)

Now the i7's get horrible.

Lets start with the 860 and 860s (same story with the i5). Only, this i7 has a little extra something wrong.
the 800 series i7's all use the SAME motherboard as the i5's, which is like saying "we will slap on a 5-series badge on a 3-series chassis and body, but you get a more powerful engine and nice features :) ).

that's strange, basically the i7 8xx series is a i5 with more power. why not call it a more powerful i5???

the i7 9xx series all uses another Motherboard, the LGA-1366, yup, which is a fully fledged 5-series as it has faaaaaaaar more features and performs a little better. And of course, the bigger the number, the better the cpu in this range.

So basically you have a weird set of naming.
Click to expand...

I have never cared what they name something. I certainly never associated any name with = performance. I do my research before I buy any hardware.

If a consumer wants to buy something without doing his due diligence then that's his problem imho.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X