Newest AMD vs intel i7

[guncrasher]

here, look at this

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html

if you have never built a computer you cannot go wrong with intel.  amd on the other hand must be carefully researched to make sure you get matching components.  and with amd there's always a chance that it wont play ah in the best possible way.  most of the calls to ah asking for help are from amd users.  so there you go.  also dont count on intel dropping the price of the sandy bridge anytime soon unless they go on sale.  intel is known for not having a fire sale to make room for newer cpus. 

if it was me i would go with the 2500k at least or maybe the 2600k.  either one will play aces high assuming you get the right components.  you dont say how much you want to spend so unless we know everybody is just gonna speculate.

besides correct me if I am wrong, isnt amd pulling out of the cpu market after they messed up with their newer cpu bulldozer?

semp

[Tom5572]

I budgeted myself 550 for board and CPU, I have an xfx power supply (850 watts) and an xfx 6770 video card. Currently, I have an ASUS M4A78 plus MB with an Anthelon x3 CPU, 8 gig of ddr2 ram. I cannot remember the stats on the RAM now. I am able to run AH at 60 fps at 1024 but only detailed terrain is on. Detailed water drops me to 47ish fps. Any more drops it further.

This will be my third build but the first with current year components.

[SilverZ06]

I budgeted myself 550 for board and CPU, I have an xfx power supply (850 watts) and an xfx 6770 video card. Currently, I have an ASUS M4A78 plus MB with an Anthelon x3 CPU, 8 gig of ddr2 ram. I cannot remember the stats on the RAM now. I am able to run AH at 60 fps at 1024 but only detailed terrain is on. Detailed water drops me to 47ish fps. Any more drops it further.

This will be my third build but the first with current year components.

You should have no problem picking out a nice a board and cpu with $550. However, budget another $50-100 for ddr3 ram. You can get 16gigs of 1600 ddr3 for about $100

[katanaso]

Tom,

I'm building a new system as well, and I stayed Intel.  I went with the i5 2500K instead of the i7 2600K.

Here's what I picked up:

Processor -- i5 2500K -- $205
Motherboard - GIGABYTE GA-Z68XP-UD4 LGA -- $189
G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 16GB DDR3 1600  F3-12800CL9Q-16GBXL -- $90

Total for these 3 is $484.

[Skuzzy]

You should have no problem picking out a nice a board and cpu with $550. However, budget another $50-100 for ddr3 ram. You can get 16gigs of 1600 ddr3 for about $100

You do realize that Windows will not allow any application to consume more than 3GB of system RAM, regardless of the amount of free RAM available, or if the OS is 32 bit or 64 bit?  Just FYI.

[Drano]

You do realize that Windows will not allow any application to consume more than 3GB of system RAM, regardless of the amount of free RAM available, or if the OS is 32 bit or 64 bit?  Just FYI.

Yeah that is annoying as hell. Is there some actual reason why there's a limit other than they just picked a number? You'd think if board manufacturers were able to put together boards that will accept up to 32 GB now (I think) that the RAM could actually be used.

[SilverZ06]

You do realize that Windows will not allow any application to consume more than 3GB of system RAM, regardless of the amount of free RAM available, or if the OS is 32 bit or 64 bit?  Just FYI.

I was under the impression that max usable was 4gb on 32 bit, 64bit supports more. The OP said he had 8gig of ddr2 so I have to assume he is running a 64bit OS. I just have 16gig because its cheap so why not 

[MrRiplEy[H]]

You do realize that Windows will not allow any application to consume more than 3GB of system RAM, regardless of the amount of free RAM available, or if the OS is 32 bit or 64 bit?  Just FYI.

I thought the limit was 2Gb and only for 32-bit application code that is not compiled with the large address aware -flag. Are you sure 64-bit code can't use more than 3Gb? Sounds pretty strange.

[Skuzzy]

The maximum addressable space with a 32 bit OS (sans a proper extended support which Microsoft will never do) is 4GB and for 64 bit Microsoft has set an arbitrary limit depending on which 64 bit OS you have.  

The maximum amount of system RAM Microsoft will allow an application to use, of the maximum addressable space, is 3GB, if the application is compiled with a specific flag.  If not, then the space is reduced to 2GB.

I thought the limit was 2Gb and only for 32-bit application code that is not compiled with the large address aware -flag. Are you sure 64-bit code can't use more than 3Gb? Sounds pretty strange.

Yes, 64 bit code is still restricted to 3GB.  The only thing compiling in 64 bit does is allow the application to run in address space higher than 4GB.

[SilverZ06]

The maximum addressable space with a 32 bit OS (sans a proper extended support which Microsoft will never do) is 4GB and for 64 bit Microsoft has set an arbitrary limit depending on which 64 bit OS you have.  

The maximum amount of system RAM Microsoft will allow an application to use, of the maximum addressable space, is 3GB, if the application is compiled with a specific flag.  If not, then the space is reduced to 2GB.

But you can run multiple applications at the same time each using 3gig correct? So in theory if you are running several apps you can easily exceed the 8-10gig in use? I'm just asking, I don't pretend to know.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

The maximum addressable space with a 32 bit OS (sans a proper extended support which Microsoft will never do) is 4GB and for 64 bit Microsoft has set an arbitrary limit depending on which 64 bit OS you have.  

The maximum amount of system RAM Microsoft will allow an application to use, of the maximum addressable space, is 3GB, if the application is compiled with a specific flag.  If not, then the space is reduced to 2GB.

Yes, 64 bit code is still restricted to 3GB.  The only thing compiling in 64 bit does is allow the application to run in address space higher than 4GB.

That's pretty unbelievable. It means MS severely gimps server performance. Or does it only apply for the desktop version? I have to keep this in mind as we have a couple of customers that run mysql on Server 2003/2008. They'll be hitting a performance limit pretty soon if only 3Gb is allowed.

Luckily our own production servers run on linux, we have several instances with 8-12Gb mysql memory footprints.

[W7LPNRICK]

Go to newegg.com. Watch the videos, read the reviews.

------------------
System Information
------------------
Time of this report: 4/1/2012, 11:10:12
       Machine name: RICK-PC
   Operating System: Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit (6.1, Build 7600) (7600.win7_gdr.111118-2330)
           Language: English (Regional Setting: English)
System Manufacturer: MSI
       System Model: MS-7673
               BIOS: BIOS Date: 04/14/11 10:01:35 Ver: 04.06.04
          Processor: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-2400 CPU @ 3.10GHz (4 CPUs), ~3.1GHz
             Memory: 8192MB RAM
Available OS Memory: 8162MB RAM
          Page File: 1586MB used, 6829MB available
        Windows Dir: C:\Windows
    DirectX Version: DirectX 11
DX Setup Parameters: Not found
   User DPI Setting: 96 DPI (100 percent)
 System DPI Setting: 96 DPI (100 percent)
    DWM DPI Scaling: Disabled
     DxDiag Version: 6.01.7600.16385 64bit Unicode
---------------
Display Devices
---------------
          Card name: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti
       Manufacturer: NVIDIA
          Chip type: GeForce GTX 550 Ti
           DAC type: Integrated RAMDAC
         Device Key: Enum\PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_1244&SUBSYS_15563842&REV_A1
     Display Memory: 4019 MB
   Dedicated Memory: 947 MB
      Shared Memory: 3071 MB
       Current Mode: 1600 x 900 (32 bit) (60Hz)
       Monitor Name: Generic PnP Monitor
      Monitor Model: HP 2009
         Monitor Id: HWP2828
        Native Mode: 1600 x 900(p) (60.000Hz)
        Output Type: DVI
        Driver Name: nvd3dumx.dll,nvwgf2umx.dll,nvwgf2umx.dll,nvd3dum,nvwgf2um,nvwgf2um
Driver File Version: 8.17.0012.6671 (English)
     Driver Version: 8.17.12.6671
        DDI Version: 10.1
       Driver Model: WDDM 1.1
  Driver Attributes: Final Retail
   Driver Date/Size: 1/16/2011 17:53:00, 12864104 bytes
        WHQL Logo'd: n/a
    WHQL Date Stamp: n/a
  Device Identifier: {D7B71E3E-5104-11CF-FD41-5A351FC2C535}
          Vendor ID: 0x10DE
          Device ID: 0x1244
          SubSys ID: 0x15563842
        Revision ID: 0x00A1
 Driver Strong Name: oem4.inf:NVIDIA_SetA_Devices.NTamd64.6 .1:Section005:8.17.12.6671:pci\ven_10de&dev_1244

I am thoroughly happy with my new build.   

[Skuzzy]

That's pretty unbelievable. It means MS severely gimps server performance. Or does it only apply for the desktop version? I have to keep this in mind as we have a couple of customers that run mysql on Server 2003/2008. They'll be hitting a performance limit pretty soon if only 3Gb is allowed.

Luckily our own production servers run on linux, we have several instances with 8-12Gb mysql memory footprints.

SQL Server/MS Server is a different beast than the desktops.  Although the 32 bit versions do have the same limitations as any desktop does.

Microsoft has not really stated what the 64 bit application limitations/restrictions are for those server platforms.  Just the gross OS address space, which is the same as the desktop operating systems.

[Tom5572]

I am running win 7 home pro 64 bit.

[PR3D4TOR]

Um.. Skuzzy?    Win 7 Enterprise x64.