SurClaro Flight Simulator Resources

Cat1 · Posted: Sun Mar 01, 2009 9:59 pm Post subject: New i7 Chips... and a story...

I have a couple of questions for some folks that are much more studied up on the market as far as things go.

Here is the history: Friday evening my Father in Law walked into my home office and said… “I’ve been told to tell you that if you find a desk for the office you like I am willing to pay for it, just let me know how much”.
I automatically went into “explain mode”, “the shape of the office will not allow what I need to fit a off the shelf desk set-up and here are my plans” type of thing… He noticed that I was putting my head into my hands and gently shaking it back and forth waiting for the software to load up while muttering the words “pathetic”, “slow ass machine”, “stupid load times” over and over for about 30 seconds until my 3-D model loaded.
Then he offered up a different approach… “Would a new computer be a better idea?”

DING, DING, DING!
After having got three variants of the Vundo Trojan virus on this HD in my Dell late last year and again early this year, I have scanned the crap out of it daily and weekly and even thought it comes up clean it’s just not the same. It is slower, and that may be due to the additional software that was installed to make sure it doesn’t happen again I don’t know, the HDD has recently been making some strange noises, I actually hear “bumps” when it is reading… I can’t upgrade this system any further than it is now. Many have seen the 3.0 GHz chip upgrade that failed. The system is really maxed out.

The questions are…

I7 core, is there any massive improvement between this and the QX9650 as far as pure processor speed, or even the Q non X series processors?
Most reviews aren’t apples to apples when it comes to the benchmarking. And as a side note why is Crysis the standard?
Finding reviewers or reviews that use FS are nearly non-existant.
This i7chip has recently hit the market; mother board offerings are thin but offer quite a bit, but the QX which is holding Newegg value at $1029 has the proven tech with the right board.
The i7 920 is almost inclusively, no matter the board reviewed, to have easy clocking abilities to take it to nearly the 4GHz realm if you can dissipate the heat increase.
Really, anything above the i7 920 is just a factory OC’ed version of the 920 to begin with. Not much of a chance to understand the differences between the QX and the i7, except for the cost.
Recommendations based on this fact:
The Dell I’m on I upgraded myself; I am looking to get something I can upgrade or tweak for say the next five years.
This is the middle to deep end of the pool, I don’t swim with sharks yet.

tropicalfish · Joined: 04 Oct 2005 Posts: 989

The QX series are not really worth the money unless you are into serious overclocking.

The lowest model of i7 comes for around 250 USD I think?

Do you have a particular budget in mind?

Cat1 · Posted: Sun Mar 01, 2009 10:42 pm Post subject:

I'm not parsing or reading all the reviews available, otherwise I would not have posted it here, it's not a budget aspect.
It's the most bang for the buck with the tech going forward.

To answer the question I posted takes up to date knowledge, understanding the differences and offering an opinion.
Terry, I trust your opinion, if you give one "at large". And include the "what if's".

tropicalfish · Joined: 04 Oct 2005 Posts: 989

I'm not really sure what you mean but I'll give it a go...

Cat1 wrote: The questions are…

I7 core, is there any massive improvement between this and the QX9650 as far as pure processor speed, or even the Q non X series processors?
The Core i7 performs much better than most other processors. The "X" in the QX processors is the Extreme version, their notable difference being that they had unlocked multipliers. Unless you are an extreme overclocker and you have an arm and leg to give away, you won't need it.
Most reviews aren’t apples to apples when it comes to the benchmarking. And as a side note why is Crysis the standard?I don't know why Crysis is used
Finding reviewers or reviews that use FS are nearly non-existant. True I guess... but some things to know: FS (both 9 and X I believe) can not make *FULL* use of SLI or CrossFire. FS9 can only use one core of the processor. FSX with SP1 can use multiple cores (Up to 32 to be exact) and is very CPU dependent.
This i7chip has recently hit the market; mother board offerings are thin but offer quite a bit, but the QX which is holding Newegg value at $1029 has the proven tech with the right board. Not sure what the question is here. But again, you probably won't be needing the QX processors
The i7 920 is almost inclusively, no matter the board reviewed, to have easy clocking abilities to take it to nearly the 4GHz realm if you can dissipate the heat increase. That is, provided you have quality RAM, quality mobo, and quality PSU.
Really, anything above the i7 920 is just a factory OC’ed version of the 920 to begin with. Not quite. There are some differences between them (I don't know the differences)
Not much of a chance to understand the differences between the QX and the i7, except for the cost. i7: 4 cores with hyperthreading capabilities (Think back to P4 with HT, simulated two cores). QX: Lots of money, unlocked multiplier, extreme OC.
Recommendations based on this fact:
The Dell I’m on I upgraded myself; I am looking to get something I can upgrade or tweak for say the next five years.
This is the middle to deep end of the pool, I don’t swim with sharks yet.

Don't take my whole word on everything. It's hard to tell what's the "best bang for buck" without knowing a budget. Different processors (both from AMD and Intel offerings) perform differently at different price ranges, some better than others.

rd · Posted: Mon Mar 02, 2009 7:27 am Post subject:

Best Bang For Buck theory...

I don't care how much it costs, I just want something that will be "The Cats Meow".

Of lets say 3 CPU's, A-B-C.

A.. You get it's full potential by over clocking.... $1000

B.. Same performance as A at normal clocking.... $500

C.. Same performance as B, but not suitable for gaming... $250

Best Bang For Buck is "B".

Me and Cat1 are basically the same when it comes to money, and spending it where we need to. I don't care how much it costs, I just want it to do what I need it to do.

Don't over think what we want or need. Most of us are in the group of "plug and play", and not interested in the workings, or making it (overclocking it) to do something we don't need or want.

RD

tropicalfish · Joined: 04 Oct 2005 Posts: 989

rd wrote: Best Bang For Buck theory...

I don't care how much it costs, I just want something that will be "The Cats Meow".

Of lets say 3 CPU's, A-B-C.

A.. You get it's full potential by over clocking.... $1000

B.. Same performance as A at normal clocking.... $500

C.. Same performance as B, but not suitable for gaming... $250

Best Bang For Buck is "B".

RD

I'm gonna have to argue with you a bit on those three points.

Let's say you take two of the same processors and overclock one of them. The overclocked one will perform better. There isn't really a measurable "full potential."

a QX9650 will perform the same as another QX9650. It only performs better if you overclock it.

If you take for example, an E8500 and overclock it to the speed of an E8600, you will get similar performance at a lower price.

Overclocking though is usually rather complex (which is why I don't do it).

Kinda hard to explain, I'm sick of my own procrastination (lol) and I need some sleep :x

rd · Posted: Mon Mar 02, 2009 10:11 am Post subject:

Again, you missed the point completely.

Please, do not do anything in life, that requires action.

RD

viche12345 · Joined: 01 Apr 2005 Posts: 849 Location: San Diego, CA, USA

rd wrote: Again, you missed the point completely.

Please, do not do anything in life, that requires action.

RD

LOL that's college life

im lazy indeed

tropicalfish · Joined: 04 Oct 2005 Posts: 989

rd wrote: Best Bang For Buck theory...

I don't care how much it costs, I just want something that will be "The Cats Meow".

Of lets say 3 CPU's, A-B-C.

A.. You get it's full potential by over clocking.... $1000

B.. Same performance as A at normal clocking.... $500

C.. Same performance as B, but not suitable for gaming... $250

Best Bang For Buck is "B".

RD

A, B, and C don't make sense.

B cannot be the same as A. Overclocking a $1k processor will result in SIGNIFICANTLY more performance than a $500 processor.

A $1k processor clocked at normal speeds *usually* does better than a $500 processor clocked at normal speeds.

C. Gaming is pretty much dependent on performance. If we are talking processor prices here, a 250 dollar processor will not have the same performance as a 500 dollar processor.

Cat1: What kind of a computer are you wanting anyway?

Cat1 · Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 7:12 pm Post subject:

Basically a gaming system, along the same lines as what I had posted some time back but now with an i7 core... Me thinks...

tropicalfish · Joined: 04 Oct 2005 Posts: 989

How powerful?

If it makes it easier to decide, What is your planned budget?

Cat1 · Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 3:35 am Post subject:

Terry you would make a good Engineer... :lol: Or Project Manager... How much does it cost...
RD already answered that, I don't care how much it costs for now, this is a paper build. I'm looking for the options from folks that are more up to date on the TECH, not the cost. I can evaluate cost. BOMBARD me with: If you do this you get this, if you do that you get that. I will back fill the cost and see if I puke on it.

Here is the thing, I used to like AMD and gamed with AMD exclusively for years. I also built and pushed quite a few drafting systems that were AMD based.
Don't think of this as a chip argument, it's not. But Intel is my bag now, and for better or worse that's that.

I don't understand the link that newegg allows you to see from the outside, but I will post the link none the less... If I can find it...
I think this is it... https://secure.newegg.com/WishList/MySavedWishDetail.aspx?ID=14990367

tropicalfish · Joined: 04 Oct 2005 Posts: 989

My personal recommendation for graphics card:

GFX (Heeshung will obviously disagree with me on this): http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102801

Don't forget an operating system

Cat1 · Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 3:59 am Post subject:

Ack! The link wasn't to mine... I think I edited it out to the correct one in the post above.

Yep... that's the one... Link above is to mine...

tropicalfish · Joined: 04 Oct 2005 Posts: 989

I can't view it.. Is there a way you can make it viewable to people without a Newegg account?