Hardware Overclocking Intel's Core i5 750

I know it is a reference, I love the fact that you seem to not understand the point of references. They are for finding information for the sake of comparison.
But nevermind, you lot on here never accept anything anyone ever says. You always argue and argue that you were right in the first place.

 

wow very impressive core i5 and mobos. and suddenly 4.5ghz sounds alot more possible

 

will you be having a uATX mobo roundup? also what kind of numbers in cooling do you get with a corsair H50?

 

We don't have a bracket for the H50 for LGA1156.

But I'm telling you those comparisons have already been done. The comment that we never take on board constructive criticism is simply, absolutely untrue too. I have dropped in a link for the other Lynnfield article that shows the overclocking results into the article though and the links to motherboard reviews already done are at the top of each motherboard page.

You're expecting every single article to have a standard format of blurb - results - conclusion, when that's not the case. We KNOW how well it overclocks, I'm just advising how how best to go about it.

I have taken on board that it looks a bit like a block of text, and if I get time I will try and make the pages easier to read with reference pictures maybe.

As everyone has correctly pointed out - for the money of the 860 in the UK you could buy a 920 platform which has more memory, more bandwidth and more features. In the States the 860 is a much better buy.

 

i don't think it's hard to read, jump straight to the motherboard, then look through screenshots for the settings.

people seems to forget that this article isn't for comparing motherboards. this is written as a guide on how to achieve 4Ghz on i5 750.

 

OK, I'm feeling a little guilty in that perhaps I was a tad disingenuous earlier, (I did say I was being picky) it WAS a good article - replete with the baffling but useful titbit that odd multipliers work better than even, (something I'll warrant that not many would have found out on their own).

If I can use a football analogy: I suppose it's rather like watching your team win 5 games on the trot, only for the 6th to be a draw. Most people will come away grumbling about the ineptitude of the team, poor display etc. Now, if you've just watched that exact same drawn game, but on the back of 5 straight losses, you're most likely to come away thinking it was a pretty good game, good defensive improvement, things are looking up etc, etc.

My point being, when you've been used to being fed a diet of foie gras it's quite easy to become accustomed to it, and maybe have your expectations raised, so that when it next doesn't appear served on a silver platter, rather than be happy you've had it, the initial reaction is to be disgruntled you haven't got it now...

If all that waffling makes sense.

Ah, technology, football & food. Add in some loud Cuban music, Playboy bunnies, a few pitchers of Mojitos & some shots and a Montecristo No.2 - and there's my perfect evening right there...

 

4GHz? Screw that! GIVE ME 5GHZ!!! lol

 

Hmmm, an analogy to explain an analogy to explain something that was probably bleedin' obvious in the first place. In case anyone was wondering the relevance of my tangents, yes, I have been drinking.

Putting down the keyboard now...

 

I love you bit-tech, even though I'm from NZ, you can have my love through the proxy of the internet. I love you.

 

Your confused because you didn't read my post properly, try again... I was comparing the i7 860 and the i7 920 (see the parts highlighted in bold) I wasn't comparing the i5 750 in my posting, at the time I posted I was comparing the 860 and the 920.

Reading here Bit-tech review of the 1156 i5-i7 CPU's it shows the i7 920 at stock speed gets an average of 32 fps in Crysis and minimum of 24 fps (just below comfortable fps) and the i7 860 gets an average of 34 fps in Crysis and a minimum of 27 fps a 2 and 3 fps increase over the 920, interesting

You forgot something the 920 has more memory, more bandwidth and more features, AND more cost, are you actually telling me it's cheaper to buy an i7 920, 6gb of ram, and a 1366 motherboard for less or the equivalent price of an i7 860, 4gb of ram and a 1156 motherboard? And if not then obviously the slight difference in price clearly wouldn't be justified as it clearly shows in the review that the difference in Crysis between the 860 and the 920 is only 1fps, which no one would even notice.

 

The cost is nearly identical. You can get a decent X58 motherboard for £130-140, which is what most of the mid-range P55 motherboards are selling for. The only thing that is more expensive is the RAM, at maybe £20 extra for 3 sticks rather than 2, but that is offset by the fact the 860 is £20 more than the 920. Ridiculous.

For that extra ~£0 you get a higher spec chipset, twice the number of PCI-E lanes for better performance in multi GPU systems, a triple channel memory controller, and a few other features that I forget right now.

 

Crysis is not the be-all-end-all... there are other applications out there too, you know. If Crysis was the only application I was thinking about, I'd opt for the 750 and spend the extra on a faster GPU.

 

It's an interesting question that Thermal5 has posed, just done a quick check on Scan's site.

Before I did this check, I would have thought the two costs to be pretty similar. Due to the extra bandwith etc I would therefore have recommended the i7 920 system.

i7 920 System: CPU (£210) + Gigabyte EX-58 UD3R (£136) + 3x3gig Dominator 1600mhz Ram (£122.00)
i7 860 System: CPU (£218) + Gigabyte P55 UD3R (£98) + 2x2gig Dominator 1600mhz Ram (£75.00)

Total for i7 920 - £468.00
Total for i7 860 - £391.00

This give the 860 system a saving of £77.00

To me, based on the results of the tests you made, the 860 system would well be worth a look now. £77 is a damn good deposit on another component too.

 

I suspect that the memory you've selected for the Core i5 system isn't compatible - it needs to have a default voltage of no more than 1.65V. So, rather than this kit for £75, you have to use this kit for £100.

That does still give you roughly a £50 difference between the systems, but if it were me, I'd pay the extra and get the better CPU and motherboard.

Still, the list above shows that things are moving in the right direction in the UK - an LGA1156 upgrade needs to be a good bit cheaper than the LGA1366 alternative to make it a no-brainer upgrade, and the prices are starting to shift to reflect this.

 

im using the exact Dominators RAM, also bought from Scan, on my i5 system, 1600Mhz 9-9-9-24 1.6v no problem, passed 4 memtest86's. it may not work with other RAM, but Corsair RAM always has a huge overhead.

the way i see it: 1156 is ~£60 cheaper than 1336, if you don't ever plan to go for SLI/Crossfire (like me) and feel 12GB is not enough, want to fill slots with 4GB sticks as soon as possible, then settling for i7 860 is a great choice. in fact, for the same amount of money, you can get 8GB instead of 6GB.

i think it all comes down to SLI/Crossfire in the future or not.

update on my Corsair H50 bought from Novatech: they've offered a full refund due to LGA1156 was mis-advertised. i asked for LGA1156 kit for free once it's available, they say they are talking with Corsair about this.

 

I'm using this kit (which I got for £75) with my i5 750, so memory of that price can be used.

 

re the last couple of posts: cool, fair enough - just wanted to make sure people knew to look at voltages of DDR3 before rushing to buy the cheapest kit. Thanks for sharing the link and Corsair advice!

 

Crysis may not be the be all and end all but at the end of the day Crysis was used as one of the benchmarks and if it's not the be all and end all then don't use that benchmark!, I was only commenting on the performance difference between the i7 860 and i7 920 which is literally 1fps which no one would even notice.

 

Really?

I didn't read your post properly? Try again?

So the fact that:

- You did mention the i5 750 in the previous post to the one you kindly highlighted in bold for me...
- That your mention of it was a full 14 minutes earlier...
- That the two chips are both socket 1156 Lynnfields...
- That they both chalk up the exact same stock scores on the Crysis performance chart, (which seems the only criteria you're interested in)...
- That the 750 actually outpaces the 860 on that same chart when overclocked...
- That for equal or greater performance in your parameter of choice, the 750 is as near as dammit £70 cheaper than the 860...*
- That when someone says they're worried about budget, I thought that value for money may be an interesting point to mention...
- And that the ENTIRE ORIGINAL ARTICLE was about the 750 to begin with...

All of that is rendered irrelevant - because you decided to change what you were talking about and I had the temerity to carry on including the 750 in comparison to both the 860 & 920?

Fair enough, a big old slap on the wrist for me then...


* http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/Inte...66Ghz-(Lynnfield)-8M-Cache-LGA1156-CPU-Retail
http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/Intel-Core-i7-860-Quad-Core-280GHz-(Nehalem)-8M-Cache-LGA1156-Retail