On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 6:36 PM, Fritz Meissner <meissner.fritz(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 5 September 2010 21:18, rosea grammostola
<rosea.grammostola(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Thanks for the info. After some reading and discussion, the i3 or i5 seems
to be good options indeed.
After reading this:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2901/7 and considering
my budget
It looks like I better go for a i3 540 or something close to that,
compared to a i5...
My perspective on the processors is a little different. If you go for the
Arrandale i5-750 you get 4 cores (but no hyperthreading or GPU) instead of 2
cores with hyperthreading plus on-chip GPU. You can see the equivalent
Anandtech review for Arrandale at
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2832 . If
you compare the benchmarks in the review you quoted, the i5-750 has a
Sysmark score of 217 versus 204 for the i3-540, which is only a 6%
difference. However, if you look at multiple benchmarks (see Tom's hardware
comparison chart
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/charts/desktop-cpu-charts-2010/compare,2414.h…
(which is for i5-530, not i5-540 but is still relevant)) the differences are
often much greater. In particular, if you look at the Adobe Photoshop Image
processing benchmark, which is the only one that I know is definitely using
parallel processing on all available cores, then the 4 core processor is
twice as fast (unsurprisingly). My expectation is that as time goes on more
and more compute-intensive applications (such as audio and video encoding
and compiling) will start to use multiple cores fully, so it makes sense to
buy for the future.
Another factor is memory bandwidth; assuming that some audio work is memory
intensive (in particular playback using large sample banks) then I think
this is important. The i5-750 has a memory bandwidth of 16.9 GB/s vs. 11.6
for the i3-530 (from the comparison chart); this is a 46% improvement.
Compounding this is the fact that the onboard GPU is using main memory as
video memory, so that memory bandwidth is also being shared with all the
video data, which could eat up a large chunk of the capacity. So the i5 must
come out way ahead on memory bandwidth available for the CPU.
Ok, but I when doing work with photoshop or 3D video, it's better to
buy a videocard. This is also possible on a i3...
An i3 is more energyfriendly afaik.
But yes, more cores could be good, the question is from which point
it's really a nice upgrade...
I'm interested in more views on this topic... I have pretty little
experience with hardware and interpreting benchmarks scores...
\r