Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
i5 Sandy Bridge vs i7 Sandy Bridge
- Thread starter mark28
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What are the main differences besides higher clock speeds?
In 2010, the desktop i5 didn't have HT while the i7 series did have it. So i'm curious if it's worth upgrading the CPU on the high end 27" iMac
Same situation here. I don't know, if it's worth upgrading to the i7 instead of the 2.7GHz i5. I'll use my iMac for work (software developing) and not for games (only Football Manager).
It depends what you do with your iMac... If its for gaming, forget the i7 as the i5 will suffice you.
The i7 has 4 cores, but 8 threads, meaning it will outperform the i5 in tasks that require parallel computing (video encoding, 3D modeling, etc).
If you only browse the web, do simple tasks or if you're a developer who compiles relatively small applications... The i5 will be more than enough.
Just my 2 cents.
The i7 has 4 cores, but 8 threads, meaning it will outperform the i5 in tasks that require parallel computing (video encoding, 3D modeling, etc).
If you only browse the web, do simple tasks or if you're a developer who compiles relatively small applications... The i5 will be more than enough.
Just my 2 cents.
The 2.70GHz Core i5 2500S is a better grade of processor than the 3.10GHz Core i5 2400. It has a lower clock speed because it is a low power model - 65W TDP vs. 95W TDP. It makes up for that in part with its aggressive turbo boost when using only 1 or 2 cores. Low power models always cost more than one that isn't.
When you buy the more expensive iMac model you are also getting a Radeon 6970M rather than a 6770M. The Core i5 2400 will also out perform the 2500S when it put under full load.
What is a shame is that they aren't using the Core i5 2500 which is 3.3Ghz with a turbo boost of 3.7GHz, presumably because the upgrade to the Core i7 wouldn't be as enticing and that financially it is better for them to use as few processor models as possible.
I still would not that it is a better grade of processor.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i5-2400s_7.html#sect0
As far as Intel are concerned it is. I'm not saying it is a better choice for consumers.
Not to mention, the 2.7ghz has a higher turbo boost so it should essentially be faster for the single and dual threaded task we all use our computer for 90% of the time.
It doesn't seem that the upgrade is worth it for most of us, unless you are doing a lot of rendering and such which isn't going to be that much faster anyways.
It doesn't seem that the upgrade is worth it for most of us, unless you are doing a lot of rendering and such which isn't going to be that much faster anyways.
I was thinking the same after looking at various computer shops. The Core i5 2500k is a dirt cheap CPU clocked at 3.3 ghz, so why not use it?. It must be either heat issues or perhaps that nobody would upgrade to the i7 model.
My greater interest is that it is not even a better binning of the processors. It just relies more on Turbo Boost.
How do you know which model processor these i7 and i5 are?
I'm trying to find the benchmarks over at Tom's Hardware or Anandtech and there are a lot more sandy bridge cpu's than I thought?
Can someone verify I'm looking at this right?
Ex:
Apple:
2.7GHz Core i5 -> 2500S
2.8GHz Core i7 -> 2600S
3.1GHz Core i5 -> 2400
3.4GHz Core i7 -> 2600
Correct? No?
I'm trying to find the benchmarks over at Tom's Hardware or Anandtech and there are a lot more sandy bridge cpu's than I thought?
Can someone verify I'm looking at this right?
Ex:
Apple:
2.7GHz Core i5 -> 2500S
2.8GHz Core i7 -> 2600S
3.1GHz Core i5 -> 2400
3.4GHz Core i7 -> 2600
Correct? No?
How does it rely more on turbo boost? Because it turbo boosts higher than the 3.1? It is still a sandy bridge quad core that uses less power for most all everyday tasks and can tackle those tasks better or equal to the 3.1 due to it's ability to overclock the 3.1.
Lower base clock with higher Turbo bins with no significant benefit in the power reduction at idle or load. Perhaps it might be a little too hard to read my previous link.
Completely irrelevant. Get a Llano and report back to me about everyday tasks nonsense.
So I plan on using it for gaming as well as my everyday tasks (web, photoshop, dreamweaver, etc) and I am kind of confused.
The 3.1 with the 6970, the 3.4 i7 with the 6970 or the 2.7 with the 6770?
The 3.1 with the 6970, the 3.4 i7 with the 6970 or the 2.7 with the 6770?
Im in the same boat. I was thinking the low-end 27 first but i would really like someone who is more read up on the subject to give their opinion, (for me its standing between a normal high-27 or low-27).
It is all about the GPU. The HD 6850 is the bare minimum but you have to cough up US$1,999 for it.
How is it irrelevant? 90% of the programs we use don't take advantage of a quad core so having the ability to boost to 3.7ghz for 2 cores means something. Not to mention, the decrease in power/heat when not using turbo boost.
As far as your link...I did read it. It was referring to a different processor, and didn't shed much light on the subject.
If you want to spend more for a minimal benefit at quad core tasks and no benefits in normal tasks....go ahead.
What would you say about the difference in the two models gpu's? Im basically moving up from a pc that gets beat by my mid -09 macbook pro high-13". If the GPU is what matters in this case when choosing between the models it better be a damn good upgrade
HD 5770 vs. HD 6850What would you say about the difference in the two models gpu's? Im basically moving up from a pc that gets beat by my mid -09 macbook pro high-13". If the GPU is what matters in this case when choosing between the models it better be a damn good upgrade
Have at it.
http://ark.intel.com/Compare.aspx?ids=52215,52211,
From what I see, it's the clock speed difference as well as 4 threads for the i5 and 8 threads for the i7 (the old Hyperthreading deal of the Pentium days).
I don't know that you will get much difference with the thread difference unless you are using a program that executes using all cores in 64 bit. Something like the new Final Cut, you may see a difference.
From what I see, it's the clock speed difference as well as 4 threads for the i5 and 8 threads for the i7 (the old Hyperthreading deal of the Pentium days).
I don't know that you will get much difference with the thread difference unless you are using a program that executes using all cores in 64 bit. Something like the new Final Cut, you may see a difference.
I am confused now
(srry bout that). But isnt the gpu's 6770 (low end 27) vs 6970(high end 27)?
That would be the HD 6570 and HD 6850 on the desktop side.I am confused now