Intel Core i3, i5, and i7 Explained

[Benoni]

There has been quiet a bit of speculation and mis-information about the new I series Intel cores over the past months. So here are links that should answer any questions you have.

But here is a short summary:

The Core i3 500 series products are dual cores and they do have hyper-threading, but they do not have Turbo Boost
the i3 500 series compairs to low end Core 2 Quads.



The Core i5 600 series products are dual cores which have hyperthreading, Turbo Boost, virtualization, and the AES instruction set. The performance of the Core i5 600 series processors is roughly on par with mid-range Core 2 Quads and high-end Phenom II processors.



The Core i5 700 series processors are quad core processors.

They do NOT have hyperthreading but they do have Turbo Boost and they do support virtualization. Their performance is roughly on par or somewhat better than high end Core 2 Quad and Phenom II processors.


The Core i7 800 series processors are quad cores which include hyper-threading, Turbo Boost, and virtualization. The performance of these processors is among the best of any processor made by Intel or AMD.



The Core i7 900 series processors are quad cores which include hyper-threading, Turbo Boost, and virtualization

These are the fastest processors Intel has available and they include an unlocked multiplier which allows for easier overclocking.

All Core i7 900 series processors use the LGA1366 socket. This is only found on motherboards using the X58 chipset.


Core i3 vs i5 vs i7: A Summary of Intel Processors

Core i3 vs i5 : Whats the difference


Core i5 vs i7 : Whats the difference


Champion vs Rookie: Core 2 Duo vs Core i3 : Laptops


Mobile Core i3 vs i5 vs i7: Showdown In Your Laptop

[John_Toolbox]

In a nutshell, the names don't mean $h!t!!!

The i series are probably the most confusing naming convention ever known to intel processors. How's that for irony.

[Benoni]

Originally Posted by John_Toolbox

In a nutshell, the names don't mean $h!t!!! .

pretty much

Originally Posted by John_Toolbox

How's that for irony.

i see what you did there

[John_Toolbox]

Seriously for once though, the big difference between i7-900 series and i7-800 is the triple channel vs dual channel memory. My experience, and the reports from the nerd websites suggest that you aren't going to be able to notice the performance difference of triple channel, but it's a significant point that x58 motherboards typically have 6 ram slots(2 banks of 3) while the dual channel boards that accomodate i7-800 series only have 4(2 banks of 2). This is, if you have the money, a potential for 24GB of RAM vs. 16GB RAM. If you aren't into VI's, carry on. But for building a slave PC for VI's, X58/i7-900 series is the way to go.

[Benoni]

Originally Posted by John_Toolbox

Seriously for once though, the big difference between i7-900 series and i7-800 is the triple channel vs dual channel memory. My experience, and the reports from the nerd websites suggest that you aren't going to be able to notice the performance difference of triple channel, but it's a significant point that x58 motherboards typically have 6 ram slots(2 banks of 3) while the dual channel boards that accomodate i7-800 series only have 4(2 banks of 2). This is, if you have the money, a potential for 24GB of RAM vs. 16GB RAM. If you aren't into VI's, carry on. But for building a slave PC for VI's, X58/i7-900 series is the way to go.

oh i agree the i7 9xx would be the way to go if you got the dough. And while 24 GB's of ram is not really an issue at this point in Pro Tools since its just a 32 bit app and can only access 4GB max in a 64 bit OS, this may come in to play for LARGE projects down the road when PT is 64 bit. Or if you are using Rewire.

Although i dont know anyone who has needed 16GB's of ram for a session, I image you would run out or processing power before you hit 16GB's used. If you know someone that needs 16GB's of Ram for Pro Tools, id love to see a snapshot of that session.


Id like Avid to comment about the integrated video processor on some of the I series chips. Even though it is integrated on the CPU, it is said to be a separate process.... so would that be "approved" as a dedicated video processor?