intel i5 or i7

[dichro1]

I need to upgrade to a better desktop. I am not a gamer, but I am big in Photoshop and related work. I see great recommendations for i7 for gamers, but the descriptions are not exactly clear.

The question is, should the i5 processor be fast and power enough? Is 8gb RAM enough? I probably will run Win 7 64.

 

[BugMeister]

this article has some info on the differences..
Core i5 vs. Core i7: Differences Between Intel's i5 and i7 Processors


- personally, given the choice, I'd opt for the i7..

 

[whs]

If you need processing power like for e.g. video encoding, then the i7 is a better bet. But for normal processing, the i5 should be fine. And 8GB of RAM will be ample. Half of it will be unused most of the time.

 

[Dude]

for your needs, go with an i7

 

[kbrady1979]

For the kind of work you mentioned, I would opt for an i7 and 16GB of RAM. In editing/rendering, you can easily use up 8GB of RAM.

 

[whs]

I don't know about the 16GB of RAM. My 8GBs are already unused most of the time.

 

[kbrady1979]

I rarely use more than 4GB of RAM as well, but I know how intensive PS and rendering/editing can be, and I'd rather have it and not need it, than need it and not have it.

 

[whs]

Fair, if you can afford it.

 

[essenbe]

I tend to agree with kbrady. I agree because of the video editing and encoding. For those, the more cores, threads and ram, the better. For normal usage, even games, 8 GB and an i5 would be plenty. I know I use Handbrake to encode movies. It is the only program I have used that pegs my i7-3770K and eats ram too. An i5 and 8 GB of ram would still encode the movies with Handbrake, but it would take a lot longer to do it. Is it worth the extra? I assume it depends on if you have the money and how much of that type work you do.

 

[TVeblen]

Also: check to see if your photo/video editing programs are designed to use multiple cores. High end programs like Avid will use as many cores as you got. Some older consumer grade programs do not manage the cores at all.

If your program uses more cores, than the more cores you got makes a huge difference in rendering and compiling speed.

 

[ignatzatsonic]

Google "advantages of hyper-threading" and see if the reasons apply to you. The i5 lacks hyper-threading. If my applications could take advantage of hyper-threading, I'd go with i7 in your situation unless budget was a major consideration.

On the other hand, you may do something that can take advantage of hyper-threading only 2 hours a month--in which case maybe it isn't worth the premium. At 2 hours a day or 2 hours a week, maybe it is worthwhile. Purely a personal decision.

 

[3D Jed]

re hyperthreading - I did a Cinebench test on an old i7 930 (8GB 3.8GHz) with HT on and off recently. The results surprised me. I found HT only gave about 26% boost (I expected more). Results were 6.47 and 5.13 respectively. I know most people don't use Cinema 4D, but Cinebench is considered a good benchmark for video render software that uses all threads. See snip (cpu would show all cores @ 100% during render test) - your mileage may vary, as they say

 

[whs]

I always check in Resource Monitor > CPU tab. The graphs on the right side show you very well which cores are busy.

 

[ShamrockRig]

A top I5 will still do the job greatly...Whichever is cheaper, And most cost effective then go for that one!

 

[whs]

A top I5 will still do the job greatly...Whichever is cheaper, And most cost effective then go for that one!

I agree, unless you want to encode videos day and night. There the i7 really makes a difference.

I have made a test encoding a video on my i5 (laptop) versus my i7 (desktop). There is a significant difference. It should be said though that a top desktop i5 would be faster than my laptop i5.

 

[ShamrockRig]

Also got to remember that a top I5 Will be better than some of the i7's as well.

 

[Mellon Head]

re hyperthreading - I did a Cinebench test on an old i7 930 (8GB 3.8GHz) with HT on and off recently. The results surprised me. I found HT only gave about 26% boost (I expected more). Results were 6.47 and 5.13 respectively.

A 26% boost is still significant, though. That cuts every minute of rendering down to 44 seconds.

 

[jimroad471]

if you are like any normal person, you may wish you got the I7. in my experience, I sometimes opt for the practical and I regret not getting the faster hardware. sounds like you're gonna do the install. if so, what thermal paste you gonna use? anyway...keep us posted
jim