More cores vs. higher clock speed?

[Parabola]

If you had a choice between 2 CPU's, say the i7-3612QM (4 cores-2.1 GHz) and the i7-3520M(2 cores-2.9 GHz) ; which one would you choose? Which is more important for a computer that would be used, among other things, for gaming and video editing?

[---TK---]

more cores

[Extraordinary]

More cores > Overclock

[lehtv]

In this case, more cores. But if I had to choose between low clock hexa/octo and high clock quad, definitely a high clock quad

[Corrupt^]

Whatever you do, nowadays it's best to get at least a quadcore. I remember someone from Valve actually said that a performance increase is most noticable (when implemented correctly) in steps of 4 cores. So basically the advantage of a hexa over a quad is only marginal but octo when the application allows it, could again offer a decent increase over quad.

[Pill Monster]

Video editing more cores. A quad core is a bit more future proofed as well.

Is the lesser of 2 evils tho since the dual core will perform better in lightly threaded workloads (read: many games).

[DSparil]

^ I pretty much agree with the lot of them as more than a dual core is the way forward. More and more multi-threaded software (Windows 8 further improved) is coming to fruition and its only a short matter of time until a quad becomes the recommended minimum standard, as dual core once was.

[Parabola]

I see, but i remember reading somewhere that applications have to be specifically coded to use multiple cores, whereas clock speed affects all applications(obviously). Is this true..? And suppose you had a choice between between i7-3930K (6 cores-3.2 GHz) and i7-3820(4 cores-3.6GHz) then..?

[Parabola]

Hey anyone knows where i can get the benchmarks for CPUs..?

[Pill Monster]

I see, but i remember reading somewhere that applications have to be specifically coded to use multiple cores, whereas clock speed affects all applications(obviously). Is this true..? And suppose you had a choice between between i7-3930K (6 cores-3.2 GHz) and i7-3820(4 cores-3.6GHz) then..?

Is this a hypothetical question? The 3820.

Originally Posted by Parabola

Hey anyone knows where i can get the benchmarks for CPUs..?

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU/2

[---TK---]

Originally Posted by Parabola

I see, but i remember reading somewhere that applications have to be specifically coded to use multiple cores, whereas clock speed affects all applications(obviously). Is this true..? And suppose you had a choice between between i7-3930K (6 cores-3.2 GHz) and i7-3820(4 cores-3.6GHz) then..?

I would take the 3930k and overclock it. if I was going socket 2011, that would be my only choice, a 6 core chip.

[Parabola]

Originally Posted by Pill Monster

Is this a hypothetical question? The 3820.

Yes it is a hypothetical question in the sense that i am not really gonna get an i7, most probably an i5/ top-of-the-line i3.

Thanks for the link.

[Parabola]

Originally Posted by ---TK---

I would take the 3930k and overclock it. if I was going socket 2011, that would be my only choice, a 6 core chip.

I could, but i have never overclocked before, and really have a no idea. Anyways this PC is not for me, it is meant for a guy who is a novice user and needs stability more than anything, thats why i am not willing to experiment with anything.

BTW, these CPUs should be compatible with LGA 1155, right?

[thatguy91]

Parabola was asking about a comparison between notebook/laptop processors, so why mention a high end desktop part?

In saying that, I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the obvious caveat of either of those processors, in that they are, like I said, laptop/notebook CPU's. If you really want to be doing video processing and gaming, a desktop computer would be a much better option, and say an i5-3570K.

In all honesty, neither of those processors are ideal for video editing or gaming, because their main focus is on battery life. On top of that, for gaming you have to consider the GPU as well. It should also be pointed out that mobile processors and GPU's are not the equivalent of desktop parts, an i7-3612QM is simply not as good as an i5-3570k, despite being an i7, and despite having a higher model number (3612 vs 3570). The same goes for GPU's. Also a decentish laptop/notebook costs most than it's desktop equivalent. The gap increases the higher in performance you go.

If you get a laptop/notebook that does have a fast processor and GPU, you can only really do gaming or heavy processing on mains power, and on top of that you have to be a little conscious of the laptops temperature. CPU's may have thermal protection, but the rest of the motherboards components, RAM, HDD's etc don't, and heat can kill these components. Sure you can play games of laptops/notebooks, but they're not a gaming platform. By gaming I mean heavy gaming (Battlefield 3 etc), not playing Solitaire or Minesweeper.

You would be surprised the number of people who buy a laptop and never ever move it from the desk. If they do move it from the desk, it would be for younger people to put it on their bed to watch videos or use Facebook etc (with the bedding blocking the ventilation holes!). I go by the principle that if you must buy a laptop, use it as a laptop! (portability). If you want to do any gaming or video processing etc, get a proper desktop and use that instead

I stand by my argument that there is no such thing as a 'gaming laptop', there are only laptops that can play games, despite what marketing etc companies try and claim.

[---TK---]

Because he asked the question in post 8. He asked the question about a 3930k and 3820.

[thatguy91]

Originally Posted by ---TK---

Because he asked the question in post 8. He asked the question about a 3930k and 3820.

Oops, too true! I guess Parabola got mixed up between laptop and desktop processors initially.

[sykozis]

I don't accept the idea that laptops should only be bought if you need something mobile. My wife has a laptop...and it hasn't seen a desk yet. It also doesn't leave the house. I could have built her a comparable desktop, but it wouldn't have been feasible to do so. We live in a small house and don't have room for a second desk. In fact, we barely have room for my small desk. Houses like mine are the perfect argument for laptops and tablets if they can meet your needs.

For video editing, more cores is almost always better. For gaming, it depends on the game. Some games like higher clocks, some more cores, some games are more dependent on the graphics card. Without buying a high-end laptop, it's nearly impossible to get a laptop that will meet that kind of criteria successfully.

[lehtv]

Originally Posted by Parabola

BTW, these CPUs should be compatible with LGA 1155, right?

No, 3820 and 3930K are not LGA1155 CPUs

[Sever]

Originally Posted by thatguy91

Parabola was asking about a comparison between notebook/laptop processors, so why mention a high end desktop part?

In saying that, I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the obvious caveat of either of those processors, in that they are, like I said, laptop/notebook CPU's. If you really want to be doing video processing and gaming, a desktop computer would be a much better option, and say an i5-3570K.

In all honesty, neither of those processors are ideal for video editing or gaming, because their main focus is on battery life. On top of that, for gaming you have to consider the GPU as well. It should also be pointed out that mobile processors and GPU's are not the equivalent of desktop parts, an i7-3612QM is simply not as good as an i5-3570k, despite being an i7, and despite having a higher model number (3612 vs 3570). The same goes for GPU's. Also a decentish laptop/notebook costs most than it's desktop equivalent. The gap increases the higher in performance you go.

If you get a laptop/notebook that does have a fast processor and GPU, you can only really do gaming or heavy processing on mains power, and on top of that you have to be a little conscious of the laptops temperature. CPU's may have thermal protection, but the rest of the motherboards components, RAM, HDD's etc don't, and heat can kill these components. Sure you can play games of laptops/notebooks, but they're not a gaming platform. By gaming I mean heavy gaming (Battlefield 3 etc), not playing Solitaire or Minesweeper.

You would be surprised the number of people who buy a laptop and never ever move it from the desk. If they do move it from the desk, it would be for younger people to put it on their bed to watch videos or use Facebook etc (with the bedding blocking the ventilation holes!). I go by the principle that if you must buy a laptop, use it as a laptop! (portability). If you want to do any gaming or video processing etc, get a proper desktop and use that instead

I stand by my argument that there is no such thing as a 'gaming laptop', there are only laptops that can play games, despite what marketing etc companies try and claim.

mobile GPUs are catching up, have you seen the new nvidia 680m?

http://www.geforce.com/hardware/note...specifications

1344 kepler cuda cores running at 720mhz paired with gddr5 at 1800mhz on a 256bit bus. sure, the memory bandwidth holds it back a bit, but it definitely does more than keep up with most desktop GPUs.

and mobile CPUs are decent enough for video editing. my first experience with editing on laptops was with a pentium 4 laptop way back when, and it was still doable to the point where my edited video won a competition. nowadays, quad core laptops have a decent amount of grunt and arent too bad for video editing. most of the newer video editing programs support the use of CUDA for rendering and realtime previews, so you'll be able to edit in real time as you would on a desktop PC. sure, the final rendering/encode might take longer than a beefy desktop, but if portability is what theyre after then its not too bad of a compromise.

@Parabola - 3820, 3930k and 3960x are socket 2011 CPUs. they are NOT compatible with socket 1155. with socket 1155, the fastest CPUs you can get are the 3570k and 3770k at the present point in time (excluding xeons).

[Parabola]

Guys i don't know what happened. I mean i went to the intel processor site and specifically selected the desktop tab. http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/...select=desktop

Leave it anyways, here are some processors that i am actually interested in purchasing-
http://www.flipkart.com/intel-3-3-gh...4-048a83352a3b

http://www.flipkart.com/intel-3-2-gh...4-048a83352a3b

http://www.flipkart.com/intel-core-i...4-048a83352a3b


I feel the third one(i5-3210) would be good, but i need your opinion.

[thatguy91]

Not all those processors are the same. The second one is actually the older socket 1156 processor, they are now superseded by 2 newer generations (Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge). Don't be fooled by the price

The other two processors are Sandy Bridge processors, with the third one you listed being the best of the two.

[Parabola]

Originally Posted by thatguy91

Not all those processors are the same. The second one is actually the older socket 1156 processor, they are now superseded by 2 newer generations (Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge). Don't be fooled by the price

The other two processors are Sandy Bridge processors, with the third one you listed being the best of the two.

My bad.. I guess i need to pay more attention to specs.

One last thing- Can you guys help me choose a good cooler from this page-

http://www.flipkart.com/computers/co...8-ec2e05611d55

[EspHack]

more cores, of course, you can most likely overclock them

[Parabola]

I actually need two coolers- one for this new PC(LGA 1155) and one for my old one(LGA 775).
I have absolutely no experience in purchasing coolers, that's why i need help.
I think the coolermaster Hyper 212 EVO would be good, but its a bit costly. What do you people think?

[lehtv]

212 EVO isn't costly, it's one of the cheapest coolers availabel in the link you provided. It's good also, go for it