The i5 and i7 are basically the same except the i7 supports hyperthreading. The i7 also has 8mb cache while the i5 has 6mb. However, gaming benchmarks have shown that the i5 performs equally to the i7, and in some cases even faster.

 

The ONLY time where i7 CPUs will be significantly faster is in use of hyperthreaded applications like video rendering software, for example.

 

If your only use of the PC is for gaming (FSX etc) the i7 is a waste of money. A lot of people who overclock their i7s actually *disable* the hyperthreading feature, which completely destroys the point of owning one.

The i5 and i7 are basically the same except the i7 supports hyperthreading. The i7 also has 8mb cache while the i5 has 6mb. However, gaming benchmarks have shown that the i5 performs equally to the i7, and in some cases even faster.

 

The ONLY time where i7 CPUs will be significantly faster is in use of hyperthreaded applications like video rendering software, for example.

 

If your only use of the PC is for gaming (FSX etc) the i7 is a waste of money. A lot of people who overclock their i7s actually *disable* the hyperthreading feature, which completely destroys the point of owning one.

 

exactly, this sums it up perfectly. I was writing pretty much the same thing LOL

Okay, but do you still need the latest and greatest hardware to play a game from 2006? I don't think so. That's like buying an Alienware to play Quake 1. Yes, I do know that with addons it does get heavy, but even some crappy AMD can do the job fine.

 

Not only do you need the fastest hardware you can buy, but you have to run it outside factory specifications (overclock) to run it well with complex add-ons and reasonably high settings. Case in point: I recently upgraded a PC for a customer of mine which ran an i7 930 overclocked to 4.4GHz with a GRX 580. Flying in Orbx areas with complex planes and high settings it simply was a stuttering mess. An upgrade to Z77 and a 3570k overclocked to 4.6GHz with some fast RAM quickly sorted the problem, and he now flies happily wherever, in whatever, and with settings cranked way up.

 

I don't know where you've developed the opinion that you have, but it is quite mistaken. Oh that I wish it were not so, then my super expensive PC would simply be unnecessary and I could've saved myself lots of money!

In fact, I believe he made it several months ago so it's based on rather outdated info as well. Further testing has occurred since that time, demonstrating that Ivy Bridge is in fact faster than Sandy Bridge once you overcome the heat problem.

 

Faster, but by how much, that is the question. Take a good SB running in the 4.6 range or so, w/ fast ram w/ great timings, an SSD, fast GPU, etc. Now compare this configuration against IB. What do the benchmarks saying for FSX? 5% bump 10%? More?

7% at the same clock speed and for the same cost. Why not get the newer stuff?

Okay, but do you still need the latest and greatest hardware to play a game from 2006? I don't think so. That's like buying an Alienware to play Quake 1. Yes, I do know that with addons it does get heavy, but even some crappy AMD can do the job fine.

 

Diego-

 

These assumptions that because the game is 6 years old are completely false. This is serious misinformation and could potentially drastically sway someone's buying descisions. I would be more careful next time before making such an audacious claim.

7% at the same clock speed and for the same cost. Why not get the newer stuff?

 

+1 I've let go of SB. Lower OC on IB with fast RAM is the best route IMO.

 

To the OP:

 

Best Budget Build:

Intel Core i5 3570K

ASUS P8Z77-V

8GB DDR3 2400

Corsair H100

Corsair AX650 PSU

GTX 660Ti

128GB SSD For FSX

1TB Caviar Black for Windows and apps

Diego-

 

These assumptions that because the game is 6 years old are completely false. This is serious misinformation and could potentially drastically sway someone's buying descisions. I would be more careful next time before making such an audacious claim.

Too many big words.

too many big words.

 

Maybe thats why you should be careful with advice to other folks? ;)

 

Your earlier post about why he does not need the latest and the greatest to run old game is actually capricious IMO. It really bothers me that someone would actually give others silly advice

 

You acknowledged that the IB "crap" (Sic) is only $10 more and then you seem to acknowledge Max's comment that IB is actually better than SB. Then you go one to say that he still needs to get the slower setup because older games don't need faster setup?

 

A is faster than B. A costs the same as B. But get B?

 

 

 

Manny

Maybe thats why you should be careful with advice to other folks? ;)

 

Your earlier post about why he does not need the latest and the greatest to run old game is actually capricious IMO. It really bothers me that someone would actually give others silly advice

 

You acknowledged that the IB "crap" (Sic) is only $10 more and then you seem to acknowledge Max's comment that IB is actually better than SB. Then you go one to say that he still needs to get the slower setup because older games don't need faster setup?

 

A is faster than B. A costs the same as B. But get B?

 

 

 

Manny

I wasn't giving advice. I was giving my opinion. Although I have spent $1,000+ to get FSX to run properly, I just, at the end of the day, don't think it's really worth it for a 6 year old game.

Too many big words.

Diego, forget the fact that they are big words and try to understand their meaning.

 

There is a very small margin between giving an opinion and giving advice, and i think you confused it.

I try to give the appropriate relative value to everyone who posts an opinion or attempts to give advice. Regardless in about 4 days I'll be able to form my own opinion about who is right, who is wrong, and who split the fence.

 

I'm upgrading from an AMD 965 Deneb with mediocre ram ( a budget build before I "rediscovered" Flight Simulation ) to a 3570K with blazing fast ram. Everything I've read tells me this should be THE ticket. I hope ... hope ... hope

I try to give the appropriate relative value to everyone who posts an opinion or attempts to give advice. Regardless in about 4 days I'll be able to form my own opinion about who is right, who is wrong, and who split the fence.

 

I'm upgrading from an AMD 965 Deneb with mediocre ram ( a budget build before I "rediscovered" Flight Simulation ) to a 3570K with blazing fast ram. Everything I've read tells me this should be THE ticket. I hope ... hope ... hope

 

I recently upgraded from a 955BE with 4G DDR2 to an i3470 with 8G DDR3 ram, i dis notice improvements, for example, at Aerosoft LFPG i used to get 15fps down to 10 in heavy areas, now i get 30fps down to 16fps in heavy areas.

 

I did notice that i am getting a stutter though, it only happens when panning around for a split second, but i put it down to my new rig loading a hell of a lot and having to catch up quickly when i pan around. Not a show stopper, it is probably just my rig, but good luck with it, you have a better processor, so fun times ahead!