When I finally upgrade I'll be looking for a quad-core since I do graphic work. Looks like the $930 is still the best deal. The 655 is pretty sweet though for a dual-core.
Yeah, they seem expensive for what they deliver. If anyone was going to spend £300 on a CPU (or more), they would go for an X58, and clock the i7 930. The 1156 platform doesn't seem the logical place to stick these chips, although I suppose that intel don't want to put people off buying the extreme edition chips.
Good review, so good for OC3D, but weird price/platform of chips from intel.
the conclusion was difficult tbh as there were so many factors to consider. The 875 is cheaper than the 870 but doesnt seem as good. The 655 goes like stink but costs a good chunk more and seems expensive for a dual but it is 32nm.....
I think you've overlooked an important aspect. By overclocking only the multiplier, you are not forced to disable Turbo, enabling you to have an overclocked chip while still maintaining low idle power consumption. This would, at least for me, be an important factor when buying a CPU.
I think you've overlooked an important aspect. By overclocking only the multiplier, you are not forced to disable Turbo, enabling you to have an overclocked chip while still maintaining low idle power consumption. This would, at least for me, be an important factor when buying a CPU.
We overclocked the BCLK too fella as Bus speed is just as important for us, if for no other reason than to show what the cpu has to offer. 99% of overclockers are more interested in a high base clock more than a higher multiplier.
i got my 875k on the cheap....and must have scored a gem. the mem controller on my 875k is an absolute BEAST. my fill rates and latencies even surpass my x58 rig (by a staggering degree)
the 875k does fall pretty short on synthetic CPU benches....but I use it for audio production....in that environment (sample editing) memory speed trumps all....so the 875k does have an interesting little niche