| Author |
Message |
greg_mitch
Joined: 03 May 2006
Posts: 5320
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 09, 2011 8:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Spanky Ham wrote: | I don't care about the naming. It is confusing, but I end up looking at the socket number. The bigger issue for me is that you can't use the IGP on a P67 mobo. All of the combos have P67 mobos. I want to use the IGP for everyday computing and throw in a card when I want to play a game.
My best friend and I had this argument the other day. How many people are gamers? I didn't specify, but I was talking about real gamers. My guess is that gamers make up about five percent of the market. He thinks it is more like twenty five percent. |
Which is better for media encoding?
Overclocking the CPU (P67) or overclocking the integrated graphics (H67)?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Spanky Ham
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 5643
Location: Comedy Central
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 09, 2011 8:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
It is moot, since you can only use the IGP on the H67.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WanMan
Joined: 19 Mar 2006
Posts: 10270
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 09, 2011 9:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Do you actually use the GPU for encoding media?
BTW, even at 25% for gamers it means initial focus is on the majority, not the minority. What does bother me is that the one and only PC I built using the Core i CPU on the 1156 motherboard was no better running 64-bit W7 than a C2D (or dual core) running 32-bit XP on a 775 motherboard.
At that point in my observations for the typical usage there wasn't any reason to buy into the Core processors. I have to wonder if the same is going to be said no. I haven't been a computer gamer in ~7 years, I do no media encoding, etc. so what benefit are the newer technologies over the LGA775 and dual-core/C2D? None.*
* Probably only a benefit if I chose W7 over XP.
_________________
Trust no one. Absolutely no one. Advice of the board.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
greg_mitch
Joined: 03 May 2006
Posts: 5320
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 09, 2011 9:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Spanky Ham wrote: | | It is moot, since you can only use the IGP on the H67. |
That is my question.
Which is better for media encoding...P67 or H67?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spanky Ham
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 5643
Location: Comedy Central
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 09, 2011 11:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Wan,
You are correct. If you aren't doing anything that takes advantage of the CPU then it isn't worth it. For me, the turbo boost should be nice for general computing. I will probably fold and not buy it. AMDs response will be weak, but cheap.
Greg,
It is the GPU, hence the need for a H67.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
greg_mitch
Joined: 03 May 2006
Posts: 5320
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 10, 2011 1:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Spanky Ham wrote: | Wan,
You are correct. If you aren't doing anything that takes advantage of the CPU then it isn't worth it. For me, the turbo boost should be nice for general computing. I will probably fold and not buy it. AMDs response will be weak, but cheap.
Greg,
It is the GPU, hence the need for a H67. |
Somehow we are crossing wires here.
I am asking which is more beneficial to media encoding (converting h.264 down to a DVD).
1. Core i7-2600k overclocked on a P67 mobo and discrete GPU (ATI 5850)
or
2. Core i7-2600k on H67 mobo with overclocked graphics?
I couldn't tell if the Intel Quick Sync only worked on the H67 board or not.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spanky Ham
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 5643
Location: Comedy Central
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
greg_mitch
Joined: 03 May 2006
Posts: 5320
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 10, 2011 2:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
That is what I needed. That is too bad. The H67 boards I have seen are dedicated to mATX form factor. Plus the software limitation is pretty great (only integrated into two products so far?).
Hopefully more will be ready when I have the time and money to build my new system.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spanky Ham
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 5643
Location: Comedy Central
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 10, 2011 2:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah tell me about it Greg. There are only TWO boards available. One is an Intel and the other is a Gigabyte. The Gigabyte one does look pretty good though.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128461
It really sucks that they don't have switchable graphics on the desktop. I guess I would just plug a discrete card in when I wanted to game. I think I am going to ask my mom if she is going by Microcenter this week. Hopefully she isn't, but if she is then I may have to have her buy me the combo.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
greg_mitch
Joined: 03 May 2006
Posts: 5320
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spanky Ham
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 5643
Location: Comedy Central
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Those are all mATX. There are only two ATX that I see. Hopefully more will come along.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WanMan
Joined: 19 Mar 2006
Posts: 10270
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 10, 2011 12:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ok, I'm guessing I'll continue to not know.
_________________
Trust no one. Absolutely no one. Advice of the board.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spanky Ham
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 5643
Location: Comedy Central
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 10, 2011 3:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Not sure what you are asking, Wan. Was it your first question of do you use the GPU for media encoding? If that is a general question, then yes SB uses the GPU for media encoding. If you are asking me specifically, then no I haven't done any media encoding. I do have a bunch of VHS tapes that I would like to transcode. My best friend asked me that question yesterday and which I did more of gaming or transcoding. I tried to get across to him that I really do neither. He was trying to imply that I would do more gaming. The fact is that this would be an everyday computer for surfing, HTPC, gaming, and encoding (in that order). For the insane people like Videograbber, SB is great. One could actually watch five HD streams at once or I assume record. Anand didn't elaborate, but it looks promising.
As for your experience, that is obviously not a fair comparison. XP uses a lot less resources than 7, which you know. I am sure there is a point of diminishing returns. I doubt XP could get to much faster on todays hardware. I have no idea about Win 7. To me, the ideal would be to run the OS in RAM. At that point, speed would never be an issue.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WanMan
Joined: 19 Mar 2006
Posts: 10270
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 10, 2011 10:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I asked if the GPU is actually the card handling video encoding vs. the CPU actually doing it. I understand if one already had encoded material that needed to be displayed the GPU would be there, but I wasn't sure if for the purpose of encoding new material it was.
Then again I have to remind myself we are talking architecture for Core processors and IGP. So, my ignorance might be moot.
_________________
Trust no one. Absolutely no one. Advice of the board.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spanky Ham
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 5643
Location: Comedy Central
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 10, 2011 10:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I am pretty sure the IGP is handling everything, but it is probably confusing since the the GPU is part of the CPU which makes an APU.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WanMan
Joined: 19 Mar 2006
Posts: 10270
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 11, 2011 2:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Did you hear about the NVidia+Intel shotgun wedding? $1.5 Billion in portfolio licensing in which Intel has complete access to NVidia IP, and NVidia has limited access to Intel's IP?
Some are already suggesting we'll see dies with Intel cores and NVidia GPUs.
_________________
Trust no one. Absolutely no one. Advice of the board.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
greg_mitch
Joined: 03 May 2006
Posts: 5320
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 11, 2011 2:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| WanMan wrote: | Did you hear about the NVidia+Intel shotgun wedding? $1.5 Billion in portfolio licensing in which Intel has complete access to NVidia IP, and NVidia has limited access to Intel's IP?
Some are already suggesting we'll see dies with Intel cores and NVidia GPUs. |
Anti trust?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WanMan
Joined: 19 Mar 2006
Posts: 10270
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 11, 2011 3:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Why should this be any more of an antitrust concern than when AMD acquired ATI? In fact, I would think it would be less of a concern. Still, when an offer that can't be refused is on the table ...
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
73.93 KB |
| Viewed: |
11755 Time(s) |
|
_________________
Trust no one. Absolutely no one. Advice of the board.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
greg_mitch
Joined: 03 May 2006
Posts: 5320
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 11, 2011 4:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| WanMan wrote: | | Why should this be any more of an antitrust concern than when AMD acquired ATI? In fact, I would think it would be less of a concern. Still, when an offer that can't be refused is on the table ... |
It isn't...I thought that was crazy as well.
I wish there was more competition in CPU and graphics...even more so that they are all blending together.
So is Intel involved in the Denver project??
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spanky Ham
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 5643
Location: Comedy Central
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 11, 2011 5:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
I just read the Anand article and Intel won't be making GPUs with Nvidia. As for Denver, it is all based on cross licensing.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
