What is a Core i3, Core i5, or Core i7 as Fast As Possible
I love Intel as much as anyone.
They make cool products, they engage
in lots of community
stuff, But man, when it comes to
confusing product naming schemes,
I think Core i3, Core i5,
Core i7 takes the cake.
I mean, great question!
What is a Core i7 479GK?
What the heck does all of this even mean?
We'll get to that.
But first a bit of
background about why we need
product names for processors.
Wouldn't it be simpler to just label them
with how many gigahertz they
run at and call it a day?
Simpler, sort of, but at times
actually even more confusing.
For example, when the Pentium 4 launched
an equivalently clocked Pentium 3
was actually faster because
it could do more work
with each cycle.
As a customer, I would expect the product
with the higher number
to be the better one!
And therein lies the problem.
Not all megahertz and
gigahertz are created equal
and rating products that way
is about like rating
the performance of a car
based on what RPM the engine runs at.
It's not actually a real indication
of how fast the processor is!
But it happened.
Now one of AMD's attempts
to move away from this
started in the early 2000s with their P.R.
or performance rating naming scheme
where they're processors
were given a four digit
model number that enthusiasts believe
was based on the performance
AMD felt that they delivered
compared to an Intel
CPU of that clock speed.
But this fixed nothing.
They were still indirectly
naming according to clock speed,
and it wasn't until Intel
introduced the Core series,
a line of CPUs that
dramatically outperformed
their predecessors at much lower clocks,
that the megahertz war ended
because Intel needed to
shift their marketing
away from frequency.
So here's what we have today.
Other than the very bare
bones Pentium skews,
a Core i3 will be your most basic option
with two processing cores
and hyper-threading,
ore about this feature here,
for better multi-tasking.
It will have a smaller cache,
it'll consume less power,
and it will generally perform
worse than the Core i5,
but it'll cost less.
Which leads us to the Core i5.
I wish I could say it
was as simple as, well,
Core i3s have two cores and
core i5s have four cores.
The number of cores equals N minus one
where N in the number after the little i.
(buzz)
But it's not.
Mobile Core i5s have two
cores and hyper-threading
while desktop ones,
mostly, have four cores
and no hyper-threading.
But what they all have in common
is improved onboard
graphics and turbo boost,
more about this feature here,
for temporary performance enhancements
when your system needs
a little bit more umph.
And with umph in mind, Core i7s.
Number one, all Core
i7s have hyper-threading
for heavy workloads and number two,
that's the noise your brain is gonna make
as I finish my explanation here.
A Core i7 can run anywhere
from two processing cores
in an Ultrabook all the up
to eight in a workstation.
It might support anywhere
from two sticks of memory
all the way to eight and it can have a TDP
all the way from around 10
watts all the way to 130 watts.
So there is a ton of variety here,
and that's for a reason.
Core i7s tend to have more
cache, faster turbo boost,
and better onboard graphics
than the lower tier processors.
And I guess other than that,
the best summary I can give is this.
A Core i7 represents the
best thing Intel could build
for a given use case
with the biggest drawback
being the higher price tag.
So when you boil it down,
that's all the i, whatever
numbers represent.
Good, better, best within a given segment.
Beyond that on their own,
they're pretty much meaningless.
The numbers and letters afterward
sort of mean something if you
use the guide from before.
But the safest way to shop
is to dig around in ARK
and look at the features,
core counts, and clock speeds of the CPUs
you're comparing to figure
out how they stack up,
with the good news being
that as long as you compare
within one brand and within
the same product generation,
those metrics will
actually mean something.
Speaking if mean, Fractal
Design is back buying up
all of my advertising inventory
for the sole purpose of
making me do stupid crap
on camera for y'all
instead of talking about
the great quality and
clean Scandinavian design
of their PC cases, power
supplies, and cooling products.
Mind you, I don't know who
to be mad at this point,
because it was you, not Fractal
who posted, I mean, thanks a lot guys!
I mean, genuinely thanks
for reading, guys.
leave a comment with suggestions or future
fast as possibles and as always,
don't forget to follow
if you haven't already.
They make cool products, they engage
in lots of community
stuff, But man, when it comes to
confusing product naming schemes,
I think Core i3, Core i5,
Core i7 takes the cake.
I mean, great question!
What is a Core i7 479GK?
What the heck does all of this even mean?
We'll get to that.
But first a bit of
background about why we need
product names for processors.
Wouldn't it be simpler to just label them
with how many gigahertz they
run at and call it a day?
Simpler, sort of, but at times
actually even more confusing.
For example, when the Pentium 4 launched
an equivalently clocked Pentium 3
was actually faster because
it could do more work
with each cycle.
As a customer, I would expect the product
with the higher number
to be the better one!
And therein lies the problem.
Not all megahertz and
gigahertz are created equal
and rating products that way
is about like rating
the performance of a car
based on what RPM the engine runs at.
It's not actually a real indication
of how fast the processor is!
But it happened.
Now one of AMD's attempts
to move away from this
started in the early 2000s with their P.R.
or performance rating naming scheme
where they're processors
were given a four digit
model number that enthusiasts believe
was based on the performance
AMD felt that they delivered
compared to an Intel
CPU of that clock speed.
But this fixed nothing.
They were still indirectly
naming according to clock speed,
and it wasn't until Intel
introduced the Core series,
a line of CPUs that
dramatically outperformed
their predecessors at much lower clocks,
that the megahertz war ended
because Intel needed to
shift their marketing
away from frequency.
So here's what we have today.
Other than the very bare
bones Pentium skews,
a Core i3 will be your most basic option
with two processing cores
and hyper-threading,
ore about this feature here,
for better multi-tasking.
It will have a smaller cache,
it'll consume less power,
and it will generally perform
worse than the Core i5,
but it'll cost less.
Which leads us to the Core i5.
I wish I could say it
was as simple as, well,
Core i3s have two cores and
core i5s have four cores.
The number of cores equals N minus one
where N in the number after the little i.
(buzz)
But it's not.
Mobile Core i5s have two
cores and hyper-threading
while desktop ones,
mostly, have four cores
and no hyper-threading.
But what they all have in common
is improved onboard
graphics and turbo boost,
more about this feature here,
for temporary performance enhancements
when your system needs
a little bit more umph.
And with umph in mind, Core i7s.
Number one, all Core
i7s have hyper-threading
for heavy workloads and number two,
that's the noise your brain is gonna make
as I finish my explanation here.
A Core i7 can run anywhere
from two processing cores
in an Ultrabook all the up
to eight in a workstation.
It might support anywhere
from two sticks of memory
all the way to eight and it can have a TDP
all the way from around 10
watts all the way to 130 watts.
So there is a ton of variety here,
and that's for a reason.
Core i7s tend to have more
cache, faster turbo boost,
and better onboard graphics
than the lower tier processors.
And I guess other than that,
the best summary I can give is this.
A Core i7 represents the
best thing Intel could build
for a given use case
with the biggest drawback
being the higher price tag.
So when you boil it down,
that's all the i, whatever
numbers represent.
Good, better, best within a given segment.
Beyond that on their own,
they're pretty much meaningless.
The numbers and letters afterward
sort of mean something if you
use the guide from before.
But the safest way to shop
is to dig around in ARK
and look at the features,
core counts, and clock speeds of the CPUs
you're comparing to figure
out how they stack up,
with the good news being
that as long as you compare
within one brand and within
the same product generation,
those metrics will
actually mean something.
Speaking if mean, Fractal
Design is back buying up
all of my advertising inventory
for the sole purpose of
making me do stupid crap
on camera for y'all
instead of talking about
the great quality and
clean Scandinavian design
of their PC cases, power
supplies, and cooling products.
Mind you, I don't know who
to be mad at this point,
because it was you, not Fractal
who posted, I mean, thanks a lot guys!
I mean, genuinely thanks
for reading, guys.
leave a comment with suggestions or future
fast as possibles and as always,
don't forget to follow
if you haven't already.
Comments
Post a Comment