View Full Version : i3 vs i5

20-11-2010, 07:47 AM


These are the specks for the i5 and i3 and I can't figure out why the i5 is $50 more or why would anyone spend $50 more so is there something here I'm not seeing or understanding?

20-11-2010, 09:13 AM
i3 is more of a fast dual core, i5 will be a dual core with hyper threading. i7 is quad core with hyper threading.
i5 did used to be a quad core without hyper threading enabled, but they took the space from two cores, enabled hyper threading on the remaining ones and then stuck a GPU on the die where the other two cores would have gone.

Or something like that, anyway.

20-11-2010, 10:53 AM
These are clarkdale processors, dual core with inbuilt graphics...
Here is the comparison.....
The i5 has turbo technology which means it will automatically clock to higher speeds if an application doesnt use both its cores, it also has HT which is like extra logical processors, so it will process 4 threads at a time instead of 2 of the i3....I would go for the i5 if it were me buying

20-11-2010, 11:54 AM
In short... i5 600's definitely don't worth the extra money, IMHO. Both are dual core with Hyperthreading.

i5 600's has Turbo Boost and a higher Integrated Graphics clock. So that's what makes it more expensive, and according to Intel, "Premium HTPC". I'd be seriously curious if anyone buys an i5 600.

20-11-2010, 12:38 PM
The i3 does not have ht in the 600 series, check the comparison, the graphiccores are the same speed

20-11-2010, 12:40 PM
Oops, wrong, both do ht

20-11-2010, 05:27 PM

i3 and i5 have SAME frequency on integrated graphics; my bad. Only i5 661 has higher specs.

So, Clarkdale i5's are more or less redundant. Especially with pressure from Sandy Bridge.