Your views on Ultra power CPU's

[kio_http]

CPU's like Intel CORE i7 and AMD PHENOM II cost a lot compared to others and are very powerful. They are way above the system requirements of even the biggest Windows games. So apart from Server computers what's the real need for them?

[The Real Dave]

For the reason there's a need for a 1000bHP Koenigsegg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koenigsegg_CCX#CCXR) :)

Seriously, I'd say virtualisation and photo/video editing. Stuff like that takes a lot of power, so its nice to have it :) I'm just waiting to see a server with Quad i7's become obsolete :)

[kio_http]

For the reason there's a need for a 1000bHP Koenigsegg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koenigsegg_CCX#CCXR) :)

Seriously, I'd say visualization and photo/video editing. Stuff like that takes a lot of power, so its nice to have it :) I'm just waiting to see a server with Quad i7's become obsolete :)

Core i7 is used in Desktop PC's whose motherboards animation creation capacity is more than an ordinary user could do.

Intel Xeon is a server CPU. Servers need power for doing such stuff. Desktops on the other hand need a good graphic card, ram but even a Pentium 4 is capable of running big games.

With Linux you system requirements become even less.

With

[blueshiftoverwatch]

I built my computer with high end parts (like the Phenom II X4 965) because I want it to last me a long time before I have to build a new one, at least six years but hopefully more. I don't want to be swapping out parts every few years as new and better things come along. I want a system that I can build and than not have to worry about for a long time.

[LowSky]

I built my computer with high end parts (like the Phenom II X4 965) because I want it to last me a long time before I have to build a new one, at least six years but hopefully more. I don't want to be swapping out parts every few as new and better things come along.

I swap out parts every two years. usually I change the Processor or the Video card first, usually the case and hard drives are the last to change.

[Ji Ruo]

even a Pentium 4 is capable of running big games.

I am using a P4 at the moment. It's fine if you want to play games that are 3+ years old. Anything newer usually has a severe performance penalty if it plays at all. As soon as I get tired of playing older games I am going to have to upgrade (AMD 955 BE FTW).

With regard to the OP - CPUs like the 6 core i7 will have the potential to do some multimedia tasks etc. 50-100% faster than anything else available in the desktop market. So for a certain section of the market paying $1000+ for a processor will be desirable, or even cost effective when considering the time it will save them.

I'm sure there's also people who will buy it because it's the most expensive available.

[00ber n00b]

Future proofing and because its super fast...even if its only by the slightest margins, its still faster.

[underquark]

If you routinely opt for the second-fastest available processor you will, in all likelihood, have the fastest machine on the block and have spent half as much as you would have needed to to get the absolute fastest one. Given that the one you opt for will have been out for a few months, it might very well be more stable too.

[MooPi]

I'm currently on the least powerful computer that I own. AMD Athlon LE-1640, 1 gig ram, integrated Nvidia graphics, 350 watt power supply, and 160 gigabyte HD. It cost me less then 270$ US dollars and I really enjoy using it. I've bumped the CPU up to 3.0GHz and this puppy flies. If you're on a budget this setup should keep you happy for several years and save you some cash. But yes I have the ultra powerful quad core systems and love the extra power when needed. Overkill on a Linux system though.

[Warpnow]

The point is that people buy them.

That's all. Companies will make what people will buy.

Future Proofing...is not very smart...

Yeah, you get a super fast machine now, and then a subpar one in 4 years. You're better off, as in, its cheaper, and you have a better PC on average, to build/upgrade more often.

[pwnst*r]

I typically buy the latest and greatest, but only every two years on average. Why? Because I can and I enjoy tech.

[3rdalbum]

If you think that computers are solely for games, then you're right - you might as well save money on the CPU and use it to get a better graphics card.

However, some of us do CPU-intensive tasks such as video encoding, audio processing, and software compiling. A Core i7 can give a massive speed boost to these operations when compared to a lesser CPU such as AMD Phenom or Core 2. Faster software compiling means that you can fix more bugs per day.

I'm sure that 15 years ago, people were saying "Why would they bother making a 33MHz CPU, all games work at their maximum framerate with a 24MHz CPU!"

[gsmanners]

It really depends on what you need right now. If you want to do HD encoding on-the-fly, you really need quad-core or better.