3770K VS 3570K Cache

[coolitic]

I am trying to choose between the 3770k and the 3570k. The only real difference I see is that the 3770K has HT (which I dont use) and that 3770K has an 8MB Cache as apposed to the 3570K's 6MB cache. I plan on overclocking to 4.2 GHz, maybe more, so I would like to know the performance hit on different kinds of scenarios. Will be used primarily for gaming, but I may do some other computing activities.

 

[$hawn]

For gaming, just get 3570k. The i7 is a waste.

For heavy rendering and video encoding the HT enabled on the i7's give it around 25%-40% performance edge over the i5. But the price increase seriously isn't all that cool

 

[coolitic]

For gaming, just get 3570k. The i7 is a waste.

For heavy rendering and video encoding the HT enabled on the i7's give it around 25%-40% performance edge over the i5. But the price increase seriously isn't all that cool

You did not read my post at all, Did you.

 

[idiotekniques]

You did not read my post at all.

he read your post but your post sucked. you say you aren't going to use HT then say give some info as you will be gaming plus other computational scenarios with absolutely zero specifics. so he gave you the right answer.

 

[coolitic]

he read your post but your post sucked. you say you aren't going to use HT then say give some info as you will be gaming plus other computational scenarios with absolutely zero specifics. so he gave you the right answer.

The post is talking about CPU cache, as it says in the title and the post.

 

[A Bad Day]

The extra cache is only worth it if the CPU is clocked very high, because increasing clock rate also increases the chance of a "cache miss", and thus has to access the much slower system RAM.

Now the question is, at what clock rate would the 2 MB of cache be worth paying for?...

 

[rrruby]

I guess it must be pretty tricky to find out the difference in impact on performance by changing the cache size, because the reason most people go for the i7 is the HT. I really doubt it will make a noticeable difference. The only benefit of the 3770k might be that in the future, you could turn HT on when you notice your PC is lagging, and upgrade time is looming?

Otherwise,I don't see why you don't go for the 3570K and save your cash if you aren't going to use highly threaded applications. Maybe buy some faster RAM instead. You'll notice that more than a bigger cache.

 

[maestro0428]

I run a 3770K and bought it for the hyper threading which makes a huge difference in some instances (and I also have Xeons for that purpose too). I am not sure, but the difference in cache probably only makes a small improvement. It sounds to me like you would be better served by a 3570k.

 

[Groomer]

3570K is more than enough, put more money into your GPU... NOW!

 

[rrruby]

put more money into your GPU... NOW!

MOAR!!

 

[coolitic]

3570K is more than enough, put more money into your GPU... NOW!

Lol, i already put over 500 in the MSI TwinFrozr 4GD 680 (dont need moar unless i get 690). but still, does any1 have an answer to the cpu cache?

 

[A Bad Day]

I posted a thread asking the cache question on overclock.net, but so far, no answer.

Tom's Hardware should do the clock vs. cache test sometime...

 

[$hawn]

You did not read my post at all, Did you.

First of all, learn to keep your ego in check. And being polite never caused harm to anyone AFAIK.

The cache barely makes any difference, in normal light operations, and upto the point where 4 threads are used on the i7. This can be verified to some extent in gaming benchmarks, where the i5's and i7's score nearly the same FPS at identical clock speeds.

The extra cache however, does comes in handy in heavy tasks when HT is used, because now the CPU has to save data for 8 threads, not 4. Very little testing has been done to see the impact of cache on the newer i5/i7 chips, but that 25%-40% improvement figure the i7 gives in general over the i5 in tasks that use all 8 threads is inclusive of the benefit of the extra 2MB cache.

So the bottom line is this, for a 4C/4T i5, 6MB cache is plenty enough.

 

[A Bad Day]

There are some games that use more than four cores/threads, though the i7 is only worth it if your favorite games do/will use HT.

Incomplete list of games that benefit from hexacore (or quad-core i7s) (hasn't been updated since 2010): http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,794274/From-Medal-of-Honor-to-Civ-5-17-Games-that-already-benefit-from-six-cores-CPUs/Reviews/

 

[coolitic]

First of all, learn to keep your ego in check. And being polite never caused harm to anyone AFAIK.

The cache barely makes any difference, in normal light operations, and upto the point where 4 threads are used on the i7. This can be verified to some extent in gaming benchmarks, where the i5's and i7's score nearly the same FPS at identical clock speeds.

The extra cache however, does comes in handy in heavy tasks when HT is used, because now the CPU has to save data for 8 threads, not 4. Very little testing has been done to see the impact of cache on the newer i5/i7 chips, but that 25%-40% improvement figure the i7 gives in general over the i5 in tasks that use all 8 threads is inclusive of the benefit of the extra 2MB cache.

So the bottom line is this, for a 4C/4T i5, 6MB cache is plenty enough.

That reply wasnt supposed to be offensive....

 

[coolitic]

Best answer selected by coolitic.