[Build Help] I5 3570k build vs i5 4590 build?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
M

michajc

Reputable
Apr 29, 2015
40
0
4,530
hi, im looking to buy a new pc for my little brother, nothing too fancy or expensive, i found 2 used pcs that fit in my budget but i dont know which know is better, they cost the same and are in good condition(1 year of use aprox)

pc 1:
cpu: Intel Core I5 4590 3.3GHz
gpu: Asus GeForce GTX760 DirectCU II OC 2GB DDR5
ram:Kingston 2x4GB DDR3 1600MHz
hdd:1TB Toshiba
case:Sentey Z-Tron
psu:Sentey 750W SCP750-HM
mother:Asus H81M-K


pc2:

cpu:Intel I5 3570K (3.8 Ghz. Turbo) BOX
mother:MSI B75MA E33 BOX (USB 3.0, Sata 3)
ram:2x4GB Gskill Sniper DDR3 1600
hdd: Seagate 3TB 7200 Sata 3, 64mb caché
gpu:HD 7870 2gb gddr5(older twin of the R9 270x)
psu:Thermaltake 530 (80 plus, PFC active)
case: Thermaltake V3
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
Depending on the game the 760 GTX beats out the 7870 on most benchmarks I'm looking at by 10fps (20-30 on bf3 and some others).

I'd say PC1 would be my bet if I wasn't looking at upgrading anything soonish/ever. Aka buying a new computer instead of upgrading it over time.

However I'd take pc2 if I planned on ever upgrading my GPU in the future and I'd overclock the CPU.
 
Upvote 1 Downvote
Id go with PC2, there isn't much of a difference in graphical power between the GTX 760 and the HD 7870, and it wont be noticeable, but the CPU is better in PC2 which could help a lot. PC2 has extra HDD space, and I think the RAM is better.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I'm leaning with Iam1080. You can OC the CPU which you can't do with the first, and the 760 and 7870 aren't that far apart. (The 270X is the same card as the 7970, and when Toms tested that one it outperformed the 760.) Toss in the extra drive space and possible better PSU I'd get that one.

Problem buying used however of course is you don't know the real/true story. Everyone is selling "grandma's car that she only drove to church". Good luck however.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


What makes you say a 3570K is better than a 4590? There's 100Mhz between them in base and turbo frequency, but Haswell (the 4590) has slightly better IPC which more than makes up for the difference. The 3570K is on a B75 motherboard, so you can't overclock it. Benchmarks would overall show a very, very slight advantage for the Haswell... it's basically a wash.

The 760 is the better video card, and that would make a difference. Most games are with 10-20%, though it looks like some games (Crysis 3, Bioshock Infinite) show a substantially advantage for the 760: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1034?vs=1038

Neither PSU is very good and you're taking a risk on that score. Though there again the PC1 edges it. That PSU is at least rated at 62A for 12V, I believe it's Sirtec made, which are far from the worst OEMs out there. At least you'll be waaaaay within spec(I doubt you'd ever draw more than 25A @ 12V).

Still, OP, worth telling us what you're considering paying. You might be able to do better new. Though having said that, both those CPUs are extremely solid and likely be a good platform for any single card gaming rig for several years (just make sure your brother upgrades the PSU if he adds a high end GPU down the track).
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I thought you could OC on the B75 boards?

My mistake, it was the review of the 285.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-r9-285-tonga,3925-14.html

Avg-Performance_w_600.png


We'd also like to address the GeForce GTX 760's position on our average performance chart. Seeing the 760 sit just below the Radeon R9 270X wasn't something we expected, and this situation caused us to re-run the majority of benchmarks and cross-reference them with other tests we've taken. The results were consistent, though, and we believe this situation is the result of a combination of factors including some newer game titles such as Thief (that favor the GCN architecture), mixed with some high-detail settings that don't sit well with the GeForce GTX 760's 192 GB/s of memory bandwidth (bandwidth that doesn't benefit from lossless color compression). We wouldn't count out the GeForce GTX 760, a card that uses even less power than the Radeon R9 285, but we're beginning to wonder if it's time to re-assess its position over a wider range of benchmarks.
Click to expand...

Games and drivers might have changed things with respect to the 760 vs 7870/270X.

Edit: Just checked, can't OC on a B75? Why would someone put a K chip on a B75?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Hmm, those TH results are quite different to Anandtech's. AT found that Company of Heroes favoured the 270X by a decent margin, but all their other benchmarks had them either close, or the 760 ahead, sometimes significantly so. http://www.anandtech.com/show/8460/amd-radeon-r9-285-review/8

Perhaps AT didn't re-run the 270X benchmarks with updated drivers? Or perhaps it's just a reflection of a different suite of games. I don't know.

Based on AT benches the 760 is the better card, but I certainly agree that this is not the case based on the TH benchmarks you provided.

If build 2 had a Z77 mobo then it might be the way to go (though I wouldn't want to be OCing on that PSU myself). They are pretty similar though for sure.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
It's why I included the quote. TH thinks it's the newer games in their test suite. (I freely admit drivers could also play a part.) The article is from when they were testing the 285, but they felt it was pronounced enough they needed to mention it. The cards have always been close, 270X < 760 < 7950. Close enough they I almost felt sorry when the 760 came out. But I had already bought my 7950 and wasn't going to return it just to save some power/electricity. Seems I might have made the right call if even the 7870/270X is faster then the 760 now.

Could also be a fluke if TH is the only site reporting this. I'm fairly certain more or less all three of these cards would provide a similar experience. You can toss the new 960 in there as well. But I wouldn't claim the 760 is faster by 20%, etc. Seems really odd to claim that.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


im not from united states, so my budget wont make sense to you, everything is 3 or 4 times more expensive here 🙁 🙁


i think im gonna go with pc 2 and maybe for christmas i would buy him a z77 motherboard and a 750w seasonic psu so i can oc it a bit until i can get some extra money to buy him an r9 280x and a hyper212 and make a full oc

believe or not, the price for this 2 specs is about $1000 us dls(each one)
and they are USED, so imagine how expensive is everything in my 3rd world country
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


That's a reasonable plan, but if you're looking to put money into upgrades for gaming the GPU (and thus PSU) is a waaaay higher priority than OCing the CPU. I'd only be looking to overclock if I already had a high end GPU, and even then it would probably be only worthwhile if you're running a high frame rate monitor and pushing for 144hz... it's only then that either of those CPUs are likely to start becoming a limiting factor.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
i found a 3rd pc for the exact same price,but with windows 10,what do you guys think?
intel i5 3330
asrock z68 extreme3 gen3
xfx r9 280 3gb
kingston hyperx 12gb 1866mhz(1x4gb and 1x8gb)
thermaltake smart 650w
wd black 1tb
samsung850evo 120gb ssd
generic case
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


You're trading off a slightly slower CPU for a slightly faster graphics card and an SSD. That's a trade I'd take personally and it would be a better gaming build than the other two as-is. However, if you're looking at a GPU upgrade within the next little while anyway, there's less value in the better GPU and you care more about a CPU which will last you longer.
Unfortunately those Thermaltake "smart" series are pretty poor, not complete trash, but far from good quality too, so that's another detractor (though none of the builds have good PSUs).
The SSD is a massive value-add though and will make the system "feel" much, much faster for booting, installing updates, browsing and other non-gaming tasks.

I'd lean towards build 3 for up front gaming prowess, or one of the other two if what I wanted was more of a long term investment with upgrades planned along the way.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
oh well i guess that I'll have problems with any of the 3 computers because they will be obsolete in 2 o 3 years
they better make some good ass games this and the next year, because i dont think i could buy another computer in 10 years, my actual computer is from 2006/07 and i can barely play league of legends
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


I don't think so! In the last 4 years we've seen CPU performance on high (ish) end desktops improve by about 30%, and all that has happened while OCing headroom has shrunk. There are people running 2500Ks @ 5+Ghz they bought in Jan 2011 who are getting within a few percentage of the just released i5 6600K on most benchmarks. That progress (or lack of it) doesn't show any sign of increasing soon.

I'm still rocking an i5 750 I bought nearly 6 years ago. It's hardly top-tier, but with my 60hz monitor there's not a game I can't play on it.

All three of those builds have solid CPUs which, barring some major advancements in the next few years, should still be relevant and capable for mid-range gaming systems for the next 4-5 years or so.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


I'd stay with PC 2.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom