help me deciede, 4970k or 5820k

[BF15]

So my old 775 board died, It was great while it lasted, but luckly my psu, case, and gtx480 are still working, but that being said I need to look into getting a new mobo/cpu/ram.

Im looking at 2 options.

Option 1 $749.00
4970k
asus maximus vii formula
16gb ram using an 8x2 ddr3 kit

Option2 $729.00
5820k
msi x99 sla pro
16gb ram using a 4x4 kit.

I'll use the system for gaming, and I will be buying either a 980 ti, or the new ATI card that's getting ready to be released once I see some benchmarks on them both. eventually sometime early next year I'll be getting a new 4k monitor, and a second card running either sli, or croxxfire.

What option would you guys go with? either way I go I want it to get me a good 5+ years with only having to worry about GPU upgrades to continue gaming at 4k.

I would consider the 5830k, but price wise, its a good 200 dollars more than
I also may consider the asus sabertooth x99 board becuase I like how clean it looks, but im not sure spec wise it the better appearances are worth the 70 dollar price increase.

 

[saint19]

I and welcome to Tom's forum.

Price difference isn't a factor here. Some Z97 manufacturers are claiming that a BIOS update makes possible support the new Intel Broadwell CPUs, personally I would check if that motherboard (I know that Gigabyte already said that) could support Broadwell and go with the 1st build.

Keep in mind, that with the fast change in technology at the present, even the best gaming rig will not give you more that 2 or 3 years at good FPS with high settings or in your case, with 4K

 

[Joseph DeGarmo]

The 5820k build will give you more expansion options like 3-way SLI and M.2 SSDs. It also has DDR4 RAM. Get that one so that way when you refresh the platform about 4-6 years from now, the DDR4 RAM can be reused.

 

[jimmysmitty]

https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/MAXIMUS_VII_FORMULA/HelpDesk_CPU/

Per Asus it can support the latest Broadwell CPUs with a BIOS flash. Most 9 series chipset boards should support Broadwell.

Either setup is decent. The x99 setup is nice as you can move to a 6 or more core setup later and you can do full x16 PCIe 3.0 SLI or CFX. However, if you stick to a single GPU then they are both great options.

For 4K, there is no single GPU setup that can do 4K at 60FPS. You need a dual GPU setup (295x2 or SLI GTX 980/980Ti) to do 4K at 60FPS on most games.

And 5 years is a long time. You will probably have to upgrade your GPU in 5 years to keep up as new technologies and game engines will find ways to make things bigger and better.

Personally I would go with Asus over MSI but that is because after 15 years of building PCs I have yet to have an Asus die on me.

 

[photonboy]

About 4K:

1) Get a 4K monitor if you want, but I STRONGLY suggest not actually gaming at 4K. You need a 2nd GPU to go from 1440p to 4K and that's only if it scale really well.

The difference in quality however is barely noticeable to most people. The money would be far, far better used by putting it towards a better monitor.

Maybe CIV5 or similar games can max 4K, Ultra settings, max refresh rate, but having to buy another $650USD card just so you can go from 1440p to 4K in a game like Crysis 3 makes little sense to me.

2) GSYNC MONITOR:
This is the ultimate gaming monitor. However, there aren't many I can recommend (and I can't recommend the Asus Swift). The ONLY one I even consider worthwhile is the recent Acer model (IPS, 27", 1440p, 144Hz).

I have NOT seen one though so it's 3rd hand input.

So yeah, it's an IPS panel and also GSYNC and also high refresh rate. There are a LOT of improvements being worked in for future monitors as we speak to tweak the experience.

Summary:
- 4k monitor okay (desktop)
- GSYNC recommended
- don't game at 4K (unless there's no quality drop with a single GTX980Ti). Just don't buy into the "4K" hype as if jumping from 1440p to 4K transports you into a wonderful world of chocolate and fairies with 3D breasts... again, in most cases it's NEGLIGIBLE improvement for a lot. more. money.

 

[photonboy]

Acer IPS 1440p 144Hz: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LTHr96NueA

 

[BF15]

that acer monitor seems pretty nice, I think I may go with it, Currently I game at 1080P with a 32" monitor, I think at 27" I will miss the extra 5 inchs. does anyone have a good 1440p 32"

 

[BF15]

for the mobo, I think im going to go ahead and get the asus x99a/usb3.1 intead of the msi. Lots of msi problems on this form now that im researching into that board some

Between a 5820k and a 5830k, do any of you think its woth the xtra 200 dollars to get it? From what im reading at this time even at tri sli it doesent seem to offer any benefits.

Between the 2 options, should I expect the 2011 v3 to be more future proof?

I did have one thought, I currently have a 8gb, 4x2gb dddr3 1600 kit. I could go with the 1050 setup and save some money now going with my 8gb memory kit. If I could expect the cpu to last me at least 4-5 years I'd just go that route. Im just not sure, I'd hate to get the z97 and it be out dated 2 years from now.

 

[BF15]

so i have a new question because im leaning towards the x99 boards.

between the asus sabtertooth x99, and the asus x99-a/usb3.1 boards which would you guys go with, theres about a 50-60 dollar price gap between them

 

[jimmysmitty]

Between the 5820K and 5930K, they are pretty much the same however the 5930K has 40 PCIe 3.0 lanes while the 5820K only has 28 PCIe 3.0 lanes so you can't do a full SLI/CFX with that CPU

http://ark.intel.com/compare/82931,82932

For the boards from the two you listed I would go for the Sabertooth. although I like the color scheme of the Rampage better but the Sabertooth is a great board series.

Oh an memory, you would need to buy new memory. X99 is DDR4 so you can't use DDR3.

 

[brianfulcher15]

Well guys i went with a newegg combo. I think illne happy with it

I picked a asrock x99 extreme4, a 5820k, and a set of 4x4gb ddr4 2400 ram with a cas latency of 12

I had a 50 dollar off cupon and it was a 110 of combo plus had a 30 dollar rebatemaking my total 660 dollars. Hopefully i made a good choice i know i wont be able to do tri sli with this board but i domt think i ever would anyways. I just have to get an adapter for my coler mow ill be using a thermalrite 120 extreme in a haf x case so hopefully ill get some good overclocks on air

 

[jimmysmitty]

That is a fine combo. The only downside is the fewer PCIe lanes so you can't do x16/x16 CFX/SLI but you can still do x16/x8 CFX/SLI and it wont really make a difference since PCIe 2.0 x16 is not even fully saturated and a PCIe 3.0 x8 slot is the same speed as a PCIe 2.0 x16 slot.

Good luck.

 

[brianfulcher15]

Over clock wise, what do you guys think i should expect, I was try trying to find some articles with people using the thermalright 120 exterme, on the 5820k, but had no luck. I do see they make a bolt through kit to use with the board, so thats on its way with some artic silver 5.

Its going to be in an air cooled haf x case, with all the optional fans added, and i use a high rpm ninja systh fan on the cooler, i think thats what its called anyways.

Ive been reading about the m.2 SSD"s too, i think i may get a 256GB one since its supposed to support 32GB/s speeds.

 

[photonboy]

that acer monitor seems pretty nice, I think I may go with it, Currently I game at 1080P with a 32" monitor, I think at 27" I will miss the extra 5 inchs. does anyone have a good 1440p 32"

Hey,
1) The monitor I linked has GSYNC and is arguably the best monitor you can buy. Not sure if they have a 32" version though frankly I think 32" is far too large unless you're sitting further back than you'd need to on a 27".

So again you can find high-res large monitors just not comparable to the one I linked (IPS, GSYNC, 144Hz).

2) 1080p 32"??
That suggest to me you're using an HDTV not an actual monitor. In fact, the size and pixel density further suggest you must be sitting much further back than you'd need to on a 27" 1440p monitor.

I sit about a 1:1 ratio away (about 30" from my 27" monitor).

3) OVERCLOCKING?
Lots of information available online. Wait until you have the actual computer built then revisit this question. Also, there's a rapidly diminishing return to overclocking so I never push the limit. The default Turbo is 3.6GHz but Asus and other vendors offer Z97 boards that provide a small overclock WITHOUT affecting the voltage and other settings which keep the Intel Power management optimal (for longevity and minimal heat).

If you want higher overclock you'll need to do more research. Don't forget not all CPU's overclock the same (silicon lottery). I think if you got 3.9GHz using the quick overclock I'd just stick with that but suit yourself.

There's also the NOISE factor however you'll have to see how that goes once you get it. For example, a light overclock with no voltage change has little affect on temperature but trying to hit 4.3GHz will raise the temperature quite a lot.

4) M.2 SSD:
Go ahead if you want, however unless you do something like VIDEO EDITING (not just converting) that benefits from a really fast SSD the real-world benefits are almost impossible to notice.

I recommend the Samsung 850 EVO mainly (A few others if on sale) and just get the cheapest solution which is likely the Samsung 850 EVO 250GB model which is a 2.5" SSD.

Also, the M.2 SSD interface is faster however the SSD itself must be faster than 6gbps (SATA3) speed or it won't benchmark any faster (and again real-world difference likely isn't noticeable anyway).

5) Links:
a) MEMTEST www.memtest.org
b) https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/19792
c) CPU-ID Hardware monitor: http://www.cpuid.com/softwares/hwmonitor.html
d) Task Manager (CTRL-ALT-DEL) and change to show all graphs (twelve) to verify all threads active

6) Other:
a) Create a backup solution for Windows partition (i.e. Acronis True Image)
b) Upgrade to Windows 10 64-bit later this year for free (recommended to support DX12)
c) Pick any BENCHMARK utility and keep note of the score for future reference (in case you question GPU performance at some point you can rerun the test. Unigine Valley and/or one of the 3DMark utilitizes. Use free versions)
d) Fan control:
Not sure about case fan support but here's an EXAMPLE of how to setup fan control for the CPU:
- install motherboard software for fan control (may be part of larger program)
- custom profile
- CPU fan speed to the LOWEST (i.e. 20% max RPM) that keeps the CPU in idle mode below the temperature you start to ramp up at (i.e. 45degC)
- ramp up to say 80degC at 100% RPM
(It makes a lot more sense when you do it. I have a Noctua NH-D14 and have 20% until 45degC-> ramped to 80degC at 100% RPM. In IDLE I sit about 30degC, in medium usage I'm in the 40-50degC so my fan is nearly silent. I do a LIGHT overclock so no voltage increase and when gaming I rarely exceed 60degC.)

PRINT this out or COPY if you need to refer to anything.

Have FUN.

 

[photonboy]

Overclocking:

Again keep in mind the "silicon lottery" however:
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2014/09/03/intel-core-i7-5930k-and-core-i7-5820k-revie/9

"The Core i7-5820K, though, would only go as far as 4.3GHz, where we only needed a vcore of 1.25V using a bus speed of 123MHz and multiplier of x35. 4.4GHz just wasn't an option, with the CPU voltage and thermals being the limiting factors."

Again though, it makes little difference for gaming if comparing say 3.8GHz vs 4.3GHz for this CPU. I still recommend seeing how the "quick" overclock works. An optimal, MANUAL method is worth trying as well such as:

1) Update BIOS if newer
2) enable "XMP" and save (leave CPU alone). Verify DDR4 settings appear correct.
3) run Intel Diagnostic.
then..

1) Manually change each core MULTIPLIER to "37" and save
2) run Intel CPU diagnostic
3) Increase multiplier by ONE and save. TEST. REPEAT until it fails then use LAST stable setting (3.9GHz?)

*Two quick points:
a) The "quick" overclock in the BIOS (name varies) often affects the DDR memory setup as well. If it's similar and MEMTEST plus CPU diagnostics pass then let it stay (i.e. my BIOS chose 4.2GHz CPU and 1986MHz for my DDR3 memory. My defaults were 3.9GHz and 2133MHz so I left it there)

b) If manually changing the core multiplier only (no other settings like voltage) you don't need to use the same multiplier for each core. It's more important with higher core counts so for example you might try using "39" for using up to FOUR cores but "38" for using FIVE or SIX cores. The reason being is that the more cores used the less stable the CPU should be so the frequency should drop with higher core count.

In my case it didn't seem to matter for my 4-core CPU so I have the same multiplier for each core.

c) **IMPORTANT:
I didn't investigate further but for my computer the BASE CLOCK is 100MHz thus using a Multiplier of "42" results in 4.2GHz for my CPU. I just noticed they mention a higher Base Clock so in their example they have only a multiplier of "35" to get 4.3GHz.

Possibly that's due to the different socket. Regardless if this is the case my above advice on MULTIPLIER values needs to be adjusted. Or ignore and use recommended values from BIOS overclock or other software. Be warned though on 1150 architecture at least the Base Clock also affects the PCIe clock speed for addon cards. It's possible they use SEPARATE CLOCKS now (highly likely based on example) thus the CPU you have may have different Base and Multiplier combinations available.

I can't research that further but you should.