How good is the intel i5-4690K in comparison to the AMD A8-6600K when it is NOT overclocked?

[WackyOwey]

First of all, thanks a lot for taking the time to read my questions and hopefully you can help, so basically I accidentally ordered an ASrock H97 Pro4 because I didn't know you can not overclock processors using H models, so rather than paying P&P to return it plus the extra £40 for the Z97 Extreme4, I asked the forums whether the i5 is still good without overclocking, to which I was told that yes it was a good CPU even without the overclocking, so I thought that I would just give it a try in the H97 and not get the Z97, but then it occurred to me that without the overclocking, how much better is the i5 over my current AMD A8-6600K? Is it worth the extra costs to get the Z97, or is the processor still a sufficient enough improvement for gaming even without overclocking it?

Again thanks in advance and just FYI my current specs are as follows:

Operating System
Windows 7 Professional 64-bit SP1
CPU
AMD A8-6600K
Richland 32nm Technology
RAM
8.00GB Single-Channel DDR3 @ 798MHz (11-11-11-28)
Motherboard
MSI A55M-E33 (MS-7721) (P0)
Graphics
CVTE TV (1600x900@59Hz)
Radeon R9 270X Sapphire 2G Edition
Storage
931GB Seagate ST1000DM003-1CH162 ATA Device (SATA)
Optical Drives
TSSTcorp CDDVDW SH-224DB ATA Device
Audio
AMD High Definition Audio Device
Power Supply
Corsair CX600M 600W ATX 80+ Bronze PC Power Supply

 

[Darkbreeze]

Very good. Almost twice the performance depending on the task:

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1261?vs=1282

Overclocking it to around 4Ghz will offer some benefits, but it's not essential, especially since it already increases your likely performance by about 33-50% over the A8.

Overclocking Haswell Refresh chips is overrated. They really don't OC all that well and tend to get hot beyond medium-ish overclocks. The gains are not exceptional, but there are some gains to be had.

 

[synphul]

I would say at stock the i5 will easily outperform the a8. Overclocking is just the cherry on top, not mandatory to give the 4690k good performance.

@ darkbreeze, why is overclocking a devil's canyon overrated? My 4690k came with stock 3.5ghz (3.9 turbo) and easily overclocks to 4.6ghz - factored across 4 cores, I'd say that's pretty decent, over a full ghz. Given performance per cycle of intel cpu's, that's equal to what, a 2ghz oc on an amd chip? It also doesn't break 75c under prime 95 or intel burn test and tops out around 65-66c on air while gaming. Pretty good thermals if you ask me.

Not trolling, genuinely curious how that's not a decent overclock, lack of addition to performance (over stock) or 'getting hot'. It's the fastest i5 there is in the 4th gen lineup.

 

[WackyOwey]

Now you see, I was pretty sure that the i5 would easily outdo the A8... but after what synphul has said it just makes me want to overclock so badly XD. But like you both say, it is still a significant improvement and to be honest, my A8 has very little problems OTHER THAN with open world games, where it seems to crap out. But if the i5-4690k can fix the issue with no overclocking then that's fine by me What do you reckon??

 

[synphul]

I'm not trying to push an upgrade but if have the budget for it and desire an upgrade I think it would be a good one. I already had intentions of overclocking when I got my motherboard and chose it not just for being z97 but for other features it had. I liked that it was sli and crossfire capable in the event I wanted to do that down the road, m.2 and esata support, the number of usb ports (good mix of 2.0 and 3.0), the fact it had dual ethernet ports which gives me the option for lan teaming down the road and for the moment gave me access to the intel ethernet adapter over the qualcomm killer. Most motherboards only have 1 ethernet port and they're almost always the killer variety. Doesn't make it the best mobo, just met my needs/wants.

If you have no plans to overclock, then you can save some money going with an i5 4460 or 4590 and get nearly the same stock performance of the 4690k and stay with the h97 mobo. Overclocking isn't necessary to get good performance from the i5's in games, it just adds to the performance. (meaning in the past there have been various processors which were only really worthwhile if overclocked, this isn't the case here).

I think a good idea to be sure would be to look up performance of the specific games you're playing and see the differences one cpu provides over the other. That will help you better determine if the upgrade is worth it, if the cpu is holding you back or if it's the gpu. Some may call me a fanboy, I don't hate amd even though personally I prefer intel and it's served me extremely well for what I do with my pc (more than gaming, if anything gaming is secondary for me). Regardless of what my preferences are for intel or amd, checking actual data is what will give you a solid answer and give you the most benefit.

 

[WackyOwey]

Thanks a lot both of you, Synphul the only thing I was interested in really about the Z97 was the prospect of overclocking to improve my gameplay, but after you suggested that I look specifically at the games that I am playing and I honestly see no need to overclock now, like darkbreeze said "It's just the cherry on the top". I was even looking at the recommended requirements for GTA V and it surpasses those recommendations easily. And I just thought, if I can play a game like GTA V with my whole system performing over those recommendations (perhaps my GPU is only on par) then there really is no need to mess around sorting the redelivery and the extra costs considering that all the multiple ethernet functions etc just don't appeal to me. Thanks a lot to both of you, you have both helped on multiple threads of mine previous- greatly appreciated.

 

[Darkbreeze]

The 4690k@4.7Ghz gets little to no performance advantage over the stock 4690k or the 4690 for most titles. i7 overclocked results are similar.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8227/devils-canyon-review-intel-core-i7-4790k-and-i5-4690k/4



If you were doing something very high end with an application known to require or only utilize single core performance, in which case threading isn't much help, then the overclock would be really beneficial.

For the few gaming titles that still focus on single core usage, like, I think maybe Farcry 4 still does, it might be beneficial too.

 

[Darkbreeze]

I too run AMD. Call me one of the unrealistic faithful, not a fanboy by any stretch of the imagination, but I get good performance with an 8320. That being said, I've had this chip since a while before the refresh chips came out and on my next upgrade I'll likely move to Intel as I don't see the necessary changes coming from AMD to remain competitive in chip performance, especially for the kinds of applications and gaming titles I run.

 

[synphul]

Yea I mean for me, the upgrade was a huge one. I wasn't coming from a newer chip either amd or intel, it was a much older e8400. If I'd had a newer chip given the cost of upgrading, the smaller leap in performance wouldn't have been worth it. Even a newer i3 to i5 wouldn't have made as much sense, but since I upgrade at a much slower rate than others do (and plan to keep my parts longer) I opted for the i5 which is a nice balance of price/performance for a lot of different things I do. Had my setup been different prior to upgrading or had my budget been different (all factors) I might not have made the same choices. Lower budget, I might have opted for the fx 8xxx series, higher budget I might have gone with a 5820k i7, better system prior to upgrading I might have held off longer.