i5 4670 or Xeon E3 1230 V2

[dannylivesforher]

Hi guys,I'm confused as to which one I should go forward with. I'm inclined towards the i5. But I find that the Xeon has some good numbers in benchmarking. But it's a little bit old in comparison to the haswell i5,and moreover it's a server CPU. So I was wondering if I'd benefit anything from the Xeon in nothing but gaming. Please tell me about the advantages of i5 over the Xeon,if any.
Thanks.

 

[rolli59]

No benefit from the Xeon in gaming! It is basically a I7.

 

[legokill101]

litarly noe but for some reason (dont ask me why) they can somtimes be found for less then a locked core i7 so buy whichever is cheaper

 

[unknownofprob]

The i5, Haswell have some great performance benchmarks already and the i5 Quad core is an excellent CPU. Overall The i5 is better as the Xeon isn't really a gaming and casual user CPU. I went for a 4930k Hex core for my work and it's insane (3D design as quad core wasn't enough), I was considering a Hex core Xeon but it actually wasn't as good in the types of programs I was using so I went for the i7 4930k. Not many advantages over the Xeon anyways that's why i didn't go for it, I'd go for the i5 any day.

 

[rgd1101]

on multiplayer games, it need more cpu power, a xeon would be great for that, if you only play single player game, and i5 would do.

 

[dannylivesforher]

Thanks for your replies guys. So I guess it's the i5 for gaming. But what about the temperatures? Do you think the i5 will be much hotter than the Xeon? I'm worried about that after looking at the TDPs of both. Xeon has a lower 69W TDP and the i5 has 84W. So do you think it will cause much of a temperature rise in the i5? And,I understand the greater TDP is due to the integrated graphics core. But since I'm having a graphics card,do you think my temperatures will drop with an i5,since the iGPU gets disabled?

 

[dacquesta1]

If you don't plan on overclocking I would personally go with the Xeon. Similiar or cheaper price and you get hyperthreading.

 

[dannylivesforher]

I don't think I should prefer the Xeon because of the Hyperthreading,because the games don't benefit much from it. All I see is some 2 or 3 fps difference. I don't think hyperthreading is worth those extra bucks,since I use my system mainly for gaming.
Anyway,thanks for the reply.

 

[rolli59]

Thanks for your replies guys. So I guess it's the i5 for gaming. But what about the temperatures? Do you think the i5 will be much hotter than the Xeon? I'm worried about that after looking at the TDPs of both. Xeon has a lower 69W TDP and the i5 has 84W. So do you think it will cause much of a temperature rise in the i5? And,I understand the greater TDP is due to the integrated graphics core. But since I'm having a graphics card,do you think my temperatures will drop with an i5,since the iGPU gets disabled?

Temp should not be an issue, as you say the TDP rating is with the IGP in the I5 and if you are not using it the rating will drop.

 

[JOOK-D]

What's the price difference? If the Xeon is only slightly more I'd get it for the benefits of hyperthreading.

 

[RobCrezz]

I don't think I should prefer the Xeon because of the Hyperthreading,because the games don't benefit much from it. All I see is some 2 or 3 fps difference. I don't think hyperthreading is worth those extra bucks,since I use my system mainly for gaming.
Anyway,thanks for the reply.

New games Hyperthreading is helping, its just that older games were only using 2-4 threads. Thats why the dual core +HT i3s are getting big benefits to having HT enabled.

BF4 for example benefits from an i7 with HT, especially on big multiplayer games.

 

[DeathAndPain]

If you don't plan on overclocking I would personally go with the Xeon. Similiar or cheaper price and you get hyperthreading.

The "similar or cheaper price" is nonsense. Those Xeons cost approximately the same as their Core i7-counterparts, and significantly more than any Core i5. For that reason, they are only a viable alternative to a Core i7.

Thanks for your replies guys. So I guess it's the i5 for gaming. But what about the temperatures? Do you think the i5 will be much hotter than the Xeon?
I'm worried about that after looking at the TDPs of both. Xeon has a lower 69W TDP and the i5 has 84W.

I do not know where your numbers are coming from. The Haswell-based Xeon CPUs have a TDP of 80-84W. Your 69W are simply wrong (unless you got those from some sort of outdated Xeon from an earlier chip generation, which you hopefully do not plan on buying).

So do you think it will cause much of a temperature rise in the i5?

No. All these chips can and do go up to 100°C when under maximum load. Not that maximum load ever occurred except in dedicated torture tests like the one Prime95 does.

With the i5, not using the internal graphics means you can use its thermal budget for the CPU. With the Xeon, you do not have an integrated graphics in the first place. The result is the same. The advantage of the Xeon is slightly larger CPU cache in exchange for the missing graphics. But again, the Xeon is an alternative to the i7, not to the i5 (based on prices).

 

[DeathAndPain]

BF4 for example benefits from an i7 with HT, especially on big multiplayer games.

BF4 is a much quoted measurement for CPU performance, yet a pretty silly one, as CPU demand of BF4 is minimal. You can run BF4 perfectly fluently on really crappy CPUs. I would use different games to judge CPU performance, games in which a better processor actually makes a difference.

 

[JOOK-D]

If you don't plan on overclocking I would personally go with the Xeon. Similiar or cheaper price and you get hyperthreading.

The "similar or cheaper price" is nonsense. Those Xeons cost approximately the same as their Core i7-counterparts, and significantly more than any Core i5. For that reason, they are only a viable alternative to a Core i7.

Thanks for your replies guys. So I guess it's the i5 for gaming. But what about the temperatures? Do you think the i5 will be much hotter than the Xeon?
I'm worried about that after looking at the TDPs of both. Xeon has a lower 69W TDP and the i5 has 84W.

I do not know where your numbers are coming from. The Haswell-based Xeon CPUs have a TDP of 80-84W. Your 69W are simply wrong (unless you got those from some sort of outdated Xeon from an earlier chip generation, which you hopefully do not plan on buying).

So do you think it will cause much of a temperature rise in the i5?

No. All these chips can and do go up to 100°C when under maximum load. Not that maximum load ever occurred except in dedicated torture tests like the one Prime95 does.

With the i5, not using the internal graphics means you can use its thermal budget for the CPU. With the Xeon, you do not have an integrated graphics in the first place. The result is the same. The advantage of the Xeon is slightly larger CPU cache in exchange for the missing graphics. But again, the Xeon is an alternative to the i7, not to the i5 (based on prices).

I guess the price depends on where you live. A Xeon E3-1230v2 costs around £170 in the UK, the same as an i5 3570k. Also, it has a 69W TDP.http://ark.intel.com/products/65732/

This is just as an example, using the LGA1155 socket. A 4670 costs basically the same as a 3570k anyway.

 

[rolli59]

If you don't plan on overclocking I would personally go with the Xeon. Similiar or cheaper price and you get hyperthreading.

The "similar or cheaper price" is nonsense. Those Xeons cost approximately the same as their Core i7-counterparts, and significantly more than any Core i5. For that reason, they are only a viable alternative to a Core i7.

Thanks for your replies guys. So I guess it's the i5 for gaming. But what about the temperatures? Do you think the i5 will be much hotter than the Xeon?
I'm worried about that after looking at the TDPs of both. Xeon has a lower 69W TDP and the i5 has 84W.

I do not know where your numbers are coming from. The Haswell-based Xeon CPUs have a TDP of 80-84W. Your 69W are simply wrong (unless you got those from some sort of outdated Xeon from an earlier chip generation, which you hopefully do not plan on buying).

So do you think it will cause much of a temperature rise in the i5?

No. All these chips can and do go up to 100°C when under maximum load. Not that maximum load ever occurred except in dedicated torture tests like the one Prime95 does.

With the i5, not using the internal graphics means you can use its thermal budget for the CPU. With the Xeon, you do not have an integrated graphics in the first place. The result is the same. The advantage of the Xeon is slightly larger CPU cache in exchange for the missing graphics. But again, the Xeon is an alternative to the i7, not to the i5 (based on prices).

LGA1155 Ivy bridge I5 price http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117286 not yet outdated!

 

[james77]

Theoretically, the Intel Xeon should perform better on BF4 and other multiplayer games as it has 8 threads as compared to the i5 which only has 4. So if they are the same price, you might want to consider the Intel Xeon.

 

[DeathAndPain]

Ivy production ended in summer 2013. Why would anyone who wants a $200-range-CPU still want to buy this obsolete stuff???

And yeah, everyone, keep on quoting my whole long post. This will help making this thread better readable!

 

[RobCrezz]

BF4 for example benefits from an i7 with HT, especially on big multiplayer games.

BF4 is a much quoted measurement for CPU performance, yet a pretty silly one, as CPU demand of BF4 is minimal. You can run BF4 perfectly fluently on really crappy CPUs. I would use different games to judge CPU performance, games in which a better processor actually makes a difference.

Was just an example of a recent game that can take advantage of 8 threads.

Although the single player doesnt require too much CPU power, the 64 player multiplayer games are quite CPU heavy.

 

[DeathAndPain]

Theoretically, the Intel Xeon should perform better on BF4

You can run BF4 nicely on a Phenom II, so yeah, suggest buying a high-end Xeon for that purpose!

 

[RobCrezz]

And yeah, everyone, keep on quoting my whole long post. This will help making this thread better readable!

On newegg the Xeon 1230 v3 price is $265 a bit more expensive than the 4670k at $240 but much cheaper than the i7 4770 at $310 or the 4770k at $340.

If you want the 4770 but arent interested in the IGPU then its a good saving IMO.

 

[james77]

Theoretically, the Intel Xeon should perform better on BF4

You can run BF4 nicely on a Phenom II, so yeah, suggest buying a high-end Xeon for that purpose!

And yeah, everyone, keep on quoting my whole long post. This will help making this thread better readable!

On newegg the Xeon 1230 v3 price is $265 a bit more expensive than the 4670k at $240 but much cheaper than the i7 4770 at $310 or the 4770k at $340.

If you want the 4770 but arent interested in the IGPU then its a good saving IMO.

I agree with you. If I was the one who is going to buy, I would spend the extra $25 to get 8 threads instead of 4. Well, that's my personal opinion. It's still up to OP to decide.

 

[DeathAndPain]

You would also lose 100MHz of clock speed because that's how much the Xeon 1230 v3 is slower than the i5-4670. So paying more money for less clock speed... the hyperthreading and larger cache better be worth it!

 

[RobCrezz]

You would also lose 100MHz of clock speed because that's how much the Xeon 1230 v3 is slower than the i5-4670. So paying more money for less clock speed... the hyperthreading and larger cache better be worth it!

WOW! A whole 100mhz! :lol:

 

[logainofhades]

100mhz isn't anything really in a modern Intel CPU. Games like Crysis 3 and BF4 in 64 man campaign mode benefit from HT. I suspect this trend to continue as the next gen console ports are released. The i5 is a nice chip, but Xeon 1230v2 will outlast a locked i5 in the long run. I wouldn't consider any i5 unless it is a k series chip.

 

[dacquesta1]

230 dollars here for the 1230v2 3.3Ghz and 8 threads

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117286

sorry but if your playing something like bf4 online yes you would be better off with the xeon AND since the OP doesn't intend to overclock, he would be far better suited with 4core/8thread over 4 cores 100mhz faster. I actually considered grabbing the Xeon but got the fx8320 instead.

edit: lets not also forget the lower TDP of the xeon....less heat is always a plus