i5 4690k vs Xeon something

[Shihanshu]

Currently have the i5 but i can get the Xeon (same lga1150 socket) as a trade, how much will the benefit be in terms of video editing with all adobe programs. doesnt matter which xeon just one around $250 on the 1150 socket

 

[Shneiky]

It will not give you a major performance boost or any at all (depending on the model). However, if you have nice cooler and overclock that I5 - that will give you the major performance boost.

 

[Shihanshu]

yeah it'd be a h60 liquid cooler which is decent. But the xeon has hyperthreading which is why it seems liked it'd be much better

 

[jghaverty]

You need to determine how much of your programs are multi threaded. If you are running 4 core programs, you'd be a fool to go with a much slower xeon. If you are running 8 threaded programs, the xeon will net you a theoretically huge boost (pending its a 4c/8t xeon).

From there, your answer should be a bit obvious.

It will not give you a major performance boost or any at all (depending on the model). However, if you have nice cooler and overclock that I5 - that will give you the major performance boost.

Your comment is incomplete and invalid. If he's using video editing software that uses true multi threaded capabilities (quite common in video editing actually), the i5 can NEVER match the xeon, no matter how overclocked it is.

 

[Shihanshu]

Adobe premier CC and After effects CC support multi threads very well and can easily used up to 24 logical cores (mac pro benchmarks)

 

[jghaverty]

Adobe premier CC and After effects CC support multi threads very well and can easily used up to 24 logical cores (mac pro benchmarks)

Sounds like you have your answer then 😉

 

[Darkbreeze]

For optimized applications like the Adobe suite, most professional CAD software, the majority of video editing and encoding applications and anything else that DOES take advantage of more than two cores or threads, it would be advantageous to use a Xeon or i7 over the i5. People often forget to acknowledge the fact that in addition to any cores/threads used by the application itself, the use of multiple simultaneously opened applications, browsers, downloads, and the OS services themselves, all need resources which can be used independently of what a single application might be able to utilize if it alone was being considered.

I'd recommend the Xeon E3 1231v3 or 1241v3, which have 3.4 and 3.5Ghz base clocks respectively and as such are NOT slower than the i5-4690 or 4690k base clock. Also, the Xeon E3 CAN be minimally overclocked on some motherboards, just not using the multiplier, and the effort probably isn't worth the investment in time, energy or effect on stability.

 

[Shihanshu]

I planned on boosting the baseclock on the xeon always gotta squeeze performance, energy and heat arent an issue

 

[Darkbreeze]

I would go that way then. I also plan to replace my 8320 very soon with a Xeon now that the prices are significantly lower but I waiting to see if the upcoming skus create a price drop. The E3 chips perform much better than the FX chips, due to the IPC.

 

[synphul]

Was actually looking at some premiere pro benchmarks and while I couldn't find one for the popular 1231v3, the theoretical math said even though ht helped some an overclocked i5 still outperformed it. Core speed matters as much if not more than ht so the additional 700-800mhz over the xeon when the i5 is oc'd drops the xeon behind. A 1241v3 is quickly approaching $300 or the cost of an i7, may as well just get the 4790k with the ht and the overclocking the xeon lacks.

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/cpu-charts-2015/-31-Adobe-Premiere-Pro-CC,3722.html

Going by the time difference between the locked and k series i7 of the same model (both have ht, core speed being the only difference) it worked out to 2.75s per 100mhz clock speed (11s difference, 400mhz clock difference). If that's the case, the 4690 scored 135s. A k series oc'd 700mhz over stock turbo (4.6ghz) would result in an oc'd time of 116s for the 4690k, right up there with the stock 4790k speeds. In that particular test they did using premiere pro, ht performance was only around 4%.

Not saying the i5 is better than the ht enabled i7 but to say an oc'd i5 could never beat an ht enabled xeon like the 1231v3 isn't true. Even using adobe programs to encode video.

 

[Shneiky]

@jghaverty,

Your argument is completely random and lacks any understand of software and hardware operations. I am a 3D/Compositing generalist and computing is what gets my bread.

This is the closest Xeon for 250 bucks:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117316&cm_re=xeon_1150-_-19-117-316-_-Product

3.4 GHz for $256. An I5 4690k clocked at 4.0 GHz will close the performance gap. Clocked at 4.2 - the I5 pulls ahead.

PremierPro does not saturate 8 threads at 100% all the time. When you move away from 4 threads, the load Premier gives is fluctuating between 50-80% with some spikes at 100%. Thus - in Premier, core scaling is not as linear as you would expect. The only thing that manages to fully saturate a processor is a 3D render - such as Mental Ray, Vray and the rest of them CPU renderers. (except if you are doing scientific calculations or fluid/particle/dynamics simulations). Even most compositing software such as AE and NUKE fluctuates at around 90-100% in ideal scenarios.

As such, the trade of an 4690k for a Xeon is non-productive. Better overclock the I5 through the multi than try to do anything to the Xeon via BCLK. BCLK should not be touched as it will very very easily lead to instabilities and/or damaging the hardware on LGA 1150.

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Estimating-CPU-Performance-using-Amdahls-Law-619/

Read "Step 2: Determining the parallelization fraction". 4 Cores score 3.75 ratio of acceleration - or in other words - losing 0.25 factor or 1/16th. 8 Cores (mind you - real cores) score 6.6 - losing 1.4 factor or in other words - it loses almost 1/5th productivity.