I7-4790k vs I5-2500K OCed to 4.3ghz.

[xaephod]

Its easy to find a comparo of CPUs on sites like CPUboss, etc that will compare the I7-4790K to the I5-2500K. How about if the 2500K is overclocked to 4.3Ghz very stably with an evo212 cooler. Without running the benchmarks myself, is there a site where this has been done already?

Since I don't have a I7-4790K, I can't do an apples to apples comparo.
Here is my current rig:

Operating System
Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit SP1
CPU
Intel Core i5 2500K @ 4.30GHz
Sandy Bridge 32nm Technology
RAM
16.0GB Dual-Channel DDR3 @ 823MHz (10-10-10-27)
Motherboard
ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. P8P67-M PRO (LGA1155)
Graphics
Generic Non-PnP Monitor (1920x1200@59Hz)
4095MB NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 (EVGA)
Storage
111GB OCZ-AGILITY3 (SSD)
1863GB Seagate ST2000DM001-9YN164 (SATA)
232GB Samsung SSD 840 EVO 250G SCSI Disk Device (SSD)

Thanks

p.s. Corsair Dominator ram...should I do anything with those ram settings? And would it make any difference?

 

[photonboy]

1) It's proportionate for the CPU overclock. In other words 4.4GHz from 4GHz means 10% faster. Of course it's only 10% faster in real world if the CPU is fully used (or in a game with say less cores but in both scenarios the CPU is still the bottleneck).

Put another way, in things like Handbrake if using close to 100% CPU usage it's proportional. In games like Tomb Raider which aren't too CPU intensive it might make almost NO difference. In Skyrim it might make a little difference.

If you already know where the i7-4790K stands compared to the i5-2500K then it's simple algebra.

2) DDR3 frequency?
It would make almost no difference to go higher for real-world tasks. You could find isolated cases where you'd get a very small benefit (not games) mostly non-realistic benchmark scenarios. You're effectively at 1646MHz CAS10.

Other:
FYI, when DX12 games come out the code will be not only better threaded but also more efficient thus a CPU like yours with the GTX970 probably won't be bottlenecked but we'll have to wait for benchmarks to confirm this.

 

[photonboy]

Update:
If you trust Passmark scores then this is how it shakes out (again assuming near 100% usage such as Handbrake basic settings):

i7-4790K (4.4GHz Turbo)-> 11241

i7-2500K (3.7GHz Turbo)-> 6470

i7-2500K (4.3GHz Turbo)-> 7519 (based on 4.3/3.7 x6470)

Thus, theoretically the newer CPU is still about 50% faster even with the older CPU overclocked.

 

[xaephod]

In my case stock speed is 3.3GHz and I am running at 4.3GHz, would that mean I am running 76% faster than stock? Coffee hasn't been fully absorbed yet and my math isn't working yet.

 

[InvalidError]

In my case stock speed is 3.3GHz and I am running at 4.3GHz, would that mean I am running 76% faster than stock? Coffee hasn't been fully absorbed yet and my math isn't working yet.

The i5-2500k's boost frequency is 3.7GHz.

OC% = (OC - base) / base x 100% = (4.3 - 3.7) / 3.7 x 100% = 16.2%

Even if you used 3.3GHz as the base frequency, that only yields a 30.3% OC.

 

[Poprin]

If you are asking will you see a difference in games, I would say almost 100% no you wont.

I have an i7-2600 @4.2ghz and a stock i5-3450 @3.2 I think it is. The i7 can encode the exact same film with the exact same settings in handbrake 12 minutes faster than my i5. They both still take over an hour with these particular settings. So if 10 minutes is worth the money to you then you can upgrade! Or if you just want a bigger e peen you can upgrade!

Really depends what you are doing with the machine but I can't imagine you will see any real world difference.

 

[xaephod]

30% OC isn't too shabby. Looks like I will wait for Skylake.