i7-4930k vs i7-4820k - Which will be better for running VM's and gaming

[andyk1985]

Hello,

I'm looking to build a new system in the next couple of weeks.

Build so far is looking to be:

Either i7-4820k or i7-4930k
ASUS PX979
32GB Kingston HYPERX BEAST 2400MHz
240gb ASUS SSD 830 Read / 810 write
Corsair 850w TXM-850
Corsair H100i CPU Cooler
Sapphire Radeon R9 290 Tri-X OC 4096MB GDDR5 PCI-Express Graphics Card

Win 8.1 Pro


So basicly my question is this machine will be used mainly for a combination of Gaming, general use and also running Server VM's for a training lab environment. Il be looking to run a few 2012 R2 servers simultaneously to emulate a DC, Exchange environment etc.

I know the 4930k is about £200 more than the 4820k so is it going to be worth the extra money or should I just stick to the 4820k?

Many thanks,

Andy

 

[vmN]

First I would rather compare 4770k(instead of 4820k) against 4930k

Do you really need an extreme Intel processor?

I do believe a 4770k should be more than fine for your usages, no need to go into a 2011 board.

 

[andyk1985]

4770k Would be better for running Multiple VM's at the same time?

 

[bicycle_repair_man]

What virtualisation software will you be using? If it'll be vSphere then you'll benefit from the extra threads of the 4930k.

Each virtual core represents a thread on the physical processor, so a dual-core VM occupies two threads, a quad-core occupies four threads, etc. The question you need to ask yourself is; "how many VMs will I be running simultaneously and what resources will they all need?". DCs and Exchange servers are fine on single-core processors, particularly in a lab environment.

Bear in mind that as well as the VMs occupying threads on the physical processor, the host machine will use these resources as well.

If you're working with four or five single-core VMs at a time, the 4820k should be fine. Anything beyond that and I'd look to the 4930k.

 

[andyk1985]

I'm not 100% sure on which VM software I will use yet. On my current build I use VM Workstation to run 3-4 MS 2008 R2 Servers but I only have 8gb DDR2 and the old Q6600 Intel Quad. It struggles a lot.

I will want to do the same with 2012 R2 servers but also maybe have a couple of 2009 R2 severs up at the same time possibly so maybe 3-5 VM's running at a time. Running Cisco labs are also on the horizon for running virtual switches, fire walls etc

I have started working at a new place that have various different VM software so it depends on which licenses are available, worst case il fall back to using VM Workstation.

So its needs to be able to accommodate that lot as well as general use, plus home cinema / multimedia and gaming.

 

[bicycle_repair_man]

Thinking about your future requirements with Cisco virtual switches and firewalls, I'd steer toward the 4930k provided you're happy paying the extra £200. The 4820k will still do a good job, particularly compared to the Q6600, but it'll have limited flexibility. The 4930k has four extra threads over the 4820k, so you have greater flexibility in terms of what CPU resources are available to the VMs and the host machine. Whether that's worth £200 is up to you.

You probably know this already, but I'd also recommend that you bump the RAM up to at least 16GB DDR3.

 

[andyk1985]

Hi again, its a brand new build so im putting in 32GB Kingston HYPERX BEAST 2400MHz. Another question about the CPU, it will have water-cooling to allow for over clocking, does the 4930k have a decent margin for over clocking? Where i'm looking to buy the CPU from they will provide the 4820k pre OC'ed to 4.4GHz. They can do the same for the 4930k but that bumps up the cost.

 

[Eggz]

The high end platform is clearly what you need for VMs and training. It's unnecessary for gaming, but it will get the job done. Between the two choices in your title, I'd say go for the 4930k. It's significantly more capable at not much more cost. Given how much you already are investing into the machine, there's no point at crippling it with a 4820k's quad-core. If you're going LGA2011, get at least the 4930k or 3930k.

 

[bicycle_repair_man]

Overclocking is really straight forward on Intel "k" processors, so there's no need to pay for it unless you don't want to invest the time doing it yourself. Just make sure you get a motherboard with a chipset that supports overclocking. In your case, this will probably be Z87.

Overclocking the processor yourself can be a tedious process as you'll be making adjustments, testing, making more adjustments, testing again, etc. but it's worth it. It helps you to understand the steps involved and the effect overclocking has on your machine.

It's impossible to judge how far a processor will overclock, as seemingly identical ones always yield different results. As a ballpark figure, I'd say that you could achieve somewhere around 4.3Ghz on the 4930k, but there's absolutely no guarantee of that. It's very much luck of the draw.

 

[andyk1985]

Perfect thanks, looks like the mobo will be ASUS® P9X79 LE as im building the system via PC Specialist and thats one of the options for this CPU

 

[bicycle_repair_man]

Most overclocking is done with a Z77 or Z87 chipset, so I'd recommend you do some research on the X79 chipset if you haven't already. Everything I've read says that it's possible, but doesn't describe the process.

PC Specialist is very good, I used them to build a laptop a few years ago which I still have to this day.

 

[Eggz]

There's actually a lot of very good information on overclocking the 4930k. Look up LinusTechTips on YouTube. He has OC guides for the major processors, including the 4930k. They have step-by-step instructions.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=linus+4930k+overclocking+guide+site%3Ayoutube.com