Is the i5 4690 and asus z97-a a future proof combination

[HongaarseBeer]

Hello,

I am wondering if the combination of the Intel core i5 4690 and the Asus Z97-A will be any good if it comes to being future proof. I currently only want to use the r9 380 as a gpu, but will it be possible to expand this? I read on the site of Intel that the cpu only supports up to 16 PCI Express ports, up to 1x16, 2x8, 1x8+2x4. So if I have things like a network adapter et cetera, will there be any room left to possibly upgrade/add anything in the future?

And if there is the possibility of adding another gpu someday, could that be the same kind of gpu or would I need one that has a different PCI port?

This is the build: http://pcpartpicker.com/list/kGZHxY

Thanks.

 

[HongaarseBeer]

Turbo boost is automatic, but more complex than suggested above.

With one thread running, the 6500 will ramp up to 3.6Ghz if needed, and the 6600 will ramp up to 3.9Ghz. Some older games will work this way.
As more threads are used, each of the CPUs will run slower.

Turbo Boost is available for very brief bursts.

Would that really make a significant difference when it comes to gaming?
If the 6500 goes for 185 and the 6600 for 207, both in euro's, would that be worth the extra 20 euro's like Lucio_1 said?

By the way, the 6600K now sells (probably for a limited time only) for 198 on Newegg. If, by the time I buy all my components it is still priced this way, I will go for this one.

 

[DonkeyOatie]

No, it would not make a significant difference, that was my point.

It's not the 20 Euros, it's the percentage increase. The 6600 costs about 12% more and is about 6% faster in actual use (less in some cases, more in others) than the 6500. It may be cheap, but it's not cost effective. The 6600K at 198 would be cost effective, even if you do not overclock it.

 

[HongaarseBeer]

No, it would not make a significant difference, that was my point.

It's not the 20 Euros, it's the percentage increase. The 6600 costs about 12% more and is about 6% faster in actual use (less in some cases, more in others) than the 6500. It may be cheap, but it's not cost effective. The 6600K at 198 would be cost effective, even if you do not overclock it.

Okay, thank you for this information!

 

[Lucio_1]

Turbo boost is automatic, but more complex than suggested above.

With one thread running, the 6500 will ramp up to 3.6Ghz if needed, and the 6600 will ramp up to 3.9Ghz. Some older games will work this way.
As more threads are used, each of the CPUs will run slower.

Turbo Boost is available for very brief bursts.

I´m not really sure what you mean by "very brief bursts". What I understood is that it will boost up for only a few seconds and then go back to its base clock

. If that´s what you meant, it is totally incorrect. If I´m gaming hard, turbo boost will keep at 3,9 GHz all the way for an hour ( it has low peaks of 800MHz that lasts 0,5 seconds, but other than that, 3,9GHz all the way till the end

By the way, I´m not basing my comment in review, I own a 6600 and that´s the way this processor works.

 

[Lucio_1]

Turbo boost is automatic, but more complex than suggested above.

With one thread running, the 6500 will ramp up to 3.6Ghz if needed, and the 6600 will ramp up to 3.9Ghz. Some older games will work this way.
As more threads are used, each of the CPUs will run slower.

Turbo Boost is available for very brief bursts.

Would that really make a significant difference when it comes to gaming?
If the 6500 goes for 185 and the 6600 for 207, both in euro's, would that be worth the extra 20 euro's like Lucio_1 said?

By the way, the 6600K now sells (probably for a limited time only) for 198 on Newegg. If, by the time I buy all my components it is still priced this way, I will go for this one.

The more GHz the better right? otherwise people wouldnt be OCing their processor speeding up their clock. So if the 6600 works up to 3.9 GHz for as much time as it needs (not very brief bursts), I think the extra $20 is worth. That´s just my opinion

 

[DonkeyOatie]

The computer will CPU will use Turbo Boost when the load requires it and it drops down to normal when not required and to cool. An 'scope will show that it does not maintain 3.9Hgz continuously or if you are running multiple threads

 

[HongaarseBeer]

The ASRock H170 states that it supports DDR4-2133. Does that mean that it supports DDR4-2133 and up or only 2133?

 

[DonkeyOatie]

It will run memory at 2133Mhz even if the memory will run faster, and will handle slower memory. To run faster would require XMP.

The maximum memory speed of any Skylake processor by the Intel specification for DDR4 memory is 2133Mhz. So any memory speed beyond 2133Mhz is seen as a memory OC by Intel. The ASRock DDR4 Non-Z OC ('Z' refers to the Z170 chipset) is only available with memory that is using specific memory chips on the DIMM card. I know one is Samsung memory chips, and I think the other is Hynix memory chips. There may be only specific Samsung and Hynix memory chips that are able to be over clocked by the DDR4 Non-Z OC feature.

All memory has a default speed that is programmed into the memory in the same general way as an XMP profile. For DDR4 memory, that is usually 2133 or even 1866. That is done to insure the memory will work with most if not all motherboard and processor combinations. Higher speed memory (beyond 2133 for DDR4) might not work at the highest specified speed with every board and processor, so the owner must manually set the memory speed in the board's UEFI/BIOS. This methodology has been used for years, probably starting with DDR2 memory.

An XMP profile is a simplified way of manually setting the highest memory speed the memory can work at, but that must be activated manually, if your system allows you to do that. Most cannot due to Intel's rules.

You may be able to tighten the tertiary timings down while keeping the speeds the same.

 

[HongaarseBeer]

It will run memory at 2133Mhz even if the memory will run faster, and will handle slower memory. To run faster would require XMP.

The maximum memory speed of any Skylake processor by the Intel specification for DDR4 memory is 2133Mhz. So any memory speed beyond 2133Mhz is seen as a memory OC by Intel. The ASRock DDR4 Non-Z OC ('Z' refers to the Z170 chipset) is only available with memory that is using specific memory chips on the DIMM card. I know one is Samsung memory chips, and I think the other is Hynix memory chips. There may be only specific Samsung and Hynix memory chips that are able to be over clocked by the DDR4 Non-Z OC feature.

All memory has a default speed that is programmed into the memory in the same general way as an XMP profile. For DDR4 memory, that is usually 2133 or even 1866. That is done to insure the memory will work with most if not all motherboard and processor combinations. Higher speed memory (beyond 2133 for DDR4) might not work at the highest specified speed with every board and processor, so the owner must manually set the memory speed in the board's UEFI/BIOS. This methodology has been used for years, probably starting with DDR2 memory.

An XMP profile is a simplified way of manually setting the highest memory speed the memory can work at, but that must be activated manually, if your system allows you to do that. Most cannot due to Intel's rules.

You may be able to tighten the tertiary timings down while keeping the speeds the same.

Okay, thanks for clearing that up!