TurboJ writes:
> ... going with a 4670k would save about 120 euros compared to the 4820k.
> Then I'd get no hyper threading though. ...
I don't see the point of the 4670K. If I was going to get a quad-core with no HT,
I'd just bag a used 2500K which costs much less and oc's far more easily (5GHz
is the norm with a decent board, and those are easy to come by).
> Comparing the 4820k and 4770k with an equivalent mobo would mean approx.
> 40 euros difference in favor of the 4770k.
But then the 4820K has a higher base clock, higher TDP and should oc both
easier & better as a result.
> The big difference is, then, that the 2011 platform would support 6-core CPUs ...
That and much better PCIe bandwidth for multiple GPUs.
> If my goal is to get the best possible gaming performance for the next three
> years (updating the GPUs once or twice in that time), what would be the
> wisest choice? ...
Three years? Definitely X79. Remember: the CPUs for Z87 only have 16 PCIe
lanes coming off the chip, so even using 2-way SLI/CF means splitting that
in half for each GPU. I shudder to think of the bandwidth requirements that'll
be the norm in 3 years time, but at least by then a current X79 system with 40
PCIe lanes will still be able to handle it, and with a 6-core option also able to offer
a CPU upgrade to match (assuming games & apps continue the trend towards
supporting ever greater threading).
> If it happens that I never use more than two GPUs, will the 2011 still have a benefit?
Even with two, yes. It can run them x16/x16,whereas Z87 would be x8/x8, unless
there are boards which use bridge chips, etc. Also leaves plenty of spare lanes for
anything else you might want to add. I've fiddled about with SAS RAID, etc. for video.
> Using 3-way SLI does seem like a good bang-for-buck deal, ...
Very much depends on the game how well 3-way works.
> but at 1080p I suppose I won't need more than two GTX 770s. ...
At that res probably not, though you could future-proof yourself somewhat
better just by fitting a 780, ie. even a single 780 is (some would argue) kinda
overkill for one 1080 display, but it means whatever you're playing can
have the detail cranked up with such a card (I like that way of doing things)
and in the future adding a 2nd 780, or a 3rd if it's X79, gives plenty of
headroom.
Also, if you fitted a single 780 just now, you'll save on power consumption
until you decide to get a 2nd, vs. running two 770s.
> Three 760s would theoretically be faster (and cheaper), but only on 1440p
> + and sometimes turn even worse performance.
Hmph, I wouldn't bother with the 760. If I was skimping to that degree I'd
just get two 3GB 580s instead.
(beats a 780; or find 4GB 760s) But yes,
performance would vary, and then you'd be chewing power from 3 cards
instead of 2.
> So, 2-way SLI - which mobo/CPU combo is the winner?
X79 IMO, much better future proofing given the 3-year time scale.
Honestly, Z87 and recent trends feel like backwards moves to me. I was so
impressed with X58 when it first came out; the glorious number of PCIe lanes
available, 6-core option, lots of RAM, loads of PCIe slots, boards with excellent
slot spacing such as the Asrock X58 Extreme6.
Since then it seems like, in basic concept of 'degree' of 'power' (if I can put it
that way), Z77/Z87 are a step downwards while X79 is a step upwards (with
just the low no. of native Intel SATA3 ports being a small fly in the ointment).
Indeed, some of the old P55 boards feel better to me than many of the current
Z87 options, eg. the ASUS P7P55 WS Supercomputer, with its PCIe bridge
chips offering x8/x8/x8/x8 for 4-way CF/SLI, though the design was aimed
more at GPU/compute users than gamers. Other board makers did this with
P67/Z68, using bridge chips to get round the limited PCIe lanes available, with
varying degrees of efficacy. X79 just does it raw though, and then there are
uber boards like the Asrock X79 Extreme11 which uses two bridge chips to
offer full 4-way x16/x16/x16/x16, though the board is costly and aimed more
at pro users who'd benefit from the onboard SAS (gamers would normally go
with the R4E).
I think I'd be a lot more impressed with Z87 if the chip had 32 lanes of PCIe,
that would be more like it. But 16? Bit boring. Feels like Z87 is more akin to
the lesser-end of P55 in concept, while X79 is way up there. Where is the
sensible X58 middle-ground? Remember X58 had plenty of sensible 4-core
options while 6-core was available aswell; until now, X79 focused on the
6-core with only rather limited and somewhat pointless 4-core options (the
4820K changes all that).
It's a pity a lot of the X79 boards are EATX, but there are good ATX models too.
Just check mbd reviews before buying, though as I say, these days I'd tend
to favour ASUS or good Asrock most of the time.
Actually, if you've not bought a case yet, you could always get a case that can
handle EATX and then... ;D
Ian.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram