The Core i7-4770K Review: Haswell Is Faster; Desktop Enthusiasts Yawn

[meat_loaf]

Unless you're using a frame counter, you won't see the difference in any game so long as the framerate stays above your monitor's refresh rate.

And in many newer titles it DOES go WAY above monitors refresh rate.
Guild Wars 2 which is an older title on an even older engine is very much improved the last few generations.

First you say you would see a difference, now you're admitting to the contrary.

As long as your framerate stays above your monitor's refresh rate, the processor makes absolutely no difference. If your monitor's refresh rate is 60hz, it doesn't matter if you're using an Athlon5350 or a Core i7 4790K. You won't see a difference as long as the system can maintain a 60FPS minimum.

Oops, I meant below. For example, during WorldVSWorld fights (150 players v 150 players v 150 players from 3 different server), framerate on my 3570K at 4.7GHz goes down to mid 20s.
On a friend Haswel(pretty sure its an I7 4790K stock, could be I5 stock), it hovers in the mid 30s. That is a significant increase.

But you are paying an extra $100-150 of difference between the 3500 and 4700k models. You could always lower the graphics down a bit to improve performance. Trying to get some extra fps is a disease. You'll be spending thousands each year trying to catch the latest to get few more fps.

 

[Novuake]

But you are paying an extra $100-150 of difference between the 3500 and 4700k models. You could always lower the graphics down a bit to improve performance. Trying to get some extra fps is a disease. You'll be spending thousands each year trying to catch the latest to get few more fps.

I do not disagree. What I am saying is that there ARE reason to upgrade from 1st generation I5/I7, not from one gen to the next.

 

[theyeti87]

But you are paying an extra $100-150 of difference between the 3500 and 4700k models. You could always lower the graphics down a bit to improve performance. Trying to get some extra fps is a disease. You'll be spending thousands each year trying to catch the latest to get few more fps.

I do not disagree. What I am saying is that there ARE reason to upgrade from 1st generation I5/I7, not from one gen to the next.

The i7-950 Nehalem I have can be overclocked and stable on air to boost performance to that of the i7-975 Extreme and beyond, which puts it in the same tier of performance as today's top Ivy bridge, only with lower fuel economy.

 

[Novuake]

The i7-950 Nehalem I have can be overclocked and stable on air to boost performance to that of the i7-975 Extreme and beyond, which puts it in the same tier of performance as today's top Ivy bridge, only with lower fuel economy.

With that reasoning, if you overclock Ivy you can get even better results.
Overclock vs overclock always, never overclock vs stock as so many people tend to do.

 

[theyeti87]

The i7-950 Nehalem I have can be overclocked and stable on air to boost performance to that of the i7-975 Extreme and beyond, which puts it in the same tier of performance as today's top Ivy bridge, only with lower fuel economy.

With that reasoning, if you overclock Ivy you can get even better results.
Overclock vs overclock always, never overclock vs stock as so many people tend to do.

I'm not interested in dimishing returns, but rather actual performance and the money required.
My point in all of this thread is that it's an enormous waste of money to upgrade from Nehalem to Ivy Bridge.

 

[Simon Anderson]

why oh why does this article continue to display in "featured topics"... it's over two years old! argh

 

[mapesdhs]

why oh why does this article continue to display in "featured topics"... it's over two years old! argh

That happens for all sorts of articles, not just this one.