upgrading setup 4790k vs 5820k overclock

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
McFee

McFee

Distinguished
Dec 16, 2013
74
1
18,665
So ive sold off my HTPC setup. Current gaming setup is a 2600k@4.3Ghz and an Asus z68 Mobo and 16gig ram. Ill be moving it down to my HTPC setup.

Im pretty torn about which CPU to upgrade to (4790k vs 5820k). Seeing as my last setup has lasted for so long and ive got some extra cash from the sale of my old HTPC setup ($300) to offset the cost of my next setup.

Ill just be purchasing the CPU, Mobo, Ram, and Cooling.

thoughts and recommendations?

Components im carrying over is a GTX 970, corsair 1000watt PSU, Samsung evo 500gig SSD etc. And im gaming on a 1440p monitor if it helps.
 
Solution
N
Sort by date Sort by votes
I don't know what it is that attracts gamers to the X99 platform. I guess the thought that more expensive = better but the 5820k is gimped at just 28 lanes and it doesn't give you anything that a 4790k can't. Unless you are using 3 GFX cards and are looking foir that 4% performance increase that 3 way SLI brings, X99 w/ 5820k / 5830k does nothing for a gaming box but siphon money away that could be better spent elsewhere.

This our recommended "up to 1440p" build

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i5-4690K 3.5GHz Quad-Core Processor ($226.49 @ OutletPC)
Motherboard: MSI Z97-GAMING 5 ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($125.98 @ Newegg)
Memory: Mushkin Redline 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR3-2400 Memory ($161.98 @ Newegg)
Storage: Samsung 850 EVO-Series 250GB 2.5" Solid State Drive ($110.98 @ Newegg)
Storage: Seagate 2TB 3.5" 7200RPM Hybrid Internal Hard Drive ($100.75 @ OutletPC)
Video Card: MSI GeForce GTX 970 4GB Twin Frozr V Video Card (2-Way SLI) ($339.00 @ NCIX US)
Video Card: MSI GeForce GTX 970 4GB Twin Frozr V Video Card (2-Way SLI) ($339.00 @ NCIX US)
Case: Phanteks Enthoo Luxe ATX Full Tower Case ($159.99 @ Amazon)
Power Supply: EVGA 750W 80+ Gold Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply ($104.99 @ NCIX US)
Other: Swiftech H-240-X ($150.00)
Total: $1819.16
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-03-31 15:56 EDT-0400

You have the PSU, SSD and 1 GFX card covered
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
A few newer game titles actually respond well to multiple integer cores on AMD, but do not fully suport hyperthreading, which is why people will tell you to stay away from i7, as explained about the SLI setup, the extra PCIe lanes provide nothing when it comes to Gaming performance, but can show significant increase in compute performance for co-porcessing applications.

However, with DX12, you will see the a better utilization of processing power in game titles. And, we may see full support for hyperthreading. But that's in the future.

Right now, within the same TDP window, you will see more performance from the 4790k instead of a 5820k, however when games decide to support more cores, and/or hyperthreading, you will see more performance from the 5820k. In fact, at that same TDP (whatever it may be) you will see even more perforamnce from the i5 (which is why its mentioned above).

The reasson for this is that right now game performance is based almost entirely off IPC and Frequency, and without hyperthreading support or large core count support, the i5 will achieve the highest stable clock, at the same TDP and IPC as the other processors

The future may unlock the potential of i7's but the way the programming world goes it may be 3-4 years before we see widespread support of all of DX12's features on gaming engines. And by that time, the new i7 may be cheaper and more efficient making it a better decision to take the i5 now, and wait for the glory days of the i7 to come to fruition.

AAAANNNDDD
the MOBO and ram for the 4xxxk series chips will be about 120-180 dollarts cheaper (depending omn the route you take) allowing more money to be spent on graphics which is still the major bottleneck in games. (and especially at higher resolutions)

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Not only does the x99 cpu upgrade not affect gaming, but like mentioned the Motherboards and ram are more expensive. Ram speeds do not affect gaming either, there are tons of benchmarks out there comparing like 1600mhz vs 2400mhz and more showing only a few fps increase.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Regarding RAM speed and benchmarks...

1. RAM Speed / CAS affects multi-card builds much differently than singe card builds....few reviewers bother to investigate this. Like anything else, performance of the box is limited by the "bottleneck", when that's the card, RAM speed doesn't matter.

2. RAM Speed / CAS affects minimum fps much differently than singe card builds....few reviewers bother to investigate this. Most won't care if average fps is affected 5% either way but let minimum fps drop from 40 to 34 ... that's what's annoying.

3. RAM Speed / CAS affects every game differently. STALKER game series was affected both by RAM speed and PCI-E bandwidth the latter of which hardly ever comes into play. So the two people who are arguing "RAM Speed doesn't affect Gaming" and RAM speed significantly affects gaming" ... well they are both right ... and both wrong.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/32-gb-ddr3-ram,3790-10.html

i7-4770K overclocked to 4.50 GHz
Asus Z87-Pro
PowerColor PCS+ AXR9 290X 4GB

In Metro 2033.... the GSkill 2400 RAM at its best CAS timings scores 116.8 fps compared to the 116.7 for the 1600 base set .... a speed increase 0.08% .... looks like the guy arguing no effect wins

In F1.... the GSkill 2400 RAM at its best CAS timings scores 177.0 fps compared to the 159.0 for the 1600 base set .... a speed increase 11.32 % .... looks like the guy arguing no effect wins

Just to give ya some relevance to that 11.32 % ....

-To get that 11.32%, it costs $20-25 to go from 1600 to 2400 (2x8GB)
-Going from a 970 to 980 will get ya 14% but that costs 9 times as much.

So the only answer with regard to "Does faster RAM matter ? " is "It depends."

We tend to use 2133 on all single card builds cuz it costs just $3 - $7

We tend to use 2400 on all multi card builds cuz it costs it only increases system build costs by just 1% and it will have an effect on minimum fps, SLI performance and in fps increases will vary by game.

Benchmarks aside "will ya notice it ?" ... perhaps that question must be considered with another one "when ya spending $1850, will ya notice the $20 ?"
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Are yu planning to add a 3rd card at some point ? Or what was it that you were looking for that swayed you to X99. I don't think there any data showing that either platform will last any longer or overclocks for higher fps.

In house here we have a 2600k at 4.8 Ghz (Son No. 3) , a 4770k at 4.7 (So No. 1) and a new 4690k that Son No. 2 is looking to claim the crown w/ 4.9 once he finishes final build touches

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
no fps difference in current games with current gpu's and DX11. DX12 will even lower cpu load once implemented. Only 'potential' is there...

Personally I don't mind spending a bit more on mobo+cpu+ram as i upgrade it only after several gpu upgrades. My i7 920 on X58 platform was way overkill at the time i bought it 6 years back, but still it bottlenecked my gtx770 when i bought that 5 years later. (The bottleneck, experienced mainly in bf3/4, was partially fixed when OC'ing from stock 2.66Ghz to 3.4Ghz with clearly noticable average fps increase, but still there as min fps and 'smoothness' also increased noticably when going to X99 with 5820k)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The price difference between the 4790k and the 5820k isn't that far off. $420ish (4790k) vs 469.99 (5820k) also im in Canada to clarify so prolly much different in the US. the other price differences im pricing out is for a mobo eg.asus x99-a is 329.99 or a ASUS MAXIMUS VII HERO is $255. Ram kits im seeing ddr4 for around $220 vs DDR3 is about 160-180ish. to overall the difference isn't much. Later on the plan is to run a second card but no more then 2 way SLI. Im probably gonna pair it with a H80i GT or a good noctua Air setup.

To clarify on my monitor setup its a ROG Swift if it helps the conversation. The SLI part of it is up in the air because I bought it before the whole 3.5Gig fiasco and it has turned me off slightly. so it might get swapped with a 980 later on or a 980ti or whatever in good time down the road.

hearing everyone's thought and opinions is great! Keep it coming!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The "3.5gig fiasko" isn't really bad, it's just made out to be, because nvidia marketed as normal 4gb first. After all you have 3.5gb with full bandwith and once they're used up 0.5gb with slower memory. The performance decrease isn't really worse than the one of a gtx 980 using more than 3.5gb. It's like 48% performance decrease on a 980 and 51% performance decrease on a gtx 970. At best measurable, hardly important.

As for the setup, I absolutely agree with Jack here. Instead of grabbing 1600mhz ram, might as well get 2133-2400mhz ram which is usually about the same price (mine was actually cheaper, haha). And since the 5820k doesn't do anything in games over a 4790k except for 3-way sli support.
The only part which I wouldn't recommend is the cooler - it's quite noisy. If you can fit a noctua nh-d15 in the case, it will cool as good, save you $70 and will not even produce half the noise. The motherboard is up to you as well, but I'd recommend the asrock extreme4 in the <$160 segment. Below $200 the z97x-ud5h is the best features/money I can find, but there's usually no real reason to spend above $130 on a z97 mobo as all you get are fancy onboard buttons or additional sata/usb ports. Since ivy the voltage regulation is in the cpu so your motherboard choice likely won't affect your oc until you power the chip more than 1.45v or so, which is way too much for general usage. I found the ud5h-bk need 0.015v less vcore to get my chip stable at 4.9ghz and at 5ghz I only got it "application stable" on the ud5h, on mine ($100 instead of $180) it would randomly crash. Until 4.8ghz, there's absolutely no difference and you can't really expect a higher 24/7 oc anyway.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Although the 5820k is "gimped" at 28 lanes, its still a lot more than the 16 lanes of the 87/97 platform cpus. That said, its only relevant if you need the lanes for other PCI-E components (PCI-E ssd etc).
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


You dont get 32 lanes with a PLX chip, you still only get 16 lanes to the CPU. A PLX chip just works similar to a switch with a 16 lane uplink to the CPU, you are essentially sharing the bandwidth but presenting the full amount.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


My son just went for 930 X58 (Asus Rampage Extreme) ... which was by no means "overkill" it was a typical gaming build at the time ..... to 4690k w/ twin 970s ... he loves the speed increase in both avg and min fps. .... some of his games were unplayable and nor he has +60 across the board. Some ghosting on his IPS monitor (he minored in photography) tho.

He looked at Anadtech to see the differences in both min and max fps ....most are pretty close so that didn't really help much

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1320?vs=1261

On min fps, 4690k wins 4 outta 5 ..... one by almost 2 to 1
On average fps, 4690k wins 3 outta 4

What finally made the difference was 5820k w/ one 970 or 4690k w/ 2 ?

MSI Z97 Krait + 16GB + 4690k = $112 + 240 + $100 = $452
MSI Z97 Krait + 16GB 5820k = $240 + 390 + $190 = $820

That left $362 which paid for the 2nd 970 (and a 75% speed increase) and a 2m interior RGB LED for the case.

Later he switched from a white / black build to a white / orange build so changed out the MoBo to Gigabyte Z97 SOC Force ... part because the Z97 Krait is a poor gamer and part aesthetics.




There fiasco is the "fake rage" .... it's almost like it came from Sean Hannity. Sure nVidia shuda made it clear that the 4GB had split usage but it doesn't change anything....numerous article have detailed why this was 'much ado about nothing"

http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/middle-earth-shadow-of-mordor-geforce-gtx-970-vram-stress-test.html

The RAM pricing is bit off in the comparison .... you're comparing same speed and ignoring the fact that DDR4 latency is almost double. A proper comparison would be base cost of 1600 CAS 9 DDR3 versus base cost of 2400 CAS 16 DDR4

Id favor the Noc over an H-anything but the Phanteks PH-TC14PE outperforms it and is only $60.





I don't see the relevance. Z97 is "2 way SLI" capable which needs x8 x8. Why go to X99 if you are only going to use 2 cards ? The 5820k loses in gaming against the 4690k. The 5930k actually beats it in 4 outta 5 games (average fps), the 5820k loses 3-2 and is capable* of 4 way SLI. In min fps the 5820k loses 4 - 1, the 5930k 3 - 2.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1261?vs=1316

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1261?vs=1316
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

That's not really what i meant to say. Sure there is a price difference, otherwise it wouldn't make sense. Let's asume that in 5 years you'll pair these rigs with latest GC GTX1370 or whatever and connect that to a, by then standard, 4K monitor. Presumably games will be better multi-threaded by then as well. That's a whole other story not?

I like to think that i will keep this rig (X99 with 5820K) 1 or 2 years longer than I would if I went for G97 with 4690K/4790K. That wil (at least partially) make up for the extra cost.


That's only because of frequency difference and can be easily overcome. Both are haswell and both will overclock to sililar frequencies. 5820 a bit less on average as it has more cores. My 5820K went easily to 4.5G. I don't see it loosing on fps for any game against any stock clocked CPU on the market. Not that it would make any REAL difference right now anyway. Anything above stock clocked i5 4690K won't add more than a couple of frames. Fast forward a few years though....
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom