Xeon 1230v3 or i5 4690k?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
T

TA3696

Reputable
Jun 12, 2014
21
0
4,510
Hi all,

I'm debating between these 2 processors. The way I see it, either would be just as viable.

I will be using the PC mainly for gaming, often multiplayer games. Possibly occassional twitch streaming, light video editing/rendering and just general work.

I think the pros and cons are 8 threads vs overclocking - I don't see any other difference. And I know that games might be using 8 threads in the future, or maybe not? Which would I see more benefit from realistically?

I want to pair either CPU with an AsRock Z97 Extreme4 so that I can use 2x 7870 GPU's (I have one and am going to get another). Is this motherboard good? I have a budget of around £100 for the motherboard.

My question is to you experts, which would be better for me and why? Thank you!
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
I'd go with the 4690k. If I recall, the Xeon is more comparable to an i7-4770? In which case, the overclockability of the i5 would push it past the performance that the Xeon would give. Seeing as the new i5s can reach anywhere from 4.8-5.5 GHz, that will give you a significant amount of performance over the Xeon.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Yes that's what I heard too. Most games use less than 4 cores, correct? That's why I thought the i5 might be better too.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Ok, interesting.

What if I took all of that out of the equation? Just a direct comparison between the 1230v3 and i5 4690k in performance?

Thank you for the information about stuttering, I'll look into it. Would a single GTX 770 be better than 2x 7870s?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Xfire 7870s would technically be faster than a 770, but AMD still suffers from driver issues and micro stuttering. Nvidia much less so, I haven't experience any micro stuttering whatsoever.

And generally, yes, a vast majority of the games out now use less than 4 cores. But by time games start to utilize more cores, the i5 still won't be a slouch.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
In games that do not support multi-card setups very well, the 770 would be faster. I would go with a 280x for less, though. In streaming, and video editing, the 1230v3 is going to be a better choice. You don't need as expensive of a motherboard, nor do you need an aftermarket cooler. I would rather take the money saved and put it towards better GPU or even a nice SSD.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Ok so I guess here are my options

PCPartPicker part list: http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/p/r6RCD3
Price breakdown by merchant: http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/p/r6RCD3/by_merchant/
Benchmarks: http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/p/r6RCD3/benchmarks/

CPU: Intel Xeon E3-1230 V3 3.3GHz Quad-Core Processor (£176.39 @ Aria PC)
Motherboard: ASRock H97 PRO4 ATX LGA1150 Motherboard (£74.59 @ Overclockers.co.uk)
Total: £250.98
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-06-12 16:55 BST+0100)

or

PCPartPicker part list: http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/p/HccMTW
Price breakdown by merchant: http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/p/HccMTW/by_merchant/
Benchmarks: http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/p/HccMTW/benchmarks/

CPU: Intel Core i5-4690K 3.5GHz Quad-Core Processor (£181.97 @ Dabs)
Motherboard: ASRock Z97 EXTREME4 ATX LGA1150 Motherboard (£103.43 @ Dabs)
Total: £285.40
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-06-12 16:57 BST+0100)

Is overclocking worth £35? I already have the CPU cooler too.

I hear different opinions a lot about what I should get. The i5 is technically better for gaming, but worse for things that use lots of threads. Would having only 3.7GHz cores be too slow? I'd like to have 60FPS when possible, I think lots of the games I play are 'single-threaded' and overclocking helps them.

Video editing isn't that much of a concern as its only casual.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


I would get the i5.

You won't benefit from the Xeon's hyperthreading if you aren't processing large files and doing editing and stuff, and with a CPU cooler and the fun and satisfaction overclocking can give you, the i5-4690K is an unbeatable choice.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Video editing and streaming while gaming is what you would want hyperthreading for.... 3.7ghz since both boards I believe have multicore enhancement, is plenty for gaming. I only have my 3570k because I needed something same day, and I couldn't pass up on Microcenter's combo deals.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Alright, 2 votes for the i5 and one for the Xeon. Hard choice! Would streaming cause huge performance drops with the i5?

Also as a sub-question, I can get a 2GB 770 or 3GB 280x for €300 (going abroad soon, have some euros left over). €368 for a 4GB GTX 770, or €383 for an R9 290. Would 2GB of memory be enough? Or is the 3GB 280x the better one? And is it worth it to get the R9 290? Sorry for the barrage of questions!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Some games are starting to become vram hungry. Watch Dogs I believe is such a title. The R9 290 would be an excellent card and better performance than either of the other two. Streaming while gaming, could affect performance with an i5, unless you are playing a title that only uses 1-2 cores. For what you are wanting to do, I recommend i7 class performance.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Oh... meant "if you aren't video editing..."

Whatever.

What is your GPU budget? 400 Euros?With games like Watch Dogs coming out that are very demanding, you are going to want the very best video card, so basically don't settle for less. The i5-4690K will be definitely ready for anything you can throw at it.

http://www.gamersnexus.net/game-bench/1472-watch-dogs-gpu-cpu-benchmark Even GTX 770s are barely breaking the 30 FPS threshold with an overclocked i5.

I'm thinking, looking at these benchmarks, that a 3GB R9 290 would be your best option. 3GB is recommended for the Ultra setting.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Yes, I suppose around 400.

So how's this? http://tietokonekauppa.fi/product/163024/graphic+card/XFX/RADEON+R9+290+BLACK+980M+PCI-E/ I think it's 4GB. You should be able to choose English on the site.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


I think that is this: http://xfxforce.com/en-us/products/amd-radeon-r9-series/amd-radeon-r9-290-black-double-dissipation-edition-r9-290a-edbd

It looks like an excellent choice. 4GB of vram will serve you well for quite awhile.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Personally, I've streamed at 1440p and 1080p, with all of my games on Ultra and still don't really notice a performance decrease. I mean obviously the frames I'm getting is a bit lower, but I have nothing but smooth gameplay. And I'm using an i5-4670k @ 4.2 GHz.

AMD cards tend to have driver issues, amongst other things. Bias aside though, of the cards you mentioned, the 290 would be the best card.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Add in my vote for the Xeon, but I recommend the Haswell refresh e3-1231v3 for the same price as the 1230v3. It's 100mhz faster and should run cooler. That's 3.4/3.8ghz. I would not put it in a Z97 motherboard though. Part of the beauty of the Xeon is it can be put in a B85, H87, or H97 motherboard(wonder when the B95 comes out...) and it ends up being a good bit cheaper than the i5 4670k/4690k.


The overclocked i5 will be faster in gaming, but the Xeon will be faster in just about everything else you would do. I just don't think overclocking is worth it. The last thing you're gonna need is more cpu power. I would even get an i5 4570 or 4590 for $50-60 less if it meant being able to afford a 290 over a 280x or 770.

I also agree with selling your 7870 and getting a newer faster single card. I don't know what your budget is, but I'm loving that Sapphire Tri-X 290 right now. Other 290s can be had for around $350.
 
Upvote 1 Downvote
The CPU+Motherboard won't eat out of my GPU budget, due to being different currencies. So the price really isn't an issue, it's just what I will get the most performance from.

So what I'm gathering is: i5 is better for gaming, but the Xeon is sufficient, and the Xeon will be better in most other tasks I could choose to do. Neither will be a bottleneck? Or could the Xeon have worse performance in single-threaded titles?

I think I'd feel limited by the 3.7GHz of the Xeon honestly (I might be being stupid). I'd like to have the option to overclock for more performance I think. I don't suppose either would be a bad choice.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The Xeon's 3.7ghz core is stronger than any AMD core ever made, and people use thousands of AMDs everyday. I promise you it will not bottleneck anything for a very long time. You will not notice a difference most of the time between an i5 4670k running 3.8ghz and an overclocked 4670k running 4.5ghz. That's why I keep saying that overclocking is not worth it at all. For the price of overclocking, you could get a Xeon e3-1241v3 that runs at 3.5/3.9ghz and a H97 motherboard.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom