Intel i7 5820K vs i7 4790K

[DarkSmith2]

i7-6700k

[Raiden60]

i7-6700k

That's not even out yet.

[Raiden60]

An i7 makes no sense for a gaming PC get an i5 and then spend more on getting a good GPU And DDR4 isnt needed for gaming.

It's not gonna be "just for gaming" though. It'll be for F@H and other workstation processes.

[theereal]

It's not gonna be "just for gaming" though. It'll be for F@H and other workstation processes.

F@H?

[NumLock21]

Only has your computer for a week, but why not just return your amd build and then grab the Intel.

[Raiden60]

Only has your computer for a week, but why not just return your amd build and then grab the Intel.

Not got enough money for it atm. I have to actually build the motorbike before I can sell it.

F@H?

Folding@Home. You basically use your computer in conjuction with loads of other computers and it makes a supercomputer

[theereal]

Not got enough money for it atm. I have to actually build the motorbike before I can sell it.

Folding@Home. You basically use your computer in conjuction with loads of other computers and it makes a supercomputer

Ahhh, righto, if youre going to be pushing it through heavy workloads an i7 might benefit you

[-iSynthesis]

5775C 

Lower TDP so it could probably overclock even further, works on Z97 too.

No. That CPU overclocks horribly. 

[Sintezza]

If this setup is mainaly for gaming, then a 5820k doesnt make much sense.

a 4790K will perform better in most games, and its a "cheaper platform"

On a 4790K you can run 2 single cards in Sli if you like to.

You can also do triple or quad sli setup on Z97, if you buy an over expensive Z97 board with plx chip.

But still it simply doesnt make any sense, Because you will be cpu bottlenecked anyway.

 

5820k also has a limitation wenn it comes to multiple gpu setups.

it does come with 28 pci-e 3.0 lanes, but this does not mean, that it can also run triple cards in sli.

Because this highly depends on which X99 mobo you are going with.

Not all X99 boards support triple sli with a 28 lane cpu, it highly depends on the boards lane layout.

And also which other devices you want to connect to the pci-e bus.

So keep that in mind.

[Raiden60]

If this setup is mainaly for gaming, then a 5820k doesnt make much sense.

a 4790K will perform better in most games, and its a "cheaper platform"

On a 4790K you can run 2 single cards in Sli if you like to.

You can also do triple or quad sli setup on Z97, if you buy an over expensive Z97 board with plx chip.

But still it simply doesnt make any sense, Because you will be cpu bottlenecked anyway.

 

5820k also has a limitation wenn it comes to multiple gpu setups.

it does come with 28 pci-e 3.0 lanes, but this does not mean, that it can also run triple cards in sli.

Because this highly depends on which X99 mobo you are going with.

Not all X99 boards support triple sli with a 28 lane cpu, it highly depends on the boards lane layout.

And also which other devices you want to connect to the pci-e bus.

So keep that in mind.

Well, thanks for the information. If I go the Z97 route, I'll get an Asus Z97 Deluxe. X99 and i'll get an X99-A. They're both practically the same price anyway, and the X99-A supports 3 way SLI with 28-lane processors anyway, I think. I'll have to double check, but at this time, the Asus website takes literally over 30 seconds to view a page. Getting to the correct thing will take me a while

[nunya bus]

well all modern processors like the i5 4690k, i7 4790k and i7 5820k will have very little difference in gaming because most games use more gpu than cpu unless your playing arma or dayz but you will still get shit fps...

as someone who has gone from a 4690 (non K) to a G3260 and now a 4790K I can tell you there is little to no difference between the i5 and i7 for games.

a 4690K is more than enough 

[ItsGinger35]

It has lower frequency, 95% of current games will perform better on 4690K than on 5890X, and by the time that changes X99 will be old anyway.

What is this 5890X you speak of?

[TheCaptain53]

at least £1000, possibly more, depending how much the motorcycle sells for

 

keep in mind, I'm gonna likely use this as a workstation. To be fair, I'd likely use the extra cores, but I don't know what for specifically.

 

I suppose, but with a H110i GT I could probably go further. And the max clock speed that I'd get on a 4790k either would stop really being effective in games, or the processor would either need very high voltages which could be hazardous that might prevent such speeds being available. 

In that case, an i7-5820K is a great idea. However, be honest with yourself about what you will be running. It could be a workstation but you might only use it for Microsoft word, at which point the i7 makes no sense. If you're running computation and simulations, then an i7 is an excellent idea.

As a side note, CPUs aren't that effective when running F@H. A GPU is a much faster and more efficient folder, so you could get away with two GPUs and a G3258 if all you're doing is folding.

[bomerr]

1000 pounds isn't that much for a PC. 

 

A 980 Ti would be over half of the budget.

 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00YNEHXY0/?tag=pcp0f-21

 

i5-4690k is another 180 quid.

 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Intel-4690K-Processor-LGA1150-Socket/dp/B00KPRWB9G/ref=sr_1_1?s=computers&ie=UTF8&qid=1438517661&sr=1-1&keywords=i5-4690k

 

Just the cpu and gpu together are 3/4ths the budget. 

 

So as I said before. If OP cares about gaming stick with an i5 until the gpu is a 980 ti or titan x and a good gaming monitor. only after that will splurging on a more expensive cpu make sense. 

[Raiden60]

1000 pounds isn't that much for a PC. 

 

A 980 Ti would be over half of the budget.

 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00YNEHXY0/?tag=pcp0f-21

 

i5-4690k is another 180 quid.

 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Intel-4690K-Processor-LGA1150-Socket/dp/B00KPRWB9G/ref=sr_1_1?s=computers&ie=UTF8&qid=1438517661&sr=1-1&keywords=i5-4690k

 

Just the cpu and gpu together are 3/4ths the budget. 

 

So as I said before. If OP cares about gaming stick with an i5 until the gpu is a 980 ti or titan x and a good gaming monitor. only after that will splurging on a more expensive cpu make sense. 

Oh, I forgot to mention, I'll be using the graphics card from my current build. I'm gonna be using the SLI capability for 4K. I'll likely get a 5930k before I get the 3rd graphics card.

[Raiden60]

In that case, an i7-5820K is a great idea. However, be honest with yourself about what you will be running. It could be a workstation but you might only use it for Microsoft word, at which point the i7 makes no sense. If you're running computation and simulations, then an i7 is an excellent idea.

As a side note, CPUs aren't that effective when running F@H. A GPU is a much faster and more efficient folder, so you could get away with two GPUs and a G3258 if all you're doing is folding.

Thanks for the help. I've already noticed that a GPU is more effective than a CPU on F@H on my current build, I just don't even bother with the CPU on this build(AMD Athlon X4 860k).

I'll also likely be running virtual machines, with what you said, an i7 would be great for it. If I was using it strictly for computation and workstation capabilities, I'm sure you'd recommend a Xeon processor, but you make a lot of sense with your argument. Thank you.

[bomerr]

Oh, I forgot to mention, I'll be using the graphics card from my current build. I'm gonna be using the SLI capability for 4K. I'll likely get a 5930k before I get the 3rd graphics card.

what gfx cards?

what monitor?

 

also SLI sucks, and the more gfx cards you add the more likely you are to get microstutter. 

[Raiden60]

what gfx cards?

what monitor?

 

also SLI sucks, and the more gfx cards you add the more likely you are to get microstutter. 

I use the EVGA GTX 970 SC ACX 2.0.

Monitor is an Asus VS247

 

What's microstutter?

[bomerr]

Microstutter is when the GPUs get out of sync and deliver frames out of order. So the FPS meter will say 50 or 80 or w/e FPS but gameplay will feel like under 20 FPS as the game feels like it's lagging. This is the worst con of SLI. The other big problem is bad scaling. For instance in GTA V SLI only gave me like 30% avg FPS improvement.

 

I used to have a 970 and I own a 980 now. IMO the 970 is okay card for 1080p gaming but it's really limited by that 3.5GB effective VRAM. GTA V with all the setting on max can exceed 3.5GB and then you'll experience performance drop. So no way would I ever SLI 970s (altho I wouldn't SLI in general either).

 

If I was in your shoes I would get an i5 CPU and wait until Pascal comes out, then upgrade to the 1080 TI (or w/e it's called) and a 4k monitor. 

Or alternatively, in the meantime, spend the extra savings from going i5 on a 27" 1440p monitor. 

[EllieThePurpleFuzzy]

If you are just mainly gaming for a 4690K and whatever money saved on GPU.

[TheCaptain53]

Thanks for the help. I've already noticed that a GPU is more effective than a CPU on F@H on my current build, I just don't even bother with the CPU on this build(AMD Athlon X4 860k).

I'll also likely be running virtual machines, with what you said, an i7 would be great for it. If I was using it strictly for computation and workstation capabilities, I'm sure you'd recommend a Xeon processor, but you make a lot of sense with your argument. Thank you.

If you're running virtual machines then DEFINITELY i7. An i5 wouldn't be able to cope.

The GTX 970 is an extremely capable card, I've had no issues using it at 1440p. Turn off AA and you'll be golden.

[Raiden60]

If you're running virtual machines then DEFINITELY i7. An i5 wouldn't be able to cope.

The GTX 970 is an extremely capable card, I've had no issues using it at 1440p. Turn off AA and you'll be golden.

Thanks for all of your help

 

btw you're on the 666'th post