i7 980x still worth it?

[sport0182]

anyone still running x58 with an i7 980x?

i've got my 980x AIO cooled running at 4.4GHz on an Asus rampage II extreme. i get a cinebench r15 score between 990 and 999. temps are pretty good ~65-70° on load.. 

thing is, i've thought about upgrading to a i7 7700k on a MSI Z270 Gaming M7 mobo. according to reasonable cinebench scores on OC'd 7700ks (~900 stock to >1k OC'd) i won't gain much in cpu performance. 

how anyone know the real life performance between the two? would i notice the difference when i upgrade to ddr4? my ddr3 is running at 1600... 

 

thanks for the help.

 

[The Sloth]

nope, single thread performance sucks, sell it and get ryzen 1600 system. 

[kaiju_wars]

1 minute ago, sport0182 said:

anyone still running x58 with an i7 980x?

i've got my 980x AIO cooled running at 4.4GHz on an Asus rampage II extreme. i get a cinebench r15 score between 990 and 999. temps are pretty good ~65-70° on load.. 

thing is, i've thought about upgrading to a i7 7700k on a MSI Z270 Gaming M7 mobo. according to reasonable cinebench scores on OC'd 7700ks (~900 stock to >1k OC'd) i won't gain much in cpu performance. 

how anyone know the real life performance between the two? would i notice the difference when i upgrade to ddr4? my ddr3 is running at 1600... 

 

thanks for the help.

 

Honestly, if everything is still running great for you, I wouldn't worry about upgrading.  Wait until you aren't getting the performance you're wanting.  Ryzen is out, which is a better deal atm than Intel, and then you also have Coffee Lake coming soon.

[asand1]

I had an X5680 running at 4.3Ghz at 60c on a Kraken X61 in my X58 till I started BSODing. Currently running an e5640.

[asand1]

For a cheap upgrade you could do an X5650,70,80,90 FOR 6 cores and Sandy Bridge speeds.

[agent_x007]

Keep NB Frequency high (ie. UnCore) 

[Mr.Meerkat]

What do you do with your system? Do you feel like you need an upgrade? 

 

Anyway, the 7700K is a 4C/8T part while your 980X is a 6C/12T part which although you get similar multi-core scores, the single-core scores on your 980X is considerably lower and if gaming is your number one priority, if you have a powerful enough GPU, getting a 7700K will help to increase FPS as it has better IPC than the 980X.  However in desktop usage, you'll probably not notice much of a difference so...

 

25 minutes ago, asand1 said:

For a cheap upgrade you could do an X5650,70,80,90 FOR 6 cores and Sandy Bridge speeds.

Well his 980X is already a 6 core CPU plus I don't think the Xeon would OC that well which would negate some of the IPC improvements going from Gulftown to Sandy so IMO, its not a great upgrade. 

Nevermind  

[Pasi123]

Overclocked i7-980x (or 6core Xeon) isn't even much slower than Ryzen.

 

[DildorTheDecent]

1 minute ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

Well his 980X is already a 6 core CPU plus I don't think the Xeon would OC that well which would negate some of the IPC improvements going from Gulftown to Sandy so IMO, its not a great upgrade. 

IIRC the older Xeons were better for OC since they're better binned. Higher OC with less volts

[Mr.Meerkat]

11 minutes ago, DildorTheDecent said:

IIRC the older Xeons were better for OC since they're better binned. Higher OC with less volts

Well in that case, I guess a 6-core sandybridge Xeon would be a pretty good idea then, especially older xeons can be bought for rather low prices 

[Evolution90]

LUL

 

I laughed when someone mentioned XEON don't OC well.. fucking i7's get left in the dust on max overclocks, no offence.

 

XEON also sports more cache, 32NM process and low TDP.

[DildorTheDecent]

3 minutes ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

Well in that case, I guess a 6-core sandybridge Xeon would be a pretty good idea then, especially older xeons can be bought for rather low prices 

Sandy Bridge was never on LGA 1366. Only LGA 1155 + LGA 2011 and BGA "whatever/whocares". Sandy Bridge levels of clock though....Definitely possible with the Xeons. 

[Evolution90]

An idea of how fast a clocked up 1366 xeon is vs Ivy.

 

 

[Intelfreak]

I7 980x @ 4.3 ghz user here and i dont complain about my system yet.

 

Firestrike score of my system, but cpu here runs 4.67 ghz. For daily use 4.3 ghz.

 

 

[Mr.Meerkat]

1 minute ago, DildorTheDecent said:

Sandy Bridge was never on LGA 1366. Only LGA 1155 + LGA 2011 and BGA "whatever/whocares". Sandy Bridge levels of clock though....Definitely possible with the Xeons. 

Whoops, misread "sandybridge speeds" as SB IPC  

[Mr.Meerkat]

7 minutes ago, Evolution90 said:

LUL

 

I laughed when someone mentioned XEON don't OC well.. fucking i7's get left in the dust on max overclocks, no offence.

 

XEON also sports more cache, 32NM process and low TDP.

Well try OCing newer Xeons and come back to me  

[Evolution90]

Just now, Mr.Meerkat said:

Well try OCing newer Xeons and come back to me  

We are talking about 1366 though?

[Mr.Meerkat]

Just now, Evolution90 said:

We are talking about 1366 though?

Well...my brain just auto-ed to new Xeons which is why I made that comment plus all you said was "XEON don't OC well.. fucking i7" without specifying which generation of Xeons so...  

[sport0182]

thanks for the fast replies.

the primary use is for gaming.. however that's not a daily thing. there is some rendering here and there... 

in terms of gaming, i'm running just an asus gtx 1060 6gb. metro last light benchmark (max settings) gets me about 120-130 average FPS, in game it runs quite smooth in my opinion. i don't think it's capable of much more.. at some point i will upgrade the card.. 

i do happen to have a xeon x5670, and did manage to OC it to 4.4GHz, but i could only get it stable at 4.2GHz. at 4.2 i didn't notice a big difference in day to day performance, but in benchmarks however. it is noticable.. all tested on the same mobo. the xeon was a little easier to overclock with cooler temps, but as soon as i hit 4.3, i had to hit the vcore hard to even boot, in benchmarks it was hard to get the same scores as my 980x, let alone stable. 

 

back to gaming, i do understand that a lot of games prefer fewer cores at higher speeds.. but are there really so many games that run single thread?

[Emberstone]

2 hours ago, nerdslayer1 said:

nope, single thread performance sucks, sell it and get ryzen 1600 system. 

Minus the selling part, that's exactly what I did (replaced a 980X).

 

The boost to gaming performance was insane. Upwards of 60% or even more in some cases.

 

Ryzen was pretty much a godsend for me. Same number of cores/threads (I did NOT want to lose multithread performance by going to an i5 just to have better fps in games), and I still got a great boost to gaming performance.

[Pasi123]

6 minutes ago, Emberstone said:

Minus the selling part, that's exactly what I did (replaced a 980X).

 

The boost to gaming performance was insane. Upwards of 60% or even more in some cases.

 

Ryzen was pretty much a godsend for me. Same number of cores/threads (I did NOT want to lose multithread performance by going to an i5 just to have better fps in games), and I still got a great boost to gaming performance.

You didn't use the same graphics card, right?

[Emberstone]

Just now, Pasi123 said:

You didn't use the same graphics card, right?

I was using a 1070 with my 980X.

[Pasi123]

Just now, Emberstone said:

I was using a 1070 with my 980X.

Did you use the 980X with a stock clock speed? Ryzen 1600 shouldn't be that much better in gaming...

[Emberstone]

3 hours ago, Pasi123 said:

Did you use the 980X with a stock clock speed? Ryzen 1600 shouldn't be that much better in gaming...

Overclocked to 4.0 GHz with 1.34v, using 12 GB of 1333 MHz RAM in triple channel.

 

I play some pretty heavily single-threaded games like Heroes of the Storm. Heroes uses the (very dated and badly optimized) Starcraft 2 engine, and on the 980X could dip below 30 fps in teamfights. My Ryzen, even at stock clocks, wouldn't ever dip below like 70.

 

Depending on the game and how it utilizes the CPU, it can make that big of a difference. That also means not every game will see gains that huge. HotS just benefits from the immensely better instructions-per-clock/single thread performance Ryzen has over Nahalem/Gulftown. No need to use ... at the end of your sentence like I don't know what I'm saying.

[MightyBooty :^)]

9 hours ago, Pasi123 said:

Did you use the 980X with a stock clock speed? Ryzen 1600 shouldn't be that much better in gaming...

You have to remember Ryzen is a brand new architecture running DDR4 and new instruction sets for the cpus, it's not just about benchmark single and multi scores. Two processors could score 150 single and 500 multi and they still differ fps while running the same gpu even on the exact same processor, and even more if they're two different architectures and ones 8 years newer/older.