Is i7 really worth it

[MxRider9637]

Hello everyone i will be doing a gaming build soon and one part i still need to get is the cpu.. My question to you guys is an i7 really needed for gaming and say some multitasking in the background like skype, music, open websites??? while playing say bf4??

 

budget is not a problem i just want to know if i7 would be needed or no??? 

 

Im looking at the i5 4670k and the i7 4770k

 

heres the build if it makes anything easier??http://pcpartpicker.com/p/35mhU

[Gung Pow Chicken]

If your just gaming go the 4670k

[Kayn]

If it's just gaming you don't need an i7.

[joelthezombie15]

For gaming no. only get a i7 if you are going to edit.

[Gung Pow Chicken]

But if you have no budget go I7 thats what I did lol

[MegaDave91]

Hello everyone i will be doing a gaming build soon and one part i still need to get is the cpu.. My question to you guys is an i7 really needed for gaming and say some multitasking in the background like skype, music, open websites??? while playing say bf4??

 

I'm doing that right now. Don't need an i7 for that.

[wng_kingsley7]

you could however many people would advise getting the mid range cpu vs the higher one with four more virtual cores

[Sheldon_King]

For gaming no. only get a i7 if you are going to edit.

Or render (CAD) using the CPU. (I assume edit you mean video and photo).

 

For gaming I rarely see more than 4 threads being used (but I also can't testify to COD Ghost as it blanks out the secondary monitor for some reason).  If you are buying on the LGA1150 range, just get an i5 for gaming only, or if you don't plan to overclock, a Xeon is about the same as an i7 with the price of an i5 (At the cost of no turbo or oc other than baseclock).

[Unhelpful]

Minecraft uses 87% of my i7 4770k. (I'm not kidding)

Then their is either something wrong with your minecraft client, or your cpu. That is never normal.

[dizmo]

Or render (CAD) using the CPU. (I assume edit you mean video and photo).

 

For gaming I rarely see more than 4 threads being used (but I also can't testify to COD Ghost as it blanks out the secondary monitor for some reason).  If you are buying on the LGA1150 range, just get an i5 for gaming only, or if you don't plan to overclock, a Xeon is about the same as an i7 with the price of an i5 (At the cost of no turbo or oc other than baseclock).

The Xeon's do have Turbo.

[Imabigmac]

Minecraft uses 87% of my i7 4770k. (I'm not kidding)

 

 

Then their is either something wrong with your minecraft client, or your cpu. That is never normal.

it's minecraft.........

[TheSLSAMG]

Then their is either something wrong with your minecraft client, or your cpu. That is never normal.

Not necessarily. Minecraft, surprisingly, is a very CPU intensive game.

[Sheldon_King]

The Xeon's do have Turbo.

Then it should be advertised better, as last time I looked, the newegg page for it missed the turbo. 

 

Given that, it makes even less since to get an i7 unless you need 6 cores or overclocking. And honestly, the OC ability of the i7 does not make up for the $100 difference between it and the xeon.

[Unhelpful]

Not necessarily. Minecraft, surprisingly, is a very CPU intensive game.

Everything cranked to the top with optifine, texture packs, and top render distance, on my 3770k never pushes my cpu past 48% o_O

 

Edit: I don't use 512x texture packs like he does, that might make the difference

[WoodenMarker]

Then it should be advertised better, as last time I looked, the newegg page for it missed the turbo. 

 

Given that, it makes even less since to get an i7 unless you need 6 cores or overclocking. And honestly, the OC ability of the i7 does not make up for the $100 difference between it and the xeon.

If there's a $100 difference between the i7 and xeon, you're probably looking at the wrong xeon. 

[Sheldon_King]

If there's a $100 difference between the i7 and xeon, you're probably looking at the wrong xeon. 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116906

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116901

 

Given the i7 has a 200MHz advantage, but that is hardly enough for $90 extra (as it will give almost 0 advantage in most applications. Especially using the CPU to render (going off my experiences with aerialvision + sketchup where 4.6GHz has a 20minute advantage over 3.6GHz (iirc. Whatever is stock for a 2600k). Given that both take over 14 hours to render fully, the difference is very small. Faster RAM makes a far greater difference there (took nearly an hour off the render time going from 1600MHz CAS11 to 2133 CAS11).   These are very specific cases though, and make almost 0 difference in gaming. If you (OP) need the threads, get the Xeon. If you need gaming performance, a 4670k will be the better option.

[WoodenMarker]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116906

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116901

I know you're talking about the e3-1230 v3 but I thought you were referring to the 4770 and not the 4770k.

[Sheldon_King]

I know you're talking about the e3-1230 v3 but I thought you were referring to the 4770 and not the 4770k.

I use them interchangeability. Sorry about that. It is easier for me to assume that 4770 = 4770k unless we are comparing the 4770 and the k version. (as most persons on this forum would be overclocking anyway.)

[atrash]

Sheldon_King, on 07 Mar 2014 - 12:23 PM, said:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116906

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116901

 

Given the i7 has a 200MHz advantage, but that is hardly enough for $90 extra (as it will give almost 0 advantage in most applications. Especially using the CPU to render (going off my experiences with aerialvision + sketchup where 4.6GHz has a 20minute advantage over 3.6GHz (iirc. Whatever is stock for a 2600k). Given that both take over 14 hours to render fully, the difference is very small. Faster RAM makes a far greater difference there (took nearly an hour off the render time going from 1600MHz CAS11 to 2133 CAS11).   These are very specific cases though, and make almost 0 difference in gaming. If you (OP) need the threads, get the Xeon. If you need gaming performance, a 4670k will be the better option.

 

Haa I was about to write the same thing. I just built a pc for a friend of mine last week using the 1230v2. He was set on getting the 4770k because 'i7 gaymin performance' eventhough he doesn't even know how to oc and claimed to never heard of the Xeon, and he will only be using it for office render+CAD works. I saved him about MYR400 from there

[marko 775]

I think that the amd fx 8350 with eight cores is much better choice and its chepper im from croatia and amd fx 8350  cost about 1200 kunas its about 250 dollars

[juretrn]

My i7 920 has rarely been used to its full potential, despite the fact that I often run games with a VM, Chrome, foobar/WMP, Word and other applications in the background. I say get the 4670K, take the 100 $ you just saved, and buy a NH-D14/H100i and OC it to hell and gone. 

[Sheldon_King]

I think that the amd fx 8350 with eight cores is much better choice and its chepper im from croatia and amd fx 8350  cost about 1200 kunas its about 250 dollars

As I understand it, it is only better of you are using heavily threaded applications only. Intel becomes a far better option if you are using apps that are single threaded only. In gaming, it may not matter (I have heard it both ways). You also have to take into account the cores vs the price vs the use. If you are not making use of 8 cores, then a FX6300 would be better, and if you only need 4 cores a FX4300 would be great (even though in most cases the price makes the FX6300 the only intelligent option).  (Again, not intending to say to get either Intel or AMD. Just saying that it may be better to have high numbers of threads in some cases or strong cores in other cases.)

[marko 775]

But in the future i hope ill need all 8 cores but for GAMING techonolgy is going foward very fast every day

[Sheldon_King]

But in the future i hope ill need all 8 cores but for GAMING techonolgy is going foward very fast every day

Just for future notice, if you are replying to a specific member, you need to tag them or quote them or they will not get a notice of the reply. 

 

There is nothing wrong with hoping, but there is also the fact that people have been saying that more cores will be needed soon since dual core CPUs were introduced, and it has taken years to make it happen. Even going off the fact that the Consoles have 8 core CPUs, you also have to take into account (unless I am remembering wrong) that the game only has access to 6 cores of it (still making the FX6300 a better option). Also if I recall right, Mantle and DX12 are meant to reduce the impact of games on the CPU, yes? 

Either way, you really can't go wrong with a FX4300, FX6300, I5, i7, or Xeon, depending on your needs and budget.

[That Norwegian Guy]

Everything cranked to the top with optifine, texture packs, and top render distance, on my 3770k never pushes my cpu past 48% o_O

 

Edit: I don't use 512x texture packs like he does, that might make the difference

 

If you're hosting a server with a few other people on it, the game will use more and more CPU based on that.