What the heck intel.

[evilmeister13]

Can anyone explain to me intels reasoning behind giving i3 processors hyperthreading but not i5? Also, why does everyone praise the 4770k as the ultimate processor? Wouldnt a 4930k outperform it?

[DoubleY]

Because i3's are used for something like offices where hyper-threading might be useful. i5's are used for gaming. and i7 is used for like rendering and stuff.

 

Yes, a 4930k WOULD outperform it, but it's double the cost for 20% more performance. 

[Anthony10]

The ultimate processor is a 4960x, actually, and everyone praises the 4770k as the ultimate Z87 processor. Not sure why i3 is hyperthreaded tbh...

[aidenrelkoff]

the 4930k does out perform, but its alot more, and price to performace the i7 4770k is the best

[AmusedGoat]

Intel = InTelAviv

 

There's your answer. They survive on boatloads of money, bribes, and cornerning the market.

 

The 4770k is seen as the best bang for your buck Intel processor, which is a joke considering how expensive it is compared to AMD procs.

[Volbet]

Can anyone explain to me intels reasoning behind giving i3 processors hyperthreading but not i5? Also, why does everyone praise the 4770k as the ultimate processor? Wouldnt a 4930k outperform it?

If the I5 had Hyperthreading it would be an I7, so that market is already occupied. The I3 has Hyperthreading to differentiate it from the Pentium and Celeron processors.

The 4930K would outperform a 4770K in multithreaded application, but it's also much more expensive. So the price/performance isn't as great on the 4930K as on the 4770K

[Ssoele]

Can anyone explain to me intels reasoning behind giving i3 processors hyperthreading but not i5? Also, why does everyone praise the 4770k as the ultimate processor? Wouldnt a 4930k outperform it?

 

i3 CPU's only have 2 cores, i5's have 4.

4 physical cores > 2 physical + 2 virtual cores

 

As for the 4770K vs 4930K, the 4930K is quite a bit more expansive then the 4770K. They also use different architectures, Haswell vs Ivy Bridge-E.

[TheSLSAMG]

Can anyone explain to me intels reasoning behind giving i3 processors hyperthreading but not i5? Also, why does everyone praise the 4770k as the ultimate processor? Wouldnt a 4930k outperform it?

That is what an i7 is for... An i5 with 4 extra threads. And a 4770K outperforms a 4930K in applications focused on single core performance.

[evilmeister13]

Is turbo boost a null technology when overclocking?

[Izaya Orihara]

The ultimate processor is a 4960x, actually, and everyone praises the 4770k as the ultimate Z87 processor. Not sure why i3 is hyperthreaded tbh...

Yeah...  Do you even Xeon E7-4890 v2? 15 cores 30 threads at 2.8 ghz. 

[Anthony10]

Yeah...  Do you even Xeon E7-4890 v2? 15 cores 30 threads at 2.8 ghz. 

I meant mainstream things people praise as the ultimate one that doesn't cost $5k  (don't quote me on the $5k price because I'm not sure how uch the xeon e7-4890 v2 costs)

[ViruZ_HUN]

Yeah...  Do you even Xeon E7-4890 v2? 15 cores 30 threads at 2.8 ghz. 

Do you even I7 X190k 25 cores 50 threads at 6.0 ghz from 2024?

[Izaya Orihara]

I meant mainstream things people praise as the ultimate one that doesn't cost $5k  (don't quote me on the $5k price because I'm not sure how uch the xeon e7-4890 v2 costs)

I think it's like 8 grands  

[Izaya Orihara]

Do you even I7 X190k 25 cores 50 threads at 6.0 ghz from 2024?

I expect CPU's to be better than that in 10 years. 

[evilmeister13]

And you all ignore my question.

[ViruZ_HUN]

I expect CPU's to be better than that in 10 years. 

hmm

 

Codenamed : Nachosbaker

 

500000000 Cores

800 Khz

1 thread

L3 : 5 Giga cache

[Izaya Orihara]

hmm

 

Codenamed : Nachosbaker

 

500000000 Cores

800 Khz

1 thread

L3 : 5 Giga cache

You know you would have one core.... Threads= cores+ logical cores. Also 0.8 ghz? 

[The_Strict_Nein]

It goes like this

 

Pentium: 2 Physical Cores

i3: 2 Cores 4 threads

i5: 4 cores

i7: 4 cores 8 threads

 

Physical cores are always better than hyperthreading. An i7 is essentially an i5 with hyperthreading

[deathjester]

And you all ignore my question.

 

Because gaming sees no benefit being on 8 cores/threads due to the games not being made for needing that kind of multi core processing. Add to this most games are primarily one core, sometimes 2 and at best the other cores are doing miniscule tasks or work. A game might put sound on a thread task. That is due to DirectX 11. That will change with 12. Even with "optimization" core usage sucks in the current DirectX. 

 

An I3 without hyperthreading would take a giant hit in some "next gen" games if it didn't have hyperthreading. With it? a I3 can barely edge out a 8350 in Thief and Elder Scrolls Online. In games that don't even bother with optimization (pretty much most non console ports) the I3 beats the 8350 by more.

 

The I5 doesn't have hyperthreading because there is no reason for it to have it. My I7 performs the same in a game with HT on or off. The I7 is an I5 with hyperthreading and more cache (helps in non gaming stuff).  Under DirectX 12? Yeah the I7 should be faster IF they make a game require that much from the CPU (would have to be a computer exclusive and not a console game). Console cpu's suck and 2 cores are not available to developers. Add to this under Mantle the 8350 isn't faster than the I5 so it doesn't matter. They are about the same. AMD does multicore better, Intel does single core better. It is a push.

 

Asking why an 8 core/hyper threading isn't required is like asking why 2 r9 290's in crossfire or two 780Ti's aren't required. People make games for more than a small group of people. Hell, their aren't even enough AMD's out there for gaming to justify some companies even optimizing giant titles like WoW. More people have I3's so they just leave the optimization crappy. Not worth their time, effort and the money it would take to "optimize" the game on DX 11.x which ain't easy anyways. 

 

Planetside 2? They optimized their game and it took them half a year and prob a crap load of money. Only reason they did it was that game is coming to the PS4. They didn't do it out of the kindness of their hearts, or because it was worth it on the PC.

 

They aren't going to make games for hexa's any time soon. 1) most games are cross platform. 2) They would have no one to sell to if they did. I5 is all you need to game with and I7 is all you need it you also want to stream/record really high quality video in some games.

 

Is a 4770k better than a Hexa? Hell no. It is right there with it in gaming though. Is a I5 right there with a I7 in gaming? Yup. Spend the money on GPU, unless you are streaming and then go I7. If you have a ton of money? Welp yeah, you can go all out and get a hexa or a Haswell -E. It isn't going to help you in gaming, but it can do other things better. 

[Ober1kenobi]

because believe it nor not, i3's can be used for gaming

[Faa]

It goes like this

 

Pentium: 2 Physical Cores

i3: 2 Cores 4 threads

i5: 4 cores

i7: 4 cores 8 threads

 

Physical cores are always better than hyperthreading. An i7 is essentially an i5 with hyperthreading

Not at all physical cores are always better because HT can yield up to a gain of 100% performance and when you would compare 2cores with HT vs a quadcore with no HT they'd perform exactly the same but the dual core would ridiculously run cooler and at a lower power draw

[The_Strict_Nein]

Not at all physical cores are always better because HT can yield up to a gain of 100% performance and when you would compare 2cores with HT vs a quadcore with no HT they'd perform exactly the same but the dual core would ridiculously run cooler and at a lower power draw

 

Hyper threading can run at 100% in extremely rare usage scenarios i.e. the lab where Intel shows the power of hyper threading. In general purpose use, you'll never see the 100% gain across 2 cores with hyper threading, where as you always will with 4 physical cores in programs that can thread data.

[Shakaza]

If the I5 had Hyperthreading it would be an I7, so there that market is already occupied. The I3 has Hyperthreading to differentiate it from the Pentium and Celeron processors.

The 4930K would outperform a 4770K in multithreaded application, but it's also much more expensive. So the price/performance isn't as great on the 4930K as on the 4770K

No, the i7-4770k has a 100 MHz advantage over the i5-4670k. But, essentially, yes. :3

[euniqe]

snip

 

lol. 

 

He meant how everyone ignored his question about turbo boost. 

[Faa]

Can anyone explain to me intels reasoning behind giving i3 processors hyperthreading but not i5? 

It's just marketing what else

 

 

Also, why does everyone praise the 4770k as the ultimate processor? 

People who claim that are stupid.

 

 

Wouldnt a 4930k outperform it?

Multithreaded wise yes. But that's just for now theoretical performance in games. Haswell has a good 10-20% per core improvement over a 4930k meaning they will perform better in most games.

 

 

Is turbo boost a null technology when overclocking?

You just override the default turbo. It doesnt work anymore once you've changed the clock speed