People please stop telling people not to get the 4790K for gaming

[patrickjp93]

I don't think anyone only runs one game and nothing else. All those benchmarks don't have a VOIP program, WMP, OC utilities, hardware monitors, web browsers, etc running in the background. Run the benchmark with all those running and see the difference in FPS then. i7 haters love those benchmarks. They're not real world results. With all the background processes even on consoles, they prove you need more threads.

Well VOIP just needs to be relegated to the iGPU unless it's in use a by a game. It's stupid that we keep that on the CPU still. Web browsers use no cycles if they just sit there. WMP I see a small point, but otherwise why the hell do you have all these hardware and oc monitoring running in the background? Once it's stable and cool, leave it and check on it in 3 months.

[steffen_anywhere]

lol

 

Because useful post

[TymmVonD]

Well VOIP just needs to be relegated to the iGPU unless it's in use a by a game. It's stupid that we keep that on the CPU still. Web browsers use no cycles if they just sit there. WMP I see a small point, but otherwise why the hell do you have all these hardware and oc monitoring running in the background? Once it's stable and cool, leave it and check on it in 3 months.

For VOIP, I personally use TS3. I use my OC utility for fan control, so it runs at startup. OHMonitor for showing CPU and GPU usage. I also like to know how much RAM and vRAM i'm using in games. And for temps...It gives me an indicator for when I should clean my dust etc.

 

Added: I didn't even think about live streaming. It seems everyone nowadays wants to be a famous live streamer.

[Guest]

No. Just no. Star citizen is going to require alot more than just a powerful gpu and whatever the hell people think is so special about mantle.

 

I played BF4 wtih Game Time and tried Mantle but it was unplayable with Mantle (stutter and lag).

DirectX was smooth

[Legitsu]

*for gaming a i7 will not matter sorry anybody that states other wise doesn't understand what hyper-threading is or why its bad for gaming-loads a 4790k Is physically identical to a 4690k its a bit of microcode programming and binning at the factory that determines if its a i7 or not 

remember hyper threading is no the same has having extra cores hyperthreading is for workloads not already being handled by the physical cores 

[D2ultima]

Wow this thread is going on forever.

 

i5 == i7 in gaming *IF* the game does not make use of the hyperthread cores. Which almost no games do. Proof and stuff is below

 

In a program which makes use of hyperthread cores (and I don't mean "adds use" to them like BF4, but actually USES them) then it takes an i5 a 900MHz to 1GHz overclock (being 800-900MHz faster than the i7) to give the same performance. Tested with:

 

friend using i5-4670K @ 4.3GHz and 4.4GHz + my laptop's i7-4800MQ @ 3.5GHz + second friend's PC with i5-4670K @ 4GHz

BF4 @ 720p (windowed mode), ultra preset, 100% resolution scale, 90fov, using OBS + window capture, same settings across all three PCs, same background programs running, all users in Teamspeak 3, stream preview running.

 

The i5 at 4GHz jumped in usage to 75-85%, while the i7 and the 4.4GHz i5 remained around 65-70% overall usage.

 

In all other games checked without using OBS' streaming the CPU usage was better for the OC'd i5s; indicating almost all games completely disregard or add load to (but do not make proper use of) the hyperthread cores. BF4 was the anomaly, because it simply uses 50% of just about any CPU once it's quadcore or better (at least from what I found with intel chips), so we were able to test the OBS drain without incident. Games tested with default i5 clocks of 3.4GHz had a similar drain placed on the CPU.

 

So for gaming? i5. It's no real contest. You want a better gaming performance? Overclock. For stuff like streaming with OBS or using CPU-based recorders like Playclaw 5 etc? i7 is your friend.

[Guest]

Wow this thread is going on forever.

 

i5 == i7 in gaming *IF* the game does not make use of the hyperthread cores. Which almost no games do. Proof and stuff is below

 

In a program which makes use of hyperthread cores (and I don't mean "adds use" to them like BF4, but actually USES them) then it takes an i5 a 900MHz to 1GHz overclock (being 800-900MHz faster than the i7) to give the same performance. Tested with:

 

friend using i5-4670K @ 4.3GHz and 4.4GHz + my laptop's i7-4800MQ @ 3.5GHz + second friend's PC with i5-4670K @ 4GHz

BF4 @ 720p (windowed mode), ultra preset, 100% resolution scale, 90fov, using OBS + window capture, same settings across all three PCs, same background programs running, all users in Teamspeak 3, stream preview running.

 

The i5 at 4GHz jumped in usage to 75-85%, while the i7 and the 4.4GHz i5 remained around 65-70% overall usage.

 

In all other games checked without using OBS' streaming the CPU usage was better for the OC'd i5s; indicating almost all games completely disregard or add load to (but do not make proper use of) the hyperthread cores. BF4 was the anomaly, because it simply uses 50% of just about any CPU once it's quadcore or better (at least from what I found with intel chips), so we were able to test the OBS drain without incident. Games tested with default i5 clocks of 3.4GHz had a similar drain placed on the CPU.

 

So for gaming? i5. It's no real contest. You want a better gaming performance? Overclock. For stuff like streaming with OBS or using CPU-based recorders like Playclaw 5 etc? i7 is your friend.

 

You can't compare mobile chips to desktop chips.

[D2ultima]

You can't compare mobile chips to desktop chips.

If I put a desktop i7-4770K at 3.5GHz and I put a mobile 4800MQ or 4900MQ at 3.5GHz they perform the same.

[patrickjp93]

You can't compare mobile chips to desktop chips.

Yes you can. It's the same silicon unless you get into the Iris Graphics. A 4980HQ is 100% = to 4770k at stock but with better graphics. You just have to provide the cooling solution.

[n0mahd]

Hate to burst your bubble OP, but the i5 is just as good as the i7. Hell, if you grab a G3258 and overclock it within a hertz of it's life, it will do close to as good as the i5 in some games.

 My brother bought that G3258 and a cheap-o mobo. In a bundle for 100 bucks. Probably the biggest bang for buck purchase he's ever done. When OC'd to 4.4ghz. That CPU just stomps all over his old amd quad core AM2+ cpu.

 

I'm totally buying one for my HTPC before I move out.

[D2ultima]

Yes you can. It's the same silicon unless you get into the Iris Graphics. A 4980HQ is 100% = to 4770k at stock but with better graphics. You just have to provide the cooling solution.

Oh my word, someone understands. I often feel alone with my understanding of laptop hardware on desktop-focused forums. 

[TheGamingBarrel]

I don't think anyone only runs one game and nothing else. All those benchmarks don't have a VOIP program, WMP, OC utilities, hardware monitors, web browsers, etc running in the background. Run the benchmark with all those running and see the difference in FPS then. i7 haters love those benchmarks. They're not real world results. With all the background processes even on consoles, they prove you need more threads.

Because that is normally like 1-3 FPS Difference, if any

[patrickjp93]

Oh my word, someone understands. I often feel alone with my understanding of laptop hardware on desktop-focused forums. 

I got an Intel reference board for cheap and hopefully will get my 4980HQ in a day or two. Just need a night with the heat gun. Oddly enough the mounting for a heatsink is exactly the same as the 115x mounting. YAY EK WATERBLOCKS! Boo no overclocking...oh well.

[D2ultima]

I got an Intel reference board for cheap and hopefully will get my 4980HQ in a day or two. Just need a night with the heat gun. Oddly enough the mounting for a heatsink is exactly the same as the 115x mounting. YAY EK WATERBLOCKS! Boo no overclocking...oh well.

Why no overclocking? =O. The chip should have some allowance in Intel XTU, and just grab some throttlestop to force it to keep its boost clocks. I don't believe your maximum boost will surpass about +400MHz though but there's always messing with the base clock speed.

 

Also, the HQ series usually is soldered to the board... good luck with getting it in and running! =D

[patrickjp93]

Why no overclocking? =O. The chip should have some allowance in Intel XTU, and just grab some throttlestop to force it to keep its boost clocks. I don't believe your maximum boost will surpass about +400MHz though but there's always messing with the base clock speed.

 

Also, the HQ series usually is soldered to the board... good luck with getting it in and running! =D

The top turbo speed is already 4.0 GHz. Maybe if there is any sort of BIOS (never used an Intel reference board) I can change the BCLK, but it's not an unlocked processor.

[D2ultima]

The top turbo speed is already 4.0 GHz. Maybe if there is any sort of BIOS (never used an Intel reference board) I can change the BCLK, but it's not an unlocked processor.

Laptops' top turbo speed is usually for 1 core. It's often base clock + 800MHz = max 4-core clock. Your chip has a +1200MHz max boost, so your max speed may be 3800MHz for 4 cores. But still, you might wanna check with Intel XTU when you get your chip and have it running; because the mobile non-extreme chips often have a boost allowance (at least for haswell).

Without editing base clock:

47x0MQ = +200MHz max OC potential 

48x0MQ = +400Mhz max OC potential

49x0MQ = +600MHz

49x0MX = unlimited OC potential. Even have people getting 4.8GHz on those things over on NBR

[patrickjp93]

Laptops' top turbo speed is usually for 1 core. It's often base clock + 800MHz = max 4-core clock. Your chip has a +1200MHz max boost, so your max speed may be 3800MHz for 4 cores. But still, you might wanna check with Intel XTU when you get your chip and have it running; because the mobile non-extreme chips often have a boost allowance (at least for haswell).

Without editing base clock:

47x0MQ = +200MHz max OC potential 

48x0MQ = +400Mhz max OC potential

49x0MQ = +600MHz

49x0MX = unlimited OC potential. Even have people getting 4.8GHz on those things over on NBR

Hmm, neat. I'm surprised Apple hasn't put the 4980HQ into the iMac yet. It's 100MHz faster and has a better iGPU, plus all the iMacs have mobile parts anyway these days except for the dGPU.

[-rascal-]

Well a i7-4790K is $359.99, and the i5-4690K is $249.99 for us up of the border.

That is already a $110 difference.

[ViruZ_HUN]

Around the forums I have noticed a lot of people who tell people not to get the i7 4790K for gaming because the i5 4690K is cheaper and preforms the same. NOT TRUE. Yes it is  cheaper but the 4790K will outperform the 4690K since it has a higher clock speed. Then they to buy a CPU cooler and over clock the 4690K so it preforms the same or slightly better then the 4790K. Sure you could do that, but with the money you spent on the cooler you could of almost bought a 4790K it it will preform the same or just slightly worse then the over clocked 4690K. Then it the the future you can buy a CPU cooler for the 4790K and over clock it and it will destroy the 4690K. Plus you have to remember the over clocking is not guaranteed you might not be able to get your chip up to the clock speed you want. If you told a first time builder not to get the 4790K and get the 4690K and over clock it and they did that and their chip wouldn't overclock to the speed they wanted they would be mad. So please stop telling people not to get the 4790K.

Wannabe ViruZ

 

Failed

[D2ultima]

Hmm, neat. I'm surprised Apple hasn't put the 4980HQ into the iMac yet. It's 100MHz faster and has a better iGPU, plus all the iMacs have mobile parts anyway these days except for the dGPU.

Oh don't feel that... the iMac from a year or so ago was still using the GTX 680MX for its dGPU, which was a GTX 780M with a downclocked core (720MHz flat vs 850MHz 780M) and that 680MX *only* appeared and was only designed for the iMacs. You couldn't put one in a laptop at all. It's kind of silly, since so few things would make use of that card, and it definitely isn't for CUDA usage as Kepler's gaming GPU cuda usage is poo, and mobile quadro cards exist that could far better do the job.

 

I count 850MHz as the stock clock for a 780M because that's what the modified vBIOS that removes the broken throttling/boost features clocks it at. And it runs cooler than with the stock vBIOS too.

[MPX309]

This is 2 threads I've read from you now with some slightly iffy content . . . you should lay off the coke, man 

[threadysparrow]

games don't benefit from hyperthreading nor do they benefit from having more than 4 cores mostly.

[patrickjp93]

games don't benefit from hyperthreading nor do they benefit from having more than 4 cores mostly.

Most* There are some programmed for it, even if not super well. 

[threadysparrow]

Because that is normally like 1-3 FPS Difference, if any

And a 1-3 FPS is more likely due to something on the graphics card rather than from the CPU. And if you run a test with the same GPU and CPU combo twice, you will get different results, which means that 1-3 FPS is well within a margin of error.

[TheGamingBarrel]

And a 1-3 FPS is more likely due to something on the graphics card rather than from the CPU. And if you run a test with the same GPU and CPU combo twice, you will get different results, which means that 1-3 FPS is well within a margin of error.

That is the point