i7 980x upgrade

[maul0r]

Hi guys, 

 

I have a "stone age" setup that is still happily rocking away, but I think it's about time to start considering to upgrade. Obviously I'd like to future proof my new setup.

 

I am currently running a i7 980x setup on a Rampage III Mainboard, with the usual gimmick such as an EVO SSD more RAM than I require and a sucky old GeForce GPU (650 Ti Boost). 

 

It is obvious that my GPU needs a major upgrade, but I am wondering what kind of a performance boost I could except when upgrading the CPU (and therefore RAM and Mainboard as well). 

 

I am not playing any high end titles (at the moment) so I am mostly playing World of Tanks and Armored Warfare (which is not yet optimized and as such is not the best application to benchmark performance). WoT is a single core application (still!!! so annoying) So loosing two cores is not too dramatic. 

 

I am thinking that the 980x is an amazing processor especially due to its 6 cores so I believe that I won't see an amazing improvement on multi threaded workloads. But on Single core performance, I am not too sure, a lot has happened in terms of optimization and efficiency improvement. 

 

Regardless on wether or not I will upgrade my CPU, I will defiantly upgrade my GPU in the range of 970 - 980Ti. I'd like to be able to easily power a new 21:9 display. 

 

What's your take on this.. Day or night difference? Or only upgrade once it fails? Wait for next years six core processors? Or just overclock to compensate? 

[KemoKa]

In single threads you'll probably see a boost of around 10-25% by going to Skylake or Devil's Canyon. I would say decide on whether the multiple threads is more important to you or keeping up with IPC per core, as your CPU is still quite powerful. If you have the budget then you could upgrade to x99 an a 5820K if you wanted the best of both worlds. What is your work style, do you need those threads?

And just for future reference, futureproofing is a misnomer. That's why you came here to ask for upgrade suggestions. all hardware will eventually become outdated.

[Naijin]

I wouldn't upgrade an i7 980x. You can still overclock it and it will still be good in terms of performance. It does have less single threaded performance than current gen intel cpu's, but most games release with great multi-core support. Some games, like World of Tanks, do use only one core, but still, I have noticed very little difference coming from an fx 8350 to i7 5775c with the same gpu. It might be a bit smoother to play, but upgrading the graphics will get you a much bigger boost in performance. A GTX 970/r9 390 or GTX 980/r9 390x/Fury would be great choices. It all depends on how much you're willing to spend, if you prefer AMD or Nvidia, and the color scheme of the card.

[manikyath]

you went for extreme edition in the past, so you'll probably be looking for something enthousiast grade now as well.

 

one thing i'll add is that the 6core processors generally are clocked a bit lower than the quad core parts. (clocked lower -> less performance per core)

 

i'd say either 5820k or 6700k processor wise, *if* you end up upgrading.

 

based on passmark's scores the 6700k is ~10% faster than the 980x.

 

doing some math, that means about a 40% increase in single threaded workloads. (correct me if i'm wrong, because my math sometimes isnt the greatest)

[soaringchicken]

I'd get the 980ti if you're looking for 'future-proofing' and if you think you need it, i'd go with a tier i5 skylake or something, if you're not doing heavily threaded workloads you'll be fine.

[JebKerman]

Just looked up the 980X, damn that's impressive for a 5 year old chip. (damn expensive mind, $1060 according to Intel, so i guess you got your money's worth)

The modern consumer equivalent is the 5820K and it is actually near identical. so you'd not see much difference.

 

A good CPU cooler might be all you'd need to get the most out of it. A GPU upgrade will grant a hefty performance boost in games, get the best you can afford.

[maul0r]

I absolutely did get my money's worth as I got given the mainboard incl. CPU for about 200 USD about a year ago. Very very lucky This time I am going to have to spend some money  

I am just a bit worried that my mainboard is going to die on me at some point - the network port is behaving funny already and sometimes the boot process is not as smooth as it should be  :wacko:

 

No I don't really use the multi threads  - I do some handbreaking every once and a while, but that can run over night so the loss of cores wouldn't be that much of a problem. I know "future proofing" is not really a thing but I would like to delay the next upgrade as much as possible. I guess that's more accurate. 

 

Haswell-E is running on X99 while Skylake is running on Z170 - for some reason I am thinking that Skylake has a PCIE lane advantage? (m2 configs, potentially SLI a couple of years down the road?)

 

Do you think that overclocking this beast would increase performance to a point where upgrading without hardware failure is just not worth it? 

[arvark]

In single threads you'll probably see a boost of around 10-25% by going to Skylake or Devil's Canyon. I would say decide on whether the multiple threads is more important to you or keeping up with IPC per core, as your CPU is still quite powerful. If you have the budget then you could upgrade to x99 an a 5820K if you wanted the best of both worlds. What is your work style, do you need those threads?

And just for future reference, futureproofing is a misnomer. That's why you came here to ask for upgrade suggestions. all hardware will eventually become outdated.

You know you get a 10-15% by going from SB to Skylake, from Nelhalem / Lynnfield or whatever the 9xx / 8xx i7s architecture is codenamed to Skylake or Haswell / DC he'd get 30% at least.

[ApolloX75]

I absolutely did get my money's worth as I got given the mainboard incl. CPU for about 200 USD about a year ago. Very very lucky This time I am going to have to spend some money

I am just a bit worried that my mainboard is going to die on me at some point - the network port is behaving funny already and sometimes the boot process is not as smooth as it should be :wacko:

No I don't really use the multi threads - I do some handbreaking every once and a while, but that can run over night so the loss of cores wouldn't be that much of a problem. I know "future proofing" is not really a thing but I would like to delay the next upgrade as much as possible. I guess that's more accurate.

Haswell-E is running on X99 while Skylake is running on Z170 - for some reason I am thinking that Skylake has a PCIE lane advantage? (m2 configs, potentially SLI a couple of years down the road?)

Do you think that overclocking this beast would increase performance to a point where upgrading without hardware failure is just not worth it?

Personally I'd run the 980X overclocked til it finally dies. It's not difficult to ramp them up and keep stable over long periods of time. Pair it with a 980 Ti and you'll have a good beast of a setup for another year or so.

The X99 platform has a huge advantage in PCIE lanes over 1150/1151. The 5820k has 28 lanes I believe and it's the lowest. Haswell 1150s have 16 lanes and I think Skylake has 20.

[typographie]

You know you get a 10-15% by going from SB to Skylake, from Nelhalem / Lynnfield or whatever the 9xx / 8xx i7s architecture is codenamed to Skylake or Haswell / DC he'd get 30% at least.

 

In terms of actual IPC, Skylake is actually more like 25–35% (more in some benchmarks) over Sandy Bridge, and potentially even more than that over Nehalem. 10% is more like the potential difference between Skylake and Haswell. The problem is that the difference is often obscured in applications… for instance, a GPU-bound game probably won't perform any differently from the i7-980X to the i7-6700K, despite there being a massive difference in CPU performance available.

[xeromynd]

If it were me, I'd wait until Skylake Refresh or Skylake-E or something.

X58 was the most stable build I'd ever run with my 960, and it was rock solid.

 

If you notice your current components are impeding daily tasks on your PC, then I guess upgrade. But I'd definitely start with the GPU before the CPU. 

 

"Futureproofing" and "upgrade itch" were what made me go to X99, and I wish I would've waited a little longer tbh. 

 

Something that did push me was learning that the Marvel 9128 SATA III controller on my Rampage III was actually far worse than the SATA II controller. Look it up if you haven't, it's super disappointing.

 

But if I had to upgrade from X58 again, I'd wait until the price of DDR4 drops a bit more, SSDs and M.2 come down a bit also, and then treat myself to both with an upgrade to Z170 or something, to make it a great upgrade.

[Curufinwe_wins]

Nehelam is really dated now. Even something as simple as ht has improved light years just up to ivy bridge.

Check out cinebench r15 scores.

An example I saw of an I7 980x was sitting at 100 single core, 764 multicore.

For comparisons sake, even a 4 core I7 479 at stock speeds does 140-160 single core (60%! Improvement) and 800-880 multicore.

Seriously though. Nehalem is extremely slow single core compared to today's chips (although in fairness a good 20-30% of that 60% came in Sandy Bridge alone aka 2600k)