Another one of these threads...Xeon or i7 for my needs? Sorry

[aisle9]

So the Pentium OC in my rig is already showing some early signs of instability, roughly a month after putting it together, and I had to up the voltage today. Haven't stress tested it yet, so we'll see what happens. I know I was on the ragged edge of stable at the lowest possible voltage (1.344) I could hold 4.4GHz stable at, but still. Disappointing, but them's the breaks.

 

I had previously intended to drop an overclocked i7-4770K or 4790K in there, but the idea of a Xeon E3-1241V3 has grown on me lately. For one, it's a $260-275 chip vs. the $315+ i7-4770/90K. Two, and this is a big one, instead of having to drop another $70-100 on a good AIO on top of the more expensive processor, because the Xeons run cool and can't be overclocked, I could stick with the compact air cooler I have.

 

The downside, of course, is that I can't overclock the Xeon, but would I really even need to? I feel like that CPU would be able to handle anything I could throw at it for the next few years regardless, given that it's essentially an i7-4790 without integrated graphics, and I'm running a discrete GPU. I don't play new AAA titles right away, and generally lag about a year behind. Assuming I keep my GPUs up to date (usually a generation older than new stock), I think this CPU would be able to meet my needs for 3-4 years to come. The second downside is single-core performance. I'm a bit concerned about taking a hit there, but would that be a big hit at all (if any), and would it be noticeable in single-threaded games?

 

I'm also an atmospheric photographer during the spring and summer (read: I drive towards tornadoes, not away), and do quite a bit of Photoshopping after I get home from outings. I've been using my laptop with an i5-3210M...I know, I know...and the performance boost of going to a quad-core w/HT would be a welcome change for me.

 

Is there some glaring reason other than the ability to overclock that I should not go with the Xeon over the i7? Am I correct in guessing that attention to my GPU would keep the Xeon capable of doing its job well for a few years?

 

The rest of my rig:

ASUS Z97-A/USB3.1

EVGA GTX 960 SSC 4GB (this will be updated on a yearly/every other year basis)

16GB DDR31600 RAM

Samsung Pro 128GB SSD

Western Digital Black 1TB HDD

Antec HCG 750 PSU

[WoodenMarker]

What cooler are you using?

The xeon should be plenty for just about anything. 3.5-3.9ghz is plenty fast for single threaded performance.

The main argument between the xeon and i7 would be the pricing. Considering you already have a z97 board, you should spring for the 4790k and oc. 

[PlayStation 2]

I'd go for the Xeon if you are not overclocking, or not really wanting to. 

The Xeon E3-1231v3 is a much better bang-for-the-buck chip as it's pretty much an i7-4770 without the iGPU. This means the Xeon will hold up as well as the i7.

[CarterDavison]

Imo if you're updating your GPU every year, you should have an iGPU to troubleshoot in case you receive a troublesome card..

 

But if you aren't bothered by something like that, just go for the xeon.

 

It's a great chip for the price.

[aisle9]

What cooler are you using?

The xeon should be plenty for just about anything. 3.5-3.9ghz is plenty fast for single threaded performance.

The main argument between the xeon and i7 would be the pricing. Considering you already have a z97 board, you should spring for the 4790k and oc. 

SilenX Effizio EFZ-92HA3

 

Dirt cheap from Fry's because the Hyper 212 EVO wound up not fitting in my case, and running a Pentium, I didn't see any real reason to spring for a decent AIO. It won't hold up for an OC'ed i7, which I knew going in and at that point basically just wanted to walk out with something that would work for my G3258. Even at 1.347v, the SilenX keeps the Pentium to load temps of ~70C.

 

The Z97 argument weighs in as well, and it is something I'd thought of. I bought the Z97 board intending to overclock, which I have done with the Pentium.

 

Imo if you're updating your GPU every year, you should have an iGPU to troubleshoot in case you receive a troublesome card..

 

But if you aren't bothered by something like that, just go for the xeon.

 

It's a great chip for the price.

I'd have two backup plans for that occurrence:

1. I'm keeping the Pentium

2. I'd keep the old GPU nearby until I was sure the new one worked.

 

I'd go for the Xeon if you are not overclocking, or not really wanting to. 

The Xeon E3-1231v3 is a much better bang-for-the-buck chip as it's pretty much an i7-4770 without the iGPU. This means the Xeon will hold up as well as the i7.

Deep down, I know this to be true, but the added little kick of 3.5/3.9, even if it's a 5% kick at best, is incredibly tempting. You know the feeling, I'm sure  :lol:

[WoodenMarker]

SilenX Effizio EFZ-92HA3

Dirt cheap from Fry's because the Hyper 212 EVO wound up not fitting in my case, and running a Pentium, I didn't see any real reason to spring for a decent AIO. It won't hold up for an OC'ed i7, which I knew going in and at that point basically just wanted to walk out with something that would work for my G3258. Even at 1.347v, the SilenX keeps the Pentium to load temps of ~70C.

The Z97 argument weighs in as well, and it is something I'd thought of. I bought the Z97 board intending to overclock, which I have done with the Pentium.

I'd have two backup plans for that occurrence:

1. I'm keeping the Pentium

2. I'd keep the old GPU nearby until I was sure the new one worked.

Deep down, I know this to be true, but the added little kick of 3.5/3.9, even if it's a 5% kick at best, is incredibly tempting. You know the feeling, I'm sure  :lol:

Oh. Fyi, the G3258 doesn't need a Z97 board to oc. Many of the cheapest H81 boards do it without a hitch.

Personally, I go with the unlocked and oc'ing route because that is my duty as an enthusiast. 

Also, keep in mind the 4790k has a boost clock of 4.4ghz as opposed to the 4790's 3.9ghz even if you aren't going to oc.

[PlayStation 2]

Also, keep in mind the 4790k has a boost clock of 4.4ghz as opposed to the 4790's 3.9ghz even if you aren't going to oc.

Yep. I don't know why Intel decided to make the regular 4790 weird, but the 4790 is clocked at 3.5GHz at stock IIRC.

[WoodenMarker]

Yep. I don't know why Intel decided to make the regular 4790 weird, but the 4790 is clocked at 3.5GHz at stock IIRC.

The higher clock speed on the 4790k is probably there to generate hype. 

[aisle9]

Oh. Fyi, the G3258 doesn't need a Z97 board to oc. Many of the cheapest H81 boards do it without a hitch.

Personally, I go with the unlocked and oc'ing route because that is my duty as an enthusiast. 

Also, keep in mind the 4790k has a boost clock of 4.4ghz as opposed to the 4790's 3.9ghz even if you aren't going to oc.

See. now I'm almost thinking about going the 4790K route and giving it a mild overclock, something the cooler I have can support, rather than running it ragged with an AIO.

 

But, man, $250 for a stock 4770 equivalent is really tempting.

[WoodenMarker]

See. now I'm almost thinking about going the 4790K route and giving it a mild overclock, something the cooler I have can support, rather than running it ragged with an AIO.

But, man, $250 for a stock 4770 equivalent is really tempting.

Considering you already spent the extra money on a Z97 board over a H81/B85 board, you're already halfway there. 

In the end, it's up to you. The e3-1230 v3 is also another option that might be cheaper. 

[Darkseth]

Anyway, you shouldn't be using an overpriced all-in-one-crap anyway ^^

Good Air Cooler > All in One liquid coolers.

Cost much less, similar cooling performance, but @ stock already by far more silent.

 

Most 30-40 bucks Coolers, like Brocken 2, Macho HR02 Rev B should be able, to cool an 4790k @ stock pretty much "silent"

No reason for an 100$+ H100 or something.

[CarterDavison]

Anyway, you shouldn't be using an overpriced all-in-one-crap anyway ^^

Good Air Cooler > All in One liquid coolers.

Cost much less, similar cooling performance, but @ stock already by far more silent.

 

Most 30-40 bucks Coolers, like Brocken 2, Macho HR02 Rev B should be able, to cool an 4790k @ stock pretty much "silent"

No reason for an 100$+ H100 or something.

You can't just make such a generic comment wtf rofl

[aisle9]

And the Pentium just crashed during the third of five RealBench benchmark runs, at 1.347v this time. Is it normal for an OC to go from 0 to stable to unstable within a month?

[WoodenMarker]

And the Pentium just crashed during the third of five RealBench benchmark runs, at 1.347v this time. Is it normal for an OC to go from 0 to stable to unstable within a month?

You can never determine that an oc is fully stable. Stress testing an oc is done to determine how stable the oc probably is. 

[aisle9]

You can never determine that an oc is fully stable. Stress testing an oc is done to determine how stable the oc probably is. 

It was passing the same stress tests with flying colors a week ago. That's what has me concerned. Nothing environmental has changed, there's no dust buildup anywhere, I just can't figure out why it went from passing stress tests at 1.344v to crashing at 1.347v within a matter of days. I knew eventually I'd have to up the voltage or lower the clock, but this just seems too early.

[WoodenMarker]

It was passing the same stress tests with flying colors a week ago. That's what has me concerned. Nothing environmental has changed, there's no dust buildup anywhere, I just can't figure out why it went from passing stress tests at 1.344v to crashing at 1.347v within a matter of days. I knew eventually I'd have to up the voltage or lower the clock, but this just seems too early.

I doubt the chip was degrading but instead that the oc wasn't stable at 1.344v to begin with.

[WaitForMeImOnDialUp]

if you dont care about overclocking get the xeon. they are server grade and made to run 24/7 for years. so if you are on your pc alot then its a good move. it could push two titan-x's  so its more than enough for your gtx 960. the single thread performance is still pretty high on those.

 

the xeon is awesome the only reason to get a 4790k over one is just for the ability to overclock later down the road when its needed(if its even needed) and epeen (bragging rights),but more than likely when that time comes there will be something way better available anyways and be a good time to upgrade

 

personally...i would get the 4790k, for peace of mind and the fact i have huge epeen

[Darkseth]

You can't just make such a generic comment wtf rofl

But if i'm right with my statement....

 

Only the 100€+ High end "AIOs" can beat good air coolers below 80-90 bucks SLIGHTLY, and that only if the Fans are going nuts.

Put silent fans on, and the Cooling power isnt even better than from a good Air cooler. Even if it is, by a few degree, you are at 150$ vs. 80-90.

At least that's, what pretty much every test showed me, ive seen so far.

[SteveGrabowski0]

So the Pentium OC in my rig is already showing some early signs of instability, roughly a month after putting it together, and I had to up the voltage today. Haven't stress tested it yet, so we'll see what happens. I know I was on the ragged edge of stable at the lowest possible voltage (1.344) I could hold 4.4GHz stable at, but still. Disappointing, but them's the breaks.

 

I had previously intended to drop an overclocked i7-4770K or 4790K in there, but the idea of a Xeon E3-1241V3 has grown on me lately. For one, it's a $260-275 chip vs. the $315+ i7-4770/90K. Two, and this is a big one, instead of having to drop another $70-100 on a good AIO on top of the more expensive processor, because the Xeons run cool and can't be overclocked, I could stick with the compact air cooler I have.

 

The downside, of course, is that I can't overclock the Xeon, but would I really even need to? I feel like that CPU would be able to handle anything I could throw at it for the next few years regardless, given that it's essentially an i7-4790 without integrated graphics, and I'm running a discrete GPU. I don't play new AAA titles right away, and generally lag about a year behind. Assuming I keep my GPUs up to date (usually a generation older than new stock), I think this CPU would be able to meet my needs for 3-4 years to come. The second downside is single-core performance. I'm a bit concerned about taking a hit there, but would that be a big hit at all (if any), and would it be noticeable in single-threaded games?

 

I'm also an atmospheric photographer during the spring and summer (read: I drive towards tornadoes, not away), and do quite a bit of Photoshopping after I get home from outings. I've been using my laptop with an i5-3210M...I know, I know...and the performance boost of going to a quad-core w/HT would be a welcome change for me.

 

Is there some glaring reason other than the ability to overclock that I should not go with the Xeon over the i7? Am I correct in guessing that attention to my GPU would keep the Xeon capable of doing its job well for a few years?

 

The rest of my rig:

ASUS Z97-A/USB3.1

EVGA GTX 960 SSC 4GB (this will be updated on a yearly/every other year basis)

16GB DDR31600 RAM

Samsung Pro 128GB SSD

Western Digital Black 1TB HDD

Antec HCG 750 PSU

 

I wouldn't get the E3-1241v3. The cheapest you can find it in stock right now is at amazon for $278, while you can get the 4790k shipped from SuperBiiz for $330. So $52 more, but you're getting 500 MHz more even at stock considering the quadcore turbo of the 4790k is 4.2 GHz while the quadcore turbo of the 1241v3 is 3.7 GHz. Even if you get the worst binned 4790k your stock voltage is capped at I believe 1.273V, so your cooler should be fine for running at stock.

 

On the flipside, the E3-1231v3 is highly worth considering. It's 100 MHz slower than the E3-1241v3, but it's also $29 cheaper since you can get it for $249 shipped from SuperBiiz. If you're not willing to spend $52 for 500 MHz on the 4790k over the 1241v3 why spend $29 for 100 MHz on the 1241v3 over the 1231v3? The 1231v3 is the Xeon that's the real price to performance winner, not the 1241v3.

[SteveGrabowski0]

I should add I run a 1231v3 and it's a monster cpu for gaming. However, in really badly optimized games like Fallout 4 I have to turn settings down a bit. For instance, I run shadow distance at medium and godrays at medium to keep a locked 60 fps, while @App4that tells me he can run both at ultra and get a locked 60 fps on his 4.5 GHz i7-4790k. I think both of those are straight cpu bound settings.

[SteveGrabowski0]

Fallout 4 really is an anomaly though, that game's optimization is complete crap. I'm at full gpu usage in everything else but Arma III (another game with crap optimization) using my Xeon E3-1231v3 + GTX 970.

[aisle9]

The more I think about it, the more appealing an i5-4690K w/the best air cooler that fits my case sounds. I got a Z board to overclock, and a locked Xeon just seems like a waste of potential. It's not 4C/8T, but realistically, I won't be doing much of anything that *requires* 8 threads.

[aisle9]

One quick addition to update: the computer keeps crashing during h264 encoding, which, frankly, I won't be doing any of on that machine until I get a higher-end processor in there anyway. To that end, I've invented my own torture test for it:

 

1. iTunes running an infinite playlist in the background

2. A four-hour 1080p video loop of heavy snow courtesy of Youtube, also in the background

3. Skyrim cranked up to ultra detail in the foreground, with my character left dormant in the Whiterun town square for two reasons: sitting dormant for more than a few minutes switches you to third-person and rotates the camera around you, and the Whiterun town square is reasonably busy at all times to ensure that the CPU is having to deal with NPC management along with HD video and audio

 

If the PC survives four hours of this torture test, I'll call it "good enough" until I can drop an i5/i7/Xeon in there in a few months.