I7-4790 vs I5 4590

[dizmo]

I wouldn't pay that much, seems a little high. If you can, look for a Dell complete tower. I've seen some go quite cheap on eBay...within $30 of what you'd be paying for the CPU. Then sell it locally for a profit. Or wait for the new chips to release and you should see price drops.

 

22 minutes ago, themctipers said:

im starting to know american prices because of LTT ..

cries in $550 7700k 

If you're paying $550 for a 7700k you need to learn how to shop.

2 minutes ago, hammer3339 said:

older 22nm architecture running 1600mhz ddr3 ram though at a clock around 15-20% lower than a 7700k can be OC'd to paired with a 15% + improvement in IPC as well as new technologies. 7700k is significantly better for high end/ high refresh rate gaming. my 4770k is bottlenecking my gtx 1080 and im pretty keen for an 8700k with an extra 2 cores 4threads as i play some simulators etc that are very cpu intensive

 

Just because you can get better performance from newer components doesn't mean your old ones are obsolete

[hammer3339]

you're right but not worth side grading to if you will need to buy a new mobo in a year or so. having more accessible high thread count consumer chips will drive the video games industry towards developing for that platform so I predict the old 4c i7s are going to be becoming undergunned in the next couple of years

 

150 bucks for slightly better multithreaded performance is not worth it with no upgrade path

2 minutes ago, Daniel Z. said:

yes, but real world performance isn't that much worse. If it is OCed then between 7600k/1600 OCed and 7700k

 

[hammer3339]

2 minutes ago, dizmo said:

Just because you can get better performance from newer components doesn't mean your old ones are obsolete

not obsolete yet but aging fast with no compatibility for newer tech such as m.2 ssds, ddr4 memory etc etc

[SlaughterSmurf]

46 minutes ago, themctipers said:

no

for $220 you can get ryzen 1600 which has better IPC, is overclockable and has 2 more cores

Yeah but then he's also buying a motherboard and ram which almost doubles the cost. 

[themctipers]

42 minutes ago, themctipers said:

it is but for the price he is buying it for, not worth it 

yes it is still a good CPU that will last him for a long time, and yes it is a performance boost but it is not good value IMO 

 

1 minute ago, SlaughterSmurf said:

Yeah but then he's also buying a motherboard and ram which almost doubles the cost. 

 

[SlaughterSmurf]

I would hold off until Covfefe Lake and get an 8700k or even an 8600k. Either would be better than Ryzen or the 4770 for gaming.

[JoostinOnline]

1 hour ago, Moderateshadow said:

while I DO agree.. a 200$ motherboard and 100$ in ram may make this not viable for OP

The hell do you need to spend $200 on a motherboard for?

[themctipers]

36 minutes ago, dizmo said:

I wouldn't pay that much, seems a little high. If you can, look for a Dell complete tower. I've seen some go quite cheap on eBay...within $30 of what you'd be paying for the CPU. Then sell it locally for a profit. Or wait for the new chips to release and you should see price drops.

 

If you're paying $550 for a 7700k you need to learn how to shop.

Just because you can get better performance from newer components doesn't mean your old ones are obsolete

shh, that was a couple of months ago somewhere on PCPP

all the prices were really high 

[Drak3]

1 hour ago, themctipers said:

no

for $220 you can get ryzen 1600 which has better IPC, is overclockable and has 2 more cores

Ryzen has roughly the same IPC as Haswell, and a good overclock is still only 3.9GHz or so, with 4GHz being a silicon lottery winner. Adding cores also doesn't mean jack shit unless one has good reason to think they'll see a worthwhile benefit from them. As much as people like to pretend Ryzen's core count will give it the edge in a year or so for gaming, it's far more likely that we'll have Zen 3 before there is any worthwhile benefit to just gaming on 6 cores, and it won't be a grand spectacle.

 

Personally, I'd save up $400 for a CPU, minimum $300 for a mainboard, and weigh my options once I've got that saved up. The 4690 isn't a bad CPU. I'm extremely happy running a 4460 and 1070 in my secondary rig.

55 minutes ago, hammer3339 said:

what do you mean ? they are the same chip with different TIM on the die essentially. im saying that i already have a 4790k equivalent and i feel its getting long in the tooth for gaming

Um chief, a good 4770K has a bit of trouble hitting 4.55GHz on water. An average 4790K can hit 4.8GHz. And at 4-4.2GHz, anything Haswell and up, 4c/8t is not getting long in the tooth for anything other than the pointless pursuit of the memelord avg. FPS in shit games like CS:GO. At 4.5GHz, with a half way decent RAM OC (XMP)

 

52 minutes ago, hammer3339 said:

older 22nm architecture running 1600mhz ddr3 ram though at a clock around 15-20% lower than a 7700k can be OC'd to paired with a 15% + improvement in IPC as well as new technologies. 7700k is significantly better for high end/ high refresh rate gaming.

The 7700K can clock 5% faster on average, and has a 5% IPC edge, for a whopping total of 10.25% difference, with a good deal of the "IPC" difference actually being a better IMC that supports better clocks and timings out of the box. At the end of the day, an upgrade from Haswell's K SKU to any 4c/8t K SKU is not worth it. The "new" features and technologies (which the only ones that matter are a hardware H.265 decoder and an improved Speedstep) are not worth it.

[dizmo]

12 hours ago, hammer3339 said:

not obsolete yet but aging fast with no compatibility for newer tech such as m.2 ssds, ddr4 memory etc etc

Ahh, yes. Though m.2 SSDs only reduce clutter, and NVME isn't really useful unless you're doing a ton of content creation.

DDR4 definitely has a tangible benefit, but I'm not sure it's worth completely redoing a system for a few more FPS..