I7 4790k overclocked to match a i7 7700k??

[Lonehelljumper]

I build a pc for a friend a few years ago with a 4790k in it. He's wanting to upgrade but I don't think it's worth it at this point. Is there a way to get 7700k performance out of a 4790k? I'm thinking he would need to hit 4.9 ghz, but he only has a a hyper 212 evo. Any ideas?

[Senzelian]

Well you can overclock the 4790k with a lot of luck to 4.9Ghz, but I wouldn't count on it, especially when the chip is already a few years old now.

And then you have to keep in mind, that the 7700k is just as easily overclocked, if not a lot easier and can reach higher clockspeeds aswell.

 

So in reality, you won't match the 7700k's performance.

 

If he is simply gaming, then I wouldn't upgrade anyway. Even an overclock is questionable.

[Enderman]

It's a different architecture.

Simply increasing the clock speed to match is not going to give the same performance.

The 7700k is not an overclocked 4790k.

[Lonehelljumper]

Well i mean reach 7700k stock performance.  

[wojtepanik]

2 minutes ago, Lonehelljumper said:

Well i mean reach 7700k stock performance.  

still no

[Lonehelljumper]

2 minutes ago, Enderman said:

It's a different architecture.

Simply increasing the clock speed to match is not going to give the same performance.

The 7700k is not an overclocked 4790k.

Right, I know a 4790k at 4.6 ghz will perform worse that a 7700k at the same clock. What I'm wondering is how much further he would have to overclock it to match stock 7700k performance or get close. 

[Streetguru]

10 minutes ago, Lonehelljumper said:

 

There's no reason to upgrade from a 4790K for gaming.

[bellabichon]

1 hour ago, Lonehelljumper said:

Right, I know a 4790k at 4.6 ghz will perform worse that a 7700k at the same clock. What I'm wondering is how much further he would have to overclock it to match stock 7700k performance or get close. 

He'd have to go quite a bit further, and there is no point for gaming. Haswell still holds up fine today, as most games rely much more on GPU power over CPU power. 

[NelizMastr]

8 minutes ago, Streetguru said:

There's no reason to upgrade from a 4790K for gaming.

Aside from massive multiplayer games with 64-player matches and more, that is. As long as you have more than 4 threads, you're absolutely fine though for the foreseeable future.

[DarkSmith2]

hmn, having a K chip and not overclocking it is a waste, using a K chip with a bad cooler is also a waste.

I dont see any reason why a faster CPU wouldnt be beneficial for gaming unless you are playing on a high resolution where a potato delivers the same performance.

So i dont get the arguments that overclocking for gaming has no point. Whats wrong with you guys? Not every goddamn game is GPU-bound AF. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Lonehelljumper]

4 minutes ago, bellabichon said:

He'd have to go quite a bit further, and there is no point for gaming. Haswell still holds up fine today, as most games rely much more on GPU power over CPU power. 

Ok so here is the deal. I built my wife a pc in 2012ish with a i7 3770k. I've delided it and it's clocked to 5 ghz. It's running gtx 1070 just fine. His goal is to have pc that can run games on ultra till 2023 or so (gpu upgrades are fine). He just doesn't want bottlenecks. I'm afraid that a 1080 ti would bottleneck him, so I'm trying to figure out how to increase performance without building a whole new system.

[Dabombinable]

6 minutes ago, NelizMastr said:

Aside from massive multiplayer games with 64-player matches and more, that is. As long as you have more than 4 threads, you're absolutely fine though for the foreseeable future.

*more than 4 low clocked threads

The clock speed of a 4790K is a big part of the longevity.

[Lonehelljumper]

1 minute ago, DarkSmith2 said:

hmn, having a K chip and not overclocking it is a waste, using a K chip with a bad cooler is also a waste.

I dont see any reason why a faster CPU wouldnt be beneficial for gaming unless you are playing on a high resolution where a potato delivers the same performance.

So i dont get the arguments that overclocking for gaming has no point. Whats wrong with you guys? Not every goddamn game is GPU-bound AF. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Thank You!!!!

[Streetguru]

1 minute ago, Lonehelljumper said:

Thank You!!!!

Even the 2600K is still mostly fine for gaming.
 

 

[Lonehelljumper]

3 minutes ago, Streetguru said:

Even the 2600K is still mostly fine for gaming.
 

 

I know. Seen this vid a few times now. I gave a friend a i7 2600 system with a gtx 970 because i figured it could play games for a few more years. But it won't do 1440p at ultra at at 144 fps with a 144hz monitor 

[Lonehelljumper]

Just wondering if it is possible to match a 7700k with a 4790k, and what clock speed I would need to hit to do so. 

[DarkSmith2]

1 minute ago, Lonehelljumper said:

Just wondering if it is possible to match a 7700k with a 4790k, and what clock speed I would need to hit to do so. 

well if you compare cinebench single core CB points. It is actually around 4.7-4.8 GHz, but its a completly different architecture and not comparable, it will just behave different application per application. 

[NelizMastr]

8 minutes ago, Lonehelljumper said:

I know. Seen this vid a few times now. I gave a friend a i7 2600 system with a gtx 970 because i figured it could play games for a few more years. But it won't do 1440p at ultra at at 144 fps with a 144hz monitor 

Well no, neither the 970 nor the 2600 are fast enough for that. 1080 144 is already a stretch for a 970 in most games, unless you like medium details.

[Streetguru]

3 minutes ago, Lonehelljumper said:

Just wondering if it is possible to match a 7700k with a 4790k, and what clock speed I would need to hit to do so. 

Going by this basic chart you're going to have to gain about 20% more performance, don't forget about the difference with DDR4, it helps a bit at times.

Least he can just upgrade to Ryzen 3000 next year.

[Lonehelljumper]

5 minutes ago, Streetguru said:

Going by this basic chart you're going to have to gain about 20% more performance, don't forget about the difference with DDR4, it helps a bit at times.

Least he can just upgrade to Ryzen 3000 next year.

Well 20% would be impossible pretty much. And with ryzen I sure hope the 3000 series finally catches up to intel.

[Lonehelljumper]

8 minutes ago, DarkSmith2 said:

well if you compare cinebench single core CB points. It is actually around 4.7-4.8 GHz, but its a completly different architecture and not comparable, it will just behave different application per application. 

We will shoot for 4.8, although I'd say that is unlikely. Thank you. 

[Tabs]

As @Streetguru said, you can expect a stock 7700K (4.2ghz) to outperform a 4790K (4.0ghz) by around 15-20%. If you were able to get the 4790K to around 4.7-4.8ghz, it will roughly approximate the performance the 7700K would have at stock, but remember that the 7700K is overclockable too - and this depends a lot on the rest of the system and the exact game(s) being tested. It'll never reach a clock speed high enough to match even a mildly overclocked 7700K, the architectural improvements are simply too great.

 

The best idea is to just push it as far as it can - no point trying to push for 4.8 if the chip and cooling can only handle 4.6, for example. It'll just disappoint you/your friend if you can't reach it. Any free performance is good.

 

 

[Streetguru]

4 minutes ago, Lonehelljumper said:

Well 20% would be impossible pretty much. And with ryzen I sure hope the 3000 series finally catches up to intel.

Ryzen 2 is only like 5-10% behind Kaby Lake/Coffee lake there

Ryzen 3 just needs to hit 4.5ghz on average with a few more IPC improvements.

 

But mostly they'll hopefully release a 12 core CPU for AM4

[Lonehelljumper]

6 minutes ago, Streetguru said:

Ryzen 2 is only like 5-10% behind Kaby Lake/Coffee lake there

Ryzen 3 just needs to hit 4.5ghz on average with a few more IPC improvements.

 

But mostly they'll hopefully release a 12 core CPU for AM4

I hope so. I remember days when the Athlon 64 hit. I love amd, wish they could be on top again. I built a 2700x system and was mildly disappointed I could only get 4.2 ghz out of it, no matter what I did. Especially since my 8700k hits 5 ghz.

[Streetguru]

4 minutes ago, Lonehelljumper said:

I hope so. I remember days when the Athlon 64 hit. I love amd, wish they could be on top again. I built a 2700x system and was mildly disappointed I could only get 4.2 ghz out of it, no matter what I did. Especially since my 8700k hits 5 ghz.

Better to just leave it at stock so it does it's 4.35Ghz turbo

But you can OC it pretty far with the right board potentially, memory is pretty important as well.

You need precision boost override I think it is. I think I heard 4.4ghz mentioned here.