Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Hardware and Technology > Motherboards

Forums
· Hardware and Technology
· CPUs and Overclocking
· Motherboards
· Video Cards and Graphics
· Memory and Storage
· Power Supplies
· Cases & Cooling
· SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones PCs
· Networking
· Peripherals
· General Hardware
· Highly Technical
· Computer Help
· Home Theater PCs
· Consumer Electronics
· Digital and Video Cameras
· Mobile Devices & Gadgets
· Audio/Video & Home Theater
· Software
· Software for Windows
· All Things Apple
· *nix Software
· Operating Systems
· Programming
· PC Gaming
· Console Gaming
· Distributed Computing
· Security
· Social
· Off Topic
· Politics and News
· Discussion Club
· Love and Relationships
· The Garage
· Health and Fitness
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals
· Free Stuff
· Contests and Sweepstakes
· Black Friday 2013
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-07-2013, 07:01 PM   #1
Ibrihim
Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 31
Default H61 In real life vs Z77

My son runs a g860 on a basic Gigabyte H61 board with a GTX460. Now without a stopwatch in his brain will he see any discernible difference using a Z77 based board? May I add I run a 2550k on a Z77X-D3H but surely it's horses for courses. I believe no conventional hard drive achieves sata 2 speeds let alone sata 3 for instance but many forums say sata 3 is a must have and so on. All too often enthusiasts seem devoted to expensive overkill.
Ibrihim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2013, 07:45 PM   #2
Sleepingforest
Platinum Member
 
Sleepingforest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,351
Default

SATA3 will only matter for SSDs. That said, a full speed SSD
is said to make your whole system feel more responsive and greatly improve program load times. Consider B75 or H77 if you want an SSD; otherwise, SATA2 should be fine.

In my opinion, the difference between PCIe 2.0 and 3.0 is a bigger deal (around 5% at the top end). A much more cost effective solution would be to upgrade the GPU from the 460 (nearly 3 generations behind now) to a GTX 660 or HD 7770.
Sleepingforest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2013, 09:16 PM   #3
VirtualLarry
Lifer
 
VirtualLarry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 24,445
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sleepingforest View Post
In my opinion, the difference between PCIe 2.0 and 3.0 is a bigger deal (around 5% at the top end). A much more cost effective solution would be to upgrade the GPU from the 460 (nearly 3 generations behind now) to a GTX 660 or HD 7770.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't a 7770 slower than 6850, and a 6850 is slower than a GTX460? Therefore, it would be pointless to "upgrade" a GTX460 to a 7770. Unless, for some reason, power-consumption is a serious issue.

After all, regardless of how many generations old it is, the GTX460 IS a DX11 card.
__________________
Rig(s) not listed, because I change computers, like some people change their socks.
ATX is for poor people. And 'gamers.' - phucheneh
haswell is bulldozer... - aigomorla
"DON'T BUY INTEL, they will send secret signals down the internet, which
will considerably slow down your computer". - SOFTengCOMPelec
VirtualLarry is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2013, 10:06 PM   #4
Torn Mind
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Maryland
Posts: 2,189
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VirtualLarry View Post
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't a 7770 slower than 6850, and a 6850 is slower than a GTX460? Therefore, it would be pointless to "upgrade" a GTX460 to a 7770. Unless, for some reason, power-consumption is a serious issue.

After all, regardless of how many generations old it is, the GTX460 IS a DX11 card.
The GTX 460 is either almost the same as or better than the 7770 depending on the game, according to Anandtech's benches.
__________________
SR061| Asrock H77M | 2x2GB G.Skill 1333Mhz NS RAM | PowerSpec TX-606 Case| 500GB 7200RPM Seagate Drive| Antec Eartwatts EA-500 (2006) | Asus DVD Burner | parallell and COM port header | Old Dell Keyboard
http://www.heatware.com/eval.php?id=93090
Torn Mind is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2013, 10:19 PM   #5
SPBHM
Platinum Member
 
SPBHM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 2,081
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VirtualLarry View Post
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't a 7770 slower than 6850, and a 6850 is slower than a GTX460? Therefore, it would be pointless to "upgrade" a GTX460 to a 7770. Unless, for some reason, power-consumption is a serious issue.

After all, regardless of how many generations old it is, the GTX460 IS a DX11 card.

the 6850 was released after the 460, and it was a little bit faster than the reference (675Mhz) 460, but many 460's were overclocked from factory to over 750MHz which makes them faster than the 6850...

the 7770 is slower than the 6850 in many or most cases, but in some newer DX11 stuff it's faster, I think overall is pretty close to the reference 460, but slower than a 460 OC.
SPBHM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2013, 10:20 PM   #6
StrangerGuy
Diamond Member
 
StrangerGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 7,067
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibrihim View Post
My son runs a g860 on a basic Gigabyte H61 board with a GTX460. Now without a stopwatch in his brain will he see any discernible difference using a Z77 based board? May I add I run a 2550k on a Z77X-D3H but surely it's horses for courses. I believe no conventional hard drive achieves sata 2 speeds let alone sata 3 for instance but many forums say sata 3 is a must have and so on. All too often enthusiasts seem devoted to expensive overkill.
No difference except lack of SATA3, even then it is going to mighty hard in real life to tell a difference with a good SSD.

Yeah the bolded part is all too true. The amount of people who do things like having a $200 board but a $150 video card as a gaming rig is staggering.

Last edited by StrangerGuy; 01-07-2013 at 10:22 PM.
StrangerGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 02:07 AM   #7
Belegost
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 799
Default

You would have to go to a 7850 to see a noticeable upgrade from the 460, the 7770 is not much difference. Which is sad considering I grabbed my 460 for under 100 bucks over 2.5 years ago... Today I could just about get double the performance for double the price, my how technology advances!

As for the motherboard, definitely on the overkill side. SATA3 makes a difference benchmarking my SSD and working with large datasets in matlab, but not really a noticeable difference that I could tell in gaming.
Belegost is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 04:56 AM   #8
Ibrihim
Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 31
Default

Thanks to all. I was beginning to think I was an ill informed cheapskate. However I came unstuck using an H61 board on HTPC/media pc (I had a spare one doing nothing) as I had to buy a discrete passive graphics card to get HDMI to my telly for sound. Costwise I should have left it in the box and bought a b75. Live and learn.
Ibrihim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 04:57 AM   #9
ShintaiDK
Diamond Member
 
ShintaiDK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 9,501
Default

Assuming you ignore SATA3 and USB3 plus overclocking. Then performance wise it will perform absolutely the same in H61 vs Z77.
ShintaiDK is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 05:53 AM   #10
Ibrihim
Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 31
Default

I think that about sums it up. I feel the overclocking is not an issue now Intel lock anything below approx 170 euros. Also my son added a sata 2 SSD which cost roughly half the price of the sata3 version as they are "old stuff" in a sale. Most of his money went on the graphics card. I believe he budgeted correctly.
Ibrihim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 11:41 AM   #11
IntelEnthusiast
Intel Representative
 
IntelEnthusiast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Utah
Posts: 582
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShintaiDK View Post
Assuming you ignore SATA3 and USB3 plus overclocking. Then performance wise it will perform absolutely the same in H61 vs Z77.
I think this is something that a lot of people don't understand; outside of the features that the board offers the board won't make a real difference on performance. A board may have features that allow something to run faster i.e. USB 3.0 or SATA III but for the most part the H77 will perform the same as the Z77.
__________________
Christian Wood
Intel Enthusiast Team

Intel® Core™ i5-3570K, Intel® SSD 520 120GB, Intel® DZ77GA-70K, SilverStone 750W PSU, EVGA GeForce GTX 580, Corsair Vengeance 8GB DDR3-1600MHz, Corsair H100 Cooler, Corsair CC600TM, Western Digital 1TB Black HDD
IntelEnthusiast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 02:01 PM   #12
Insert_Nickname
Golden Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,448
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibrihim View Post
I feel the overclocking is not an issue now Intel lock anything below approx 170 euros.
Technically you are correct, with a small "quirk"...

A Z77 board will allow you to overclock any CPU that supports Turbo Boost by 4 turbo bins. That's +400MHz... (Generally i5 and higher. The Pentium G860 does not, unfortunately)

From personal experience I can also say that this increase in clockspeed should not affect TDP if you're not using the IGP. My own 3770non-K draws very close to 77W fully loaded at 4.3GHz.
Insert_Nickname is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 03:51 PM   #13
Ibrihim
Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 31
Default IGPs (H61vs Z77)

Tried sending this private, but it seems I don't have enough posts!
Hi and thanks for your info.Have you any idea of the power draw of IGPs? Also do IGPs use zero watts if you don't use them i.e. they are not in idle state or anything that contributes to CPU temps or activity. I hope it's ok to bother you in private but I felt it was a bit off topic for a motherboard section but I would love to Know.
Ibrihim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 04:54 PM   #14
Zap
Super Moderator
Off Topic
Elite Member
 
Zap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Somewhere Gillbot can't find me
Posts: 22,378
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibrihim View Post
Have you any idea of the power draw of IGPs? Also do IGPs use zero watts if you don't use them i.e. they are not in idle state or anything that contributes to CPU temps or activity.
You could have started a new thread on this. I don't think the IGP draws anything when not in use. I think Intel calls it "power gating."

With Ivy Bridge the HD 4000 uses around 8W. I get this figure from the TDP of socket 1155 Ivy Bridge Xeon chips (E3 V2) because they are sold with and without IGP. With IGP the TDP is 77W. Without is 69W.

Standard disclaimers apply regarding TDP not being exact power draw, plus lower power at low loads, etc.
__________________
The best way to future-proof is to save money and spend it on future products. (Ken g6)

SSD turns duds into studs. (JBT)
Zap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 05:16 PM   #15
Ibrihim
Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 31
Default

Thanks.
Ibrihim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 06:44 AM   #16
Insert_Nickname
Golden Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,448
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zap View Post
With Ivy Bridge the HD 4000 uses around 8W. I get this figure from the TDP of socket 1155 Ivy Bridge Xeon chips (E3 V2) because they are sold with and without IGP. With IGP the TDP is 77W. Without is 69W.
Just checked. The HD2000 in my Celeron G465 uses 0.06W when idle. At least according to Aida64. Though how accurate that is can be debated...

In all circumstances I would expect it to be well below 1W.
Insert_Nickname is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 08:03 AM   #17
thebigbolgna
Diamond Member
 
thebigbolgna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 4,915
Default

Its going to be REALLY hard (I think impossible unless your constantly copying large files to or from the SSD, which is unlikely) to notice the difference of a SSD on SATA 2 or SATA 3.

Unless he has a specific need for Z77 (like overclocking, which he can't currently anyways), its a waste.
__________________
HTPC/TV Gamer: AMD X4 750K @ 4.2 GHz | MSI A88X-G45 | MSI 7850 TFIII 2GB @ 1200/1375 | 8GB DDR3-1600 Ballistix | 120GB Intel 320 | 750GB Seagate | nMedia 5000b | Insignia 50" 1080p LED | Win 8.1 Pro |
Notebook: Dell E6330 13" | Intel i7 3540M @ 3.0 GHz | Intel HD 4000 | 16GB DDR3 | Samsung 830 256GB | Win 8.1 Pro |
Phone: Moto X
thebigbolgna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 06:23 PM   #18
Ibrihim
Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 31
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zap View Post
You could have started a new thread on this. I don't think the IGP draws anything when not in use. I think Intel calls it "power gating."

With Ivy Bridge the HD 4000 uses around 8W. I get this figure from the TDP of socket 1155 Ivy Bridge Xeon chips (E3 V2) because they are sold with and without IGP. With IGP the TDP is 77W. Without is 69W.

Standard disclaimers apply regarding TDP not being exact power draw, plus lower power at low loads, etc.
Yes I am bit new at this sorry I did not start a new thread. The reason I asked about IGP is I bought a 2550k was to avoid excess baggage but Intel give the same TDP as the 2500k which does have an IGP. Maybe 100 mhz faster = an Igp. Or perhaps its a Sandybridge thing?
Ibrihim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 06:29 PM   #19
Ibrihim
Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 31
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigystyle84 View Post
Its going to be REALLY hard (I think impossible unless your constantly copying large files to or from the SSD, which is unlikely) to notice the difference of a SSD on SATA 2 or SATA 3.

Unless he has a specific need for Z77 (like overclocking, which he can't currently anyways), its a waste.
My first SSD (slow) blew me away. Now I wonder about read/write speed in real life.Let alone sata 2 or 3.
Ibrihim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 07:56 AM   #20
Insert_Nickname
Golden Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,448
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibrihim View Post
My first SSD (slow) blew me away. Now I wonder about read/write speed in real life.Let alone sata 2 or 3.
The real reason your SSD "blew you away" is a combination of much lower access time across the whole disk and the shear amount of IOPS the SSD controller can do...

Very high sequential read/write speeds is just icing on the cake. But honestly you'll be hard pressed to spot the difference between a SATA2 or SATA3 link in real life, outside benchmarks.
Insert_Nickname is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 12:12 PM   #21
Zap
Super Moderator
Off Topic
Elite Member
 
Zap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Somewhere Gillbot can't find me
Posts: 22,378
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibrihim View Post
Yes I am bit new at this sorry I did not start a new thread. The reason I asked about IGP is I bought a 2550k was to avoid excess baggage but Intel give the same TDP as the 2500k which does have an IGP. Maybe 100 mhz faster = an Igp. Or perhaps its a Sandybridge thing?
It is how Intel rates TDP. They rate it for a "family" of processors, so for instance a Core i5-2310 and a Core i7-2700K both have a 95W TDP even though the 2700K is much higher MHz, has 33% more cache and 100% more EUs in the integrated graphics. I'm willing to bet, however, that in the real world, at stock speeds and using the IGP, the 2700K ends up using a bit more power.
__________________
The best way to future-proof is to save money and spend it on future products. (Ken g6)

SSD turns duds into studs. (JBT)
Zap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 03:59 PM   #22
Ibrihim
Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 31
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zap View Post
It is how Intel rates TDP. They rate it for a "family" of processors, so for instance a Core i5-2310 and a Core i7-2700K both have a 95W TDP even though the 2700K is much higher MHz, has 33% more cache and 100% more EUs in the integrated graphics. I'm willing to bet, however, that in the real world, at stock speeds and using the IGP, the 2700K ends up using a bit more power.
On over clocking I've read a lot on the temperature effect of upping voltage and quite a bit on how high a processor speed can be increased at stock voltage. I have not seen much on CPU speed increase on power draw at stock v. (or decrease) Though a speed drop seems to feature on most "low power" CPUs. Also lately even low price motherboards offer the option of upping the IGP speed again I am curious about power and heat .

Last edited by Ibrihim; 01-11-2013 at 04:05 PM. Reason: Last three words could be missinterpretated
Ibrihim is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.