Does it make sense to buy Haswell now?

[2is]

This is exactly what I think of CPU overclocking. It's a hobby that isn't usually necessary, nor that helpful, to get great performance. And $60-$65 surely is significant, being 1/3 the cost of an i5. $60 can be the difference between running an R9 280 and an R9 290 in your system, which will give a night and day performance difference vs a tiny bump in performance from a 500MHz overclock on your already very strong CPU. CPU overclocking was awesome in the 90s and early 2000s when it legitimately offered incredible price to performance gains when you could unlock the performance of top end CPUs binned as lower CPUs to keep from flooding the market with high end processors. But now you can usually only overclock the highest end Intel chips (and crap FX I guess), and I don't think it mixes well with being on a budget. Price to performance should always matter for a rational consumer, but it seems like the only time CPU overclocking offers much is for someone building a high end system to play AAA games at 120/144Hz.

I'm not suggesting anyone buy a 4690k and a 280 instead of a 4690 and a 290 and no one else in this thread is either that I've seen. If someone's build hinges on $60 and those are their options, you and I are in full agreement on which is the more prudent choice. That isn't what I responded to earlier though.

 

[escrow4]

Because most people just need a $70 board for a 4790K? Or $175 16GB DDR3 when you can buy $130 on Amazon?

Then that becomes $530 vs $846. Then the X99 set would need an extra 60% premium which is still a good deal if you need the features and the cores, but most people won't and also wouldn't want to spend that much.

How far would a cheapo $70 Z97 board overclock? On 3+1 VRMs and no heatsinks on the board? Don't forget I didn't specify rebates across other sites. 5820K X99 isn't expensive considering what you get.

 

[StrangerGuy]

How far would a cheapo $70 Z97 board overclock? On 3+1 VRMs and no heatsinks on the board? Don't forget I didn't specify rebates across other sites. 5820K X99 isn't expensive considering what you get.

Because you don't have to OC a 4790K? Why do I have to even state this by now.

 

[tential]

He did. Every single AAA game at the end of this year (Unity, FC 4, Inquisition) along with Watch Dogs can use more than 4 threads. It isn't exactly required (yet) but the trend is there. Its far from a massive cost increase. Right now on Newegg, no rebates:

- 4790K: $340
- Z97X-UD5H: - $185
- Corsair LP 16GB 1600MHz CAS 9 - $175

$700

- 5820K: $385
- Asrock X99 Extreme 4: $231
- G-Skill 16GB DDR4 2133MHz: $230

$846

$146 is not a massive difference for 2 extra cores and the added bits of X99. Over 3yrs at least say you'll keep this CPU, that is less than $50 extra a year. So why 4790K?

Yes that's an extremely cute example. However, no one is forcing you to get a $185 mobo or $175 16GB ram. You could shave more than $150 off the 4790k platform price.

You want to take a 30-40% price premium for an at most 10% increase in performance in the best case scenarios. Ok.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

I'm actually using it right now as I wait for the Sapphire Tri-X to drop down to an even $250.

You might be waiting a while, considering it has been $280 after rebate for the entire month of December. I think the $250 after rebate was just Newegg's crazy Black November sale.

EDIT: Well I'll be damned, it's $270 after rebate now.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202080

 

[2is]

One other bonus, the 4790k has an iGPU, which while not useful for any real gaming, does offer a nice emergency backup if your old GPU dies. I'm actually using it right now as I wait for the Sapphire Tri-X to drop down to an even $250.

That's one reason I personally would not build myself an X99 based system. I've been using Quick Sync a lot to encode my bluray/dvds since handbreak was updated to support it and I find it entirely way too useful to give up

 

[voodoo7817]

You might be waiting a while, considering it has been $280 after rebate for the entire month of December. I think the $250 after rebate was just Newegg's crazy Black November sale.

EDIT: Well I'll be damned, it's $270 after rebate now.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814202080

I literally have this tab open and I refresh it like 10 times a day lol: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...20141229210826. I also think a 960 release might push the price point a tiny bit down as well, even if/when the 960 is outperformed by the 290 price/performance wise.

Ok sorry back on topic...

 

[Chesebert]

That's one reason I personally would not build myself an X99 based system. I've been using Quick Sync a lot to encode my bluray/dvds since handbreak was updated to support it and I find it entirely way too useful to give up

I do think Quick Sync is THE killer app for i5/i7. I can get very good quality (12k kbps 1080p max quality) x264 conversion at like 100fps. The same quality x264 conversion is like 20-30fps on OCed 4790k. Even 5960x can't pull off 100fps with 8C/16T. So far Quick Sync is the only hardware encoder worth using in terms of quality. I think someone is building a q264 CLI with lots of user control.

 

[Lepton87]

You didn't at all. He just has an obsession with hexacore. It's not the sweet spot at all, it's a massive increase in cost for not a great increase in performance.

Agreed but only if you discount overclocking. The 5820K is a 3.3/3.6 part and 4790K is a 4/4.4 part making its frequency almost a 1/4 higher. If I didn't OC I would have chosen the 4970K because I think that much higher ST performance would make up for worse MT performance. I don't think that 4C/8T at 4.4GHz is much worse than 6C/12T 3.3/3.6GHz overall while being much cheaper. Platforms not just CPUs.

Yes that's an extremely cute example. However, no one is forcing you to get a $185 mobo or $175 16GB ram. You could shave more than $150 off the 4790k platform price.

You want to take a 30-40% price premium for an at most 10% increase in performance in the best case scenarios. Ok.

10%? The best case scenario is over 25% better performance not just 10%. Or did you mean overall not just a single benchmark? In that case you're probably right. I agree with the rest of what you said. The X99 is certainly not a budget platform.
http://anandtech.com/bench/product/1320?vs=1260
Well, I looked at the results and actually there are benchmarks where the 5820K is 50% faster than the 4790K but why? I thought that it should be close to 6x3.3 vs 4x4 that is 20 vs 16 = 25% and that mostly holds true but not everywhere. For example how the 5820K is so much faster in Agisoft photo scan mapping speed? 224 vs 148 makes it a whooping 51% faster like there was no clock-speed difference.

 

[voodoo7817]

I think if you often run multi-threaded applications where a 6core CPU offers >25% improvement over a 4core, then the 6core is likely a good/great purchase for you. And I don't think anyone in this thread is really claiming otherwise. However, most people don't use highly MT apps, and especially if gaming is your priority, 6-cores are simply not necessary right now, and IMO won't be for at least a couple more years.

In general, I am against the idea of trying to future proof a build too much, as it's never really possible. I'm somewhat hypocritical on this, as I ended up spending a bit extra money on a Z97 ASRock Extreme 6 because of its x4 M.2 port, but I admit it's hard to say if that was actually worth the extra up front investment in 2014. I'm hoping it was, but perhaps not. That was only ~$30-50 extra though.

 

[PhilipO50]

I've looked over so many benchmarks on the 5820 that my head is spinning.

With what i have now(3820K @ 4.2GHz and Titan OC'ed gpu), the only upgrades(game wise) seem to be going from two 2.0 X 16 pci-bus's to
PCI 3.0 16X/8X combo for 2-way SLI. [as i'll never go 3 way sli]

And since money is an issue[ie..make payments] i'm looking at the Dell Area 51, which has it's 5820cpu clocked at 3.8GHz.

So i'll be dropping 400Mhz down..if that makes a difference.

For 99% of the time, i use my pc for gaming only(and some youtube vid's).

I'm thinking the smart move is to wait for Skylake and do a full upgrade at that time, as it seems to be a much bigger move up from SB-E then Haswell-E is.

The only issue is i'd like to upgrade by the end of 2015 and i'm reading how it's best to wait for the Skylake unlocked cpu's are out in 2016.

I'm thinking it's a no-brainer to wait this out for Skylake.
(and if so, do i wait until the unlocked Skylake is out in 2016?)

Would you guys agree?

TIA

 

[Arachnotronic]

I've looked over so many benchmarks on the 5820 that my head is spinning.

With what i have now(3820K @ 4.2GHz and Titan OC'ed gpu), the only upgrades(game wise) seem to be going from two 2.0 X 16 pci-bus's to
PCI 3.0 16X/8X combo for 2-way SLI. [as i'll never go 3 way sli]

And since money is an issue[ie..make payments] i'm looking at the Dell Area 51, which has it's 5820cpu clocked at 3.8GHz.

So i'll be dropping 400Mhz down..if that makes a difference.

For 99% of the time, i use my pc for gaming only(and some youtube vid's).

I'm thinking the smart move is to wait for Skylake and do a full upgrade at that time, as it seems to be a much bigger move up from SB-E then Haswell-E is.

The only issue is i'd like to upgrade by the end of 2015 and i'm reading how it's best to wait for the Skylake unlocked cpu's are out in 2016.

I'm thinking it's a no-brainer to wait this out for Skylake.
(and if so, do i wait until the unlocked Skylake is out in 2016?)

Would you guys agree?

TIA

I think it would be smart to wait for Skylake; 3820K is still a fine chip.

 

[2is]

It would be absolutely silly to upgrade from a 3820k to a 5820, and bordering on completely crazy if money is an issue like you said. If money is a factor, the smart move is to upgrade when you need to upgrade. You already know what you need to know, and that's that an upgrade now is a complete waste. Why even set Skylake as the upgrade date? What if skylike is another marginal increase and you're existing system is still plowing through every task you ask of it with ease?

 

[Arachnotronic]

It would be absolutely silly to upgrade from a 3820k to a 5820, and bordering on completely crazy if money is an issue like you said. If money is a factor, the smart move is to upgrade when you need to upgrade. You already know what you need to know, and that's that an upgrade now is a complete waste. Why even set Skylake as the upgrade date? What if skylike is another marginal increase and you're existing system is still plowing through every task you ask of it with ease?

Yep. Also, a used 3930K or 4930K might also be a good upgrade path since he already has the X79 platform, and that 3820K certainly will fetch a decent price in the used market.

 

[PhilipO50]

I think it would be smart to wait for Skylake; 3820K is still a fine chip.

Thanks.

I thought so, but it's very rare to see 3820 gaming benchmarks compared to the 5820. I just needed some 2nd opinions.

Since it's cpu mark score(about 10300) is near the 4770k, i just got by how the 4770k compares.

 

[PhilipO50]

It would be absolutely silly to upgrade from a 3820k to a 5820, and bordering on completely crazy if money is an issue like you said. If money is a factor, the smart move is to upgrade when you need to upgrade. You already know what you need to know, and that's that an upgrade now is a complete waste. Why even set Skylake as the upgrade date? What if skylike is another marginal increase and you're existing system is still plowing through every task you ask of it with ease?

Thanks for the reply back.

Yeah i know enough, from the 2 weeks of reading so many 5820/5830 articles and benchmarks, i guess i needed some 2nd opinions on this, in case i missed something in all that i read up on.
lol.. [pc related ocd, i guess?]

Also, i may be going 4K by the end of 2015, if the 'big' Maxwell's[..ie 980TI] can deliver 2 way SLI at 60fps, so that's a factor as well. But this pc can handle 2 way SLI at 16/16 2.0, so i'm fine there as well. [as i would never do a 3 way sli]

As far as Skylake, that's a great point, but with PCI 4.0 it seems like it may be more future proof? However PCI 3.0 is barely being utilized over PCI 2.0 at this time, so it may well be an unused feature for a number of years?

I'd rather put that money into an Oculas Rift[VR] or a 4K setup.[which would need two 980Ti's]

Thanks for you input, i appreciate it.

 

[thilanliyan]

nm

 

[escrow4]

It would be absolutely silly to upgrade from a 3820k to a 5820, and bordering on completely crazy if money is an issue like you said. If money is a factor, the smart move is to upgrade when you need to upgrade. You already know what you need to know, and that's that an upgrade now is a complete waste. Why even set Skylake as the upgrade date? What if skylike is another marginal increase and you're existing system is still plowing through every task you ask of it with ease?

A 3820 is only a quad not a hexa and X79 in terms of chipset features is old. It wouldn't be silly at all. Skylake assuming it isn't delayed will be here towards the end of 2015.

 

[2is]

A 3820 is only a quad not a hexa and X79 in terms of chipset features is old. It wouldn't be silly at all. Skylake assuming it isn't delayed will be here towards the end of 2015.

Upgrading for the sake of specs is very silly. If your existing system is easily doing everything you want it to do with performance to spare, spending money on an upgrade when he already said money IS an issue, is silly. If money is not an issue and you're upgrading for your own enjoyment, then by all means, upgrade. But that isn't what he said.

 

[PhilipO50]

A 3820 is only a quad not a hexa and X79 in terms of chipset features is old. It wouldn't be silly at all. Skylake assuming it isn't delayed will be here towards the end of 2015.

It's not silly if i was going to do so for any reason but gaming.

Granted the X79 chipset is outdated and it uses PCI 2.0, but it's not like PCI 3.0 is being optimized for it's increased bandwidth. Actually, in benchmarks in most every game, max difference is 1-3%.

If i was to upgrade for a feature set, that's where Skylake would be ideal. It's PCI 4.0 is even more future proof then PCI 3.0 as well as the same DDR4 Ram and there's alot more features Intel will bring to the table, with this new cpu.

The only drawback, is that Skylake will have only 20 PCI lanes, but i'm not one to use a 4 way sli..it's way too costly and 3 or 4 way sli gives diminishing returns.

 

[PhilipO50]

Upgrading for the sake of specs is very silly. If your existing system is easily doing everything you want it to do with performance to spare, spending money on an upgrade when he already said money IS an issue, is silly. If money is not an issue and you're upgrading for your own enjoyment, then by all means, upgrade. But that isn't what he said.

Thank you, and if money was no issue i'd upgrade, but only as a short term option until Skylake[unlocked] was out. [ie..12-18 months]

But still, as much as i've been upgrading pc's since the Timex Sinclair/C64 and 80286 days on a 2-3 yr basis, even if i had the money, why do so when it's a tiny upgrade for gaming purposes?

If i had money to burn i'd throw that into a 980TI SLI combo with a 4K monitor or UHD flat panel, instead.

Or if i get back into 3D animation projects once again, it makes sense.

I was just asking here, as far as gaming only purposes, was going to a 5820 with new motherboard and DDR4 Ram..ect, worth it?

From what i have been reading it was a tiny upgrade at best, and i just wanted to confirm it. [as i trust other pc user opinions as much as benchmark sites]

Thanks again!

 

[Spike]

Ok, real dumb question with the current gen turbos. On the 4690k that turbos to 4.4, does that mean all cores hit that or just one core like with the older chips? If so, then it seems like a waste that I overclocked the CPU to 4.4 if it would just hit that regardless.

And thanks to this thread I've been racking my brain to figure out a way to get rid of my 7 day old 4690k build in favor of a 5820k build. So far I've found no way of doing that without taking a pretty big hit money wise. I just hope I did not sacrifice too much gaming ability, I was unaware the latest titles are using more than 4 cores now.

 

[Chesebert]

Ok, real dumb question with the current gen turbos. On the 4690k that turbos to 4.4, does that mean all cores hit that or just one core like with the older chips? If so, then it seems like a waste that I overclocked the CPU to 4.4 if it would just hit that regardless.

And thanks to this thread I've been racking my brain to figure out a way to get rid of my 7 day old 4690k build in favor of a 5820k build. So far I've found no way of doing that without taking a pretty big hit money wise. I just hope I did not sacrifice too much gaming ability, I was unaware the latest titles are using more than 4 cores now.

Just 1 core, iirc.

Do you encode h264 videos at all? If yes, you would be giving up quick sync by moving to 5820k.

 

[escrow4]

Just 1 core, iirc.

Do you encode h264 videos at all? If yes, you would be giving up quick sync by moving to 5820k.

Close to every single recent 2014 game GameGPU tested the 5960X was on top followed by either a 3970X or 4770. If they bothered to test a 5820K it would be close behind. 6 cores is starting to be utilised. May be small now, but next year you already have GTA V and Witcher 3 at least and a quad would be the bare minimum for both.

 

[voodoo7817]

Close to every single recent 2014 game GameGPU tested the 5960X was on top followed by either a 3970X or 4770. If they bothered to test a 5820K it would be close behind. 6 cores is starting to be utilised. May be small now, but next year you already have GTA V and Witcher 3 at least and a quad would be the bare minimum for both.

You say "bare minimum" as if it's a slight, when in reality it is "plenty of enough power" for less money which let's you spend more money on a graphics card, which will always be the better way to spend money for gaming.