• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

I am struggling with the decision to upgrade

PitViper81

Junior Member
Jan 5, 2017
4
1
1
I am struggling with the decision to upgrade. I am currently running a (gen4?) i7 4820k @ 4.5ghz with 2x GTX 1080's (3440X1440 monitor) on a Asus Rampage IV extreme black edition mobo. I can't decide if I want to go x99 or z270. I want to get at least one PCIE m.2 SSD, and run both GPU's.



If I get Kabby Lake i7-7700k i'm looking at 24 PCIE lanes available, that should be enough right? GPU's will use 8 each for 16 total, and 4 for the SSD... 20 total and leaving 4 extra?



If I go with the x99 the GPU's will run at 16x instead of 8x, I hear the difference is very small. Quad channel memory and 6 cores are also an option not available on z270. The x99 has been around along time now though, I don't know if I'm wasting my time going that route? I'm looking at an i7-6850k (40 PICE lanes) if I go this route



I'm a gamer and I try to upgrade only every 2 years or so, right now I feel like I'm missing out on DDR4 and m.2, something my x79 doesn't have. Plus I'm not sure if my CPU is holding back my 1080's? I's been a great machine but I feel it's time to upgrade, I'm just not sure which way is better. Money isn't a big concern, this is my main hobby is this is where my fun money goes.
 

Bouowmx

Golden Member
Nov 13, 2016
1,094
485
146

For Intel Z270, 16 PCI Express 3.0 lanes from CPU, and 24 from chipset, which are separate. DMI 3.0, equivalent to PCI Express 3.0 ×4 connects CPU and chipset (all expansions connected to chipset share DMI). 2 GPUs use 16 lanes from CPU, and m.2 likely uses lanes from chipset.

X99: 28 or 40 PCI Express 3.0 lanes from CPU, and 8 from chipset. DMI 2.0, equivalent to PCI Express 2.0 ×4 connects CPU and chipset. 2 GPUs use 16 or 32 lanes from CPU. Depending on motherboard, m.2 can use lanes from CPU or chipset.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PitViper81

CakeMonster

Senior member
Nov 22, 2012
998
85
91
If you're on a 2 year cycle, I'd say go for the 7700K. You save money and right now you get the slightly better gaming performance, even with SLI 2x as far as I can recall from reading reviews.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PitViper81

PitViper81

Junior Member
Jan 5, 2017
4
1
1
Thank you Bouowmx, it looks like PCIe lanes are not going to be an issue.


Thanks for the input Cakemonster. I'm going on 3 years with my current cpu/mobo, so it's possible I may go longer if hardware doesn't improve greatly over the next few years.
 

daxzy

Senior member
Dec 22, 2013
393
77
101
I am struggling with the decision to upgrade. I am currently running a (gen4?) i7 4820k @ 4.5ghz with 2x GTX 1080's (3440X1440 monitor) on a Asus Rampage IV extreme black edition mobo. I can't decide if I want to go x99 or z270. I want to get at least one PCIE m.2 SSD, and run both GPU's.
Due to the awesomeness of marketing, the i7-4820K is actually 3rd generation.

That said, I don't think its worth it to upgrade to a X99 or Z270. You might as well stick around until Skylake-X launches (I'm assuming Q2) next year, or check out if Zen delivers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PitViper81

PitViper81

Junior Member
Jan 5, 2017
4
1
1
Due to the awesomeness of marketing, the i7-4820K is actually 3rd generation.

That said, I don't think its worth it to upgrade to a X99 or Z270. You might as well stick around until Skylake-X launches (I'm assuming Q2) next year, or check out if Zen delivers.
The marketing is working, i'm on gen 3 and gen 7 is available! Makes you feel antiquated.

I was thinking about that too. I won't rule out Zen, but it has to to prove it's self before i'll go back to AMD.
 

PitViper81

Junior Member
Jan 5, 2017
4
1
1
Id wait for zen, maybe not to get it itself depending on how it performs but it should at the least shake up intels HEDT and top end mainstream CPU prices which may work in your favor.
For sure! I like the way you think :)

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: Headfoot

thesmokingman

Platinum Member
May 6, 2010
2,304
226
106
The marketing is working, i'm on gen 3 and gen 7 is available! Makes you feel antiquated.

I was thinking about that too. I won't rule out Zen, but it has to to prove it's self before i'll go back to AMD.
There is not much gain for you, either way. If you want to spend some cash look for a used 3930k/4930k or 4960x and run those gpus at x16/x16 lane widths. I actually went from a 3930k 4.8ghz to a 6700k 4.7ghz because I dropped/stopped using quads and tri gpu. Mgpu over 3 cards is practically dead now, but running two gpu at x16 is still a positive. 3930K's are like under 150 bucks now and 4960x's are 300 ish. In my case, I was downsizing however I kept all my x79 gear, it's still too good to toss out for a loss. My old 3930k/rive powers my super server/family game pc, file server, hevc encoder, etc it runs everything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PitViper81

John Carmack

Member
Sep 10, 2016
112
90
101
The marketing is working, i'm on gen 3 and gen 7 is available! Makes you feel antiquated.

I was thinking about that too. I won't rule out Zen, but it has to to prove it's self before i'll go back to AMD.
It's actually 3rd gen to 6th gen. Kaby Lake is just an updated Skylake stepping.
 

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
15,125
5,246
136
Quad Ivey at 4.5@quad memory? Wouldnt touch it. Coffeelake, Skylake-X, joker-Ryzen is coming closest. Even then. Nah. What are you gaming that you need those extra 2fps'es for? There is always a 6950x with exotic cooling if you must go that extra mile... you might just hit 4.5 with current revisions for 10 core broadwell madness. Then again at that pricepoint, ludricus $$'ers, upcoming 8 core ryzen may rival it. So wait.
 
Last edited:

sm625

Diamond Member
May 6, 2011
8,176
135
106


X99 looks pretty antiquated there. 10000 points in google octane is pretty damn noticeable to me. This make both X99 and probably also Zen DOA.
 
Aug 11, 2008
10,457
641
126


X99 looks pretty antiquated there. 10000 points in google octane is pretty damn noticeable to me. This make both X99 and probably also Zen DOA.
I suppose if you "play" google octane all day. Plus the OP has his cpu overclocked to 4.5 ghz, which would narrow the gap considerably even in this benchmark. He also has more cores for the games that can use them. This also seems like a very atypical benchmark. 6700K > 30% faster than 4790K??? Huh??
 

BonzaiDuck

Lifer
Jun 30, 2004
14,656
981
126
I am struggling with the decision to upgrade. I am currently running a (gen4?) i7 4820k @ 4.5ghz with 2x GTX 1080's (3440X1440 monitor) on a Asus Rampage IV extreme black edition mobo. I can't decide if I want to go x99 or z270. I want to get at least one PCIE m.2 SSD, and run both GPU's.



If I get Kabby Lake i7-7700k i'm looking at 24 PCIE lanes available, that should be enough right? GPU's will use 8 each for 16 total, and 4 for the SSD... 20 total and leaving 4 extra?



If I go with the x99 the GPU's will run at 16x instead of 8x, I hear the difference is very small. Quad channel memory and 6 cores are also an option not available on z270. The x99 has been around along time now though, I don't know if I'm wasting my time going that route? I'm looking at an i7-6850k (40 PICE lanes) if I go this route



I'm a gamer and I try to upgrade only every 2 years or so, right now I feel like I'm missing out on DDR4 and m.2, something my x79 doesn't have. Plus I'm not sure if my CPU is holding back my 1080's? I's been a great machine but I feel it's time to upgrade, I'm just not sure which way is better. Money isn't a big concern, this is my main hobby is this is where my fun money goes.
I wouldn't miss having the M.2 slot on the motherboard so much. I have it with my Sabertooth Z170, and I made a final decision not to use it. Pick up one of these instead:

ASUS' own PCI-E x4 adapter

The Lycom DT-120

Either way I do it with a Z170, I lose two SATA ports. Somehow I came away from a few web-searches to suggest that M.2 performance in the M.2 slot wasn't as good -- and someone can correct me. I think if I use that slot, I could spring for a 1TB SATA M.2 card and it would make sense. But it would leave me with only two functioning SATA ports on the motherboard's controller.

At the moment, I'm only interested in using the Lycom and 960 EVO in the 250GB model. Maybe the EVO will get "used up" as fast as a box of Milk Duds at the movies -- I can't say. But after a week or so of running it as a cache drive, it doesn't seem to be chewing up much in the way of TBW.

On the money angle, I completely understand the perspective, but money not spent one way can be spent in another, and it's still an "economic maximization problem" which I personally define as part of the hobby. Heck -- I was planning an X79 Ivy system two years ago, but it never progressed beyond the planning. I had plans for Z97, but didn't pull the string. Then I was looking at Haswell-E and X99, but didn't fly that route, either.

Whether you sell the X79 as a mobo-processor-RAM bundle, or redeploy it, I can see "where you're comin' from." But you can have the NVMe speeds anyway, since your board supports PCI-E 3.0. You only need a slot working in x4.

In the economic problem, despite your indifference to it, you could buy a Lycom or other adapter and a 960 Pro, and wait another year or two if you wanted. Then just redeploy the 960 Pro.

You've got 40 lanes with that chip and motherboard, I'm fairly sure. And it appears that you could use DDR3-2400 RAM in that motherboard. And you can take pleasure in this "hobby" whichever route you pursue now, next year, and the year thereafter.

Now that I look again at those expansion cards, I see that ASUS says "For Z170, . . . X99. . . " I must have a blind spot in my understanding of system requirements for a PCIE M.2. Someone can enlighten me.
 
Last edited:

jimbob200521

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2005
4,108
29
91
Do you have a copy of my system? I have the same CPU & motherboard hah Love my system and have seen no compelling reason to upgrade. With your OC (I'm "only" at 4.2ghz), I wouldn't think upgrading is worth it unless you have a specific task set that requires some new feature or whatnot. If cores is your problem, grab a 6 core CPU and put it in your motherboard. Otherwise, sit tight; even if you upgraded to the latest and greatest, most likely your only noticeable performance increase would be in a synthetic benchmark as your system should have zero problems play any game today.
 

BonzaiDuck

Lifer
Jun 30, 2004
14,656
981
126
"However, BIOS support is largely lacking. Without an NVMe-aware BIOS, you can’t boot from an NVMe drive, though anyone with a x4 PCIe slot or M.2 connector can benefit from employing an NVMe drive as secondary storage. An NVMe BIOS is not a difficult technical hurdle, but it does require engineering hours and money, so it’s unlikely it will stretch far back into the legacy pool. "

PC World on NVMe

I'd have to look more closely at this. You don't HAVE to make your system boot from an NVMe. Mine doesn't -- for now. But there's still the issue of how your chipset implements any M.2/NVMe integration -- with PCIE 3.0 versus PCIE 2.0.

Well . . . . decisions, decisions . . .
 

BonzaiDuck

Lifer
Jun 30, 2004
14,656
981
126
Do you have a copy of my system? I have the same CPU & motherboard hah Love my system and have seen no compelling reason to upgrade. With your OC (I'm "only" at 4.2ghz), I wouldn't think upgrading is worth it unless you have a specific task set that requires some new feature or whatnot. If cores is your problem, grab a 6 core CPU and put it in your motherboard. Otherwise, sit tight; even if you upgraded to the latest and greatest, most likely your only noticeable performance increase would be in a synthetic benchmark as your system should have zero problems play any game today.
That's all part of the Enthusiast Dilemma. You can grow to love your custom-built system so much, that you even enjoy throwing more money at it. I do it. On the other side, we can spend three kilobucks on any one of these systems to become a throw-away in less time than practical. Heck -- I might even consider buying a used X79 bundle, even so. But I'd pick saving for a larger 960 in the "Pro" line over doing that, so . . . .
 

sm625

Diamond Member
May 6, 2011
8,176
135
106
I suppose if you "play" google octane all day. Plus the OP has his cpu overclocked to 4.5 ghz, which would narrow the gap considerably even in this benchmark. He also has more cores for the games that can use them. This also seems like a very atypical benchmark. 6700K > 30% faster than 4790K??? Huh??
All I can say is that my absolute #1 complaint when using a computer is, hands down, the hundreds of annoying little delays that I experience when opening a link in a new tab or scrolling down a page. I open hundreds of tabs every day and they do load faster on skylake. Pages clearly render faster and scroll faster. I've been using a Xeon E3-1545MV5, which isnt even clocked very high. But it just flies through web tasks so much faster than a haswell i7 that is clocked 700MHz higher. I 100% believe that google Octane is the absolute best measure of a PC's performance for anyone that does even moderate web browsing. Everyone is looking at KBL dismal IPC improvements in games but they are totally overlooking how much faster this thing is at web browsing. I cant wait to get my hands on a KBL with L4. This is also why I believe Ryzen is DOA. I have little hope that it is going to put out these kinds of numbers. I'm not going to buy it if it makes my web browsing slower than a skylake i3.
 
Last edited:

inf64

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2011
3,129
2,088
136
This is also why I believe Ryzen is DOA. I have little hope that it is going to put out these kinds of numbers. I'm not going to buy it if it makes my web browsing slower than a skylake i3.
Wait let me see if I get what you are saying. Ryzen is DOA because it will not score as high in Google Octane benchmark as Skylake? And because Skylake , to put it bluntly, "accelerates your internet" ??
Nice logic there.
 

R0H1T

Platinum Member
Jan 12, 2013
2,567
142
106
Wait let me see if I get what you are saying. Ryzen is DOA because it will not score as high in Google Octane benchmark as Skylake? And because Skylake , to put it bluntly, "accelerates your internet" ??
Nice logic there.
Not to mention an SSD, the browser type & its version plus Internet speeds make a whole lot more of a difference than the CPU itself.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Rifter and inf64

MrTeal

Diamond Member
Dec 7, 2003
3,057
705
136
All I can say is that my absolute #1 complaint when using a computer is, hands down, the hundreds of annoying little delays that I experience when opening a link in a new tab or scrolling down a page. I open hundreds of tabs every day and they do load faster on skylake. Pages clearly render faster and scroll faster. I've been using a Xeon E3-1545MV5, which isnt even clocked very high. But it just flies through web tasks so much faster than a haswell i7 that is clocked 700MHz higher. I 100% believe that google Octane is the absolute best measure of a PC's performance for anyone that does even moderate web browsing. Everyone is looking at KBL dismal IPC improvements in games but they are totally overlooking how much faster this thing is at web browsing. I cant wait to get my hands on a KBL with L4. This is also why I believe Ryzen is DOA. I have little hope that it is going to put out these kinds of numbers. I'm not going to buy it if it makes my web browsing slower than a skylake i3.
What does your Xeon score in Octane?

Edit: That's an Iris Pro with eDRAM, correct? Wikipedia seems to have that wrong.
 

Rifter

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,518
745
126
All I can say is that my absolute #1 complaint when using a computer is, hands down, the hundreds of annoying little delays that I experience when opening a link in a new tab or scrolling down a page. I open hundreds of tabs every day and they do load faster on skylake. Pages clearly render faster and scroll faster. I've been using a Xeon E3-1545MV5, which isnt even clocked very high. But it just flies through web tasks so much faster than a haswell i7 that is clocked 700MHz higher. I 100% believe that google Octane is the absolute best measure of a PC's performance for anyone that does even moderate web browsing. Everyone is looking at KBL dismal IPC improvements in games but they are totally overlooking how much faster this thing is at web browsing. I cant wait to get my hands on a KBL with L4. This is also why I believe Ryzen is DOA. I have little hope that it is going to put out these kinds of numbers. I'm not going to buy it if it makes my web browsing slower than a skylake i3.
So we all need xeons to surf the net now? wow now ive herd everything. Im starting to agree with Virtual Larry that everyone on anandtech is totally out of touch with reality when it comes to what type of hardware is needed and usable for a given task.
 

crashtech

Diamond Member
Jan 4, 2013
9,638
1,520
126


X99 looks pretty antiquated there. 10000 points in google octane is pretty damn noticeable to me. This make both X99 and probably also Zen DOA.
Well, don't forget that the 5820K has a really low stock clock speed, I doubt many leave it at that. Mine is running 4.3GHz 24/7, which puts its single thread much closer to a 4790K than anything, which while not stellar, isn't horrible either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Headfoot

coercitiv

Diamond Member
Jan 24, 2014
4,162
5,054
136
All I can say is that my absolute #1 complaint when using a computer is, hands down, the hundreds of annoying little delays that I experience when opening a link in a new tab or scrolling down a page. I open hundreds of tabs every day and they do load faster on skylake. Pages clearly render faster and scroll faster. I've been using a Xeon E3-1545MV5, which isnt even clocked very high. But it just flies through web tasks so much faster than a haswell i7 that is clocked 700MHz higher.
I doubt that what you're experiencing is CPU related, not with the kind of SKUs you're talking about. You may want to compare system & browser settings, storage performance. Modern browsers have numerous bottlenecks.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY