• 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."

I7 4790 non k enough for BF1?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

what should i do?

  • drop in a $150 i7 4790 and a 16gb ddr3 1600 ram kit and be set?

    Votes: 1 6.3%
  • drop in a i5 8600k and buy 2x8gb ddr4 kit got friend who has a spare z370 motherboard

    Votes: 7 43.8%
  • Go with a Ryzen 2600 maybe?

    Votes: 8 50.0%

  • Total voters
    16

mopardude87

Diamond Member
Oct 22, 2018
3,348
1,575
96
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813144197&cm_re=am4-_-13-144-197-_-Product

I found this motherboard,it lacks usb 2.0 headers as worst issue but having my Antec 900 with only 3.0 up front this is no issue at all. My monitor also has usb 2.0 ports on it if i run short on them.Looks like the dual slot 1070 ti also would fit and right above i got the 2 needed sata connectors. I don't overclock so this series of board would be fine.Plenty of headers too.

Now to benchmark ryzen 2600.
 

Thunder 57

Golden Member
Aug 19, 2007
1,676
1,724
136
Saying a 3770 not OC'd would beat a 3570K Oc'd is patently false. Simply find old reviews where every site recommended the i5 over the i7 unless you are encoding. I am typing on a worthless thinkpad T430s with i7 processor. I have another thinkpad with a i5 processor of the same model. I do not notice any difference other than resale value.

As far as not being a good Ocing chip you have. That is simply pathetic only getting 4-4.2ghz considering the turbo is 3.8ghz. You clearly do not know what you are doing. All they ivy bridge CPU's OC to 4.5ghz with very little effort. On air I had my vcore at 1.22v @ 4.5ghz but got a few blue screens and pumped up the voltage to 1.26v

I run BF1 @ 1660p with high settlings and get 60fps.
Way to be a dickhead. I can tell you that in BF1 a 4C/8T chip will do better than a 4C/4T overclocked. I have seen it. "Meh, you clearly do not what you are doing". Shut up, I know how to overclock a CPU. 4.0GHz is easily attainable. 4.2 is not much harder, 4.4 is getting a bit rough, 4.5 is the max I've gotten. The voltage required to get it there was just too high. It's like cars. Sometimes you get a lemon.
 

Hans Gruber

Golden Member
Dec 23, 2006
1,196
346
136
Way to be a dickhead. I can tell you that in BF1 a 4C/8T chip will do better than a 4C/4T overclocked. I have seen it. "Meh, you clearly do not what you are doing". Shut up, I know how to overclock a CPU. 4.0GHz is easily attainable. 4.2 is not much harder, 4.4 is getting a bit rough, 4.5 is the max I've gotten. The voltage required to get it there was just too high. It's like cars. Sometimes you get a lemon.
I would like to apologize for the diction in my comment. If hyper threading were important. Intel would have included it with the 9700K. After seeing the results of the 9900K, it seems the 9900K is more like the old AMD black edition FX processors. I think more new games are more core driven than hyper threading driven. With that said a 6 or 8 core CPU seems to be where the gaming road map is going.
 

LTC8K6

Lifer
Mar 10, 2004
28,520
1,573
126
I would like to apologize for the diction in my comment. If hyper threading were important. Intel would have included it with the 9700K. After seeing the results of the 9900K, it seems the 9900K is more like the old AMD black edition FX processors. I think more new games are more core driven than hyper threading driven. With that said a 6 or 8 core CPU seems to be where the gaming road map is going.
9700K doesn't have HT because i7 is the new i5, so it shouldn't have HT. :)
Now what about the 9600K? :D
 

ozzy702

Golden Member
Nov 1, 2011
1,127
508
136
I would like to apologize for the diction in my comment. If hyper threading were important. Intel would have included it with the 9700K. After seeing the results of the 9900K, it seems the 9900K is more like the old AMD black edition FX processors. I think more new games are more core driven than hyper threading driven. With that said a 6 or 8 core CPU seems to be where the gaming road map is going.
Hyperthreading means less at higher core counts when it comes to most software. Look at the huge differences in performance on the software that does scale well though, it's nothing like the FX processors.

BF1 is a stuttering mess on 64 person servers when trying to game at over 60fps on a quad core without hyperthreading. I saw improvement going from a 6700k to an 8700k with the other components staying the same. 1% and .1% frametimes will be significantly better with more available threads, especially if you have anything else running in the background.
 
  • Like
Reactions: krumme

Hans Gruber

Golden Member
Dec 23, 2006
1,196
346
136
9700K doesn't have HT because i7 is the new i5, so it shouldn't have HT. :)
Now what about the 9600K? :D
That is what the reviews said before the 9900K was released. The 9900K is the fastest gaming PC money can buy. However, it uses massive amounts of power and requires watercooling or probably the best Noctura air cooler at the very least. The 8700K was never a power hog. So I imagine the 9700K cannot be the new i5 processor simply because the 9600K exists. I have read that hyper threading reduces max OC's a little bit. Obviously the 8700K never had issues hitting 5ghz.

For me 1080P doesn't mean anything. I look @ 1440P and 4K performance in CPU's. That is the future of gaming.
 

ozzy702

Golden Member
Nov 1, 2011
1,127
508
136
That is what the reviews said before the 9900K was released. The 9900K is the fastest gaming PC money can buy. However, it uses massive amounts of power and requires watercooling or probably the best Noctura air cooler at the very least. The 8700K was never a power hog. So I imagine the 9700K cannot be the new i5 processor simply because the 9600K exists. I have read that hyper threading reduces max OC's a little bit. Obviously the 8700K never had issues hitting 5ghz.

For me 1080P doesn't mean anything. I look @ 1440P and 4K performance in CPU's. That is the future of gaming.
The 8700k is absolutely a power hog at 5ghz, I've seen the massive difference between stock clocks and 5ghz OC through my killawatt. It's the frequency that really ramps power consumption/heat up. Per core efficiency of the 9900k is the same or better than previous offerings at the same clock speeds.
 

mopardude87

Diamond Member
Oct 22, 2018
3,348
1,575
96
I keep looking at videos if people use Geforce experience they pretty much max their cpu usage on a i5 8400. Other videos show a clear fps advantage over the 2600 and their usage is in the mid 80's to like lower 90's. Me i open up my game and got nothing else running ever in the background.I value max fps if i can so nothing dampers it.

Given i play mostly older games i choose to run with the i5 8400. I would have loved to grab a 4 core/8 thread i5 from coffee lake but i guess even they figured such a chip made no sense in their line up. Where could they even put that chip price wise and would it even be a I5 or would it be something like a core i4 perhaps? Lord stop me now before Intel gets the idea to toss in a core i4 chip lol.
 

Thunder 57

Golden Member
Aug 19, 2007
1,676
1,724
136
I would like to apologize for the diction in my comment. If hyper threading were important. Intel would have included it with the 9700K. After seeing the results of the 9900K, it seems the 9900K is more like the old AMD black edition FX processors. I think more new games are more core driven than hyper threading driven. With that said a 6 or 8 core CPU seems to be where the gaming road map is going.
And I will apologize for overreacting. The problem with HT on the 9700k is that it would basically be a 9900k, with a bit less cache and maybe clock speed?

That is what the reviews said before the 9900K was released. The 9900K is the fastest gaming PC money can buy. However, it uses massive amounts of power and requires watercooling or probably the best Noctura air cooler at the very least. The 8700K was never a power hog. So I imagine the 9700K cannot be the new i5 processor simply because the 9600K exists. I have read that hyper threading reduces max OC's a little bit. Obviously the 8700K never had issues hitting 5ghz.

For me 1080P doesn't mean anything. I look @ 1440P and 4K performance in CPU's. That is the future of gaming.
I love my 1440p monitor. I would like to see what 4k looks like but the power to drive it in games is a bit pricey.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hans Gruber

Omegaboost

Member
Oct 24, 2016
35
6
71
No point in wasting more $$ on this outdated platform esp since the mobo only has 2 ram slots. Get a 8600k or 8400 if budget is an issue.
 

SPBHM

Diamond Member
Sep 12, 2012
4,998
356
126
they are showing "r3 1300x" as recommended CPU for BF1, I would think your i5 is at least as good as that, so maybe it will work ok?
 

mopardude87

Diamond Member
Oct 22, 2018
3,348
1,575
96
Already ordered the i5 8400 and the 16gb of ram. :) I am hyped. Kind of amazing how long the 4 core thread chips stuck away seriously. Unreal Tournament 3 in 2007 was the first i found to make use of them and now 11 years later i find myself needing a upgrade. The i5 2500 and up chips wow they had a long run 7 whole years well for me as i mostly used them in various builds.

Prob gonna post this i5 4670/H81/8gb up for sell locally after the new stuff comes in and i verify it works,maybe i could sell it for enough to cover my next upgrade being a 500gb ssd samsung evo? I am sure i could $120. What ya guys think?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY