i7-4790 vs i7-4790k

[Craig234]

My current CPU most works 'just fine' - a several year old AMD 965.

But I have a little itch to think about a current system - I do have some performance issues at times, whatever the cause, and it's tempting to want something without them.

Right now, I have option to buy an I7-4790, which Google says it almost twice as fast, for $250. But then I noticed the i7-4790k, which is going for $300.

I hadn't looked at the k because it said 'for overclocking' which I don't do, but then I saw it appears to be about 14% faster just at base speed.

It's a little hard to pass that up. So... 4790 for $250? 4790k for $300? I asked before about 'or wait until later' and the one reply said just buy now.

 

[waffleironhead]

According to intel, the 4790 base speed is 3.6, while the 4790k is 4.0.
I'd pay the extra and get the k.

 

[notty22]

I'll help you out!

Go for it ! The 4790K also turbos to 4400mhz, impressive specs.

It goes by the name Devil's Canyon
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8227/devils-canyon-review-intel-core-i7-4790k-and-i5-4690k

 

[SlowSpyder]

I'd say get the 'K' model. More clock speed and allows you to overclock should you ever get the itch to do so.

 

[crashtech]

In this specific case, the normal rules governing the choice between K and non-K do not apply. The 4790K is faster out of the box, and as of now has the highest performing stock clocked cores on the planet.

 

[escrow4]

With the right mobo and MCE you can load the 4790 to an even 4.0GHz across all cores on load, negating some of the clock speed differences. For $50, up to you.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

With the right mobo and MCE you can load the 4790 to an even 4.0GHz across all cores on load, negating some of the clock speed differences. For $50, up to you.

Ah. . . "multi-core enhancement." I almost thought to make a Wiki. Truth is -- I'm playing with some Z77 boards right now, and wondered "what the hell is that?"

I'm no good for advice about this. I was bitten by the enthusiast bug around 2003/2004. Before that, I just "built computers" and I would low-ball the parts budget. If it were my rig, I wouldn't blink while I paid the extra U.S. Grant for the K.

 

[xthetenth]

If you're changing platform, with a lowball for mobo and RAM of $150 that's $450 vs. $400. At that point it's basically even on performance for dollar so practically unless you severely cheap out on mobo and RAM the K is going to be better for performance per dollar. The question of course is whether about 1/8ths more performance for 1/8ths more price is worth it to you, or if you're price limited whether that's the most effective place to spend that $50.

 

[Craig234]

Well, the good news is, for all the votes to get the K, Amazon customer service is kind of crazy good on this, and I got the K for $250. Best of both worlds.

Now, will I hold on to it for years like I have? Not a good idea, probably need to make one of those posts for other parts and find a local person to build a new PC.

I was thinking hard of one of those 1TB Samsung SSD's, but the $350 pricing ended.

 

[crashtech]

Nice deal, congrats!

 

[ehume]

Excellent price for the K.

 

[Craig234]

Thanks guys. Should last a while. Given my AMD 965 still seems fine.