i7 5820

[Lepton87]

I'm going to buy i7 5820, I've heard that there were some bad batches that OC very well, conversely are there any batches that OC better on average? Are you any batches I should look for or avoid?

ps. What's the best mobo for 3 cards? I've got NOCTUA NH D14, am I going to need new retention brackets provided that they are even available? It stands to reason that such retention brackets ought to be available because it's still one of the top performers that cost me a pretty penny and it's not something I considered expendable when I bought it I planned on keeping it for at least 2 CPU generations if not more. My next cooling will probably be water based because barring some new advancements like that sandia cooler, AIR coolers are pretty much at their limit with only a few degrees left to be squeezed as D14 successor showed which only improved performance by a few degrees, I think there is maybe 5 degrees more to be gained than today's top performers which is maybe 10C lower than what my cooler can manage. 10C lower temperature is an improvement but it's not enough to perceptibly change my experience after as that would translate to maybe 100-200MHz more. As a side note I'm having problems finding straightforward comparison between D14 and its successor but by going by other coolers' performance I calculated it's abut 5C better than D14. If you got any links please share. 5C is not enough to dump 140$ and that's how much it would cost me here.

ps.1 When is Broadwell 2011 realistically going to be released? I think it's still way out and HW-E is actually very new with its kinks still being iron out. Are there any outstanding issues with HW-E and SLI? I'm not sure but I think I read about some issues with it and SLI. Is there any truth to it? Is BW in HEDT flavor going to be a drop-in replacement? 8C/16T for a reasonable price would be sweet but sadly I think broadwell is still not going to give us that but I hope I'm wrong. In my opinion we will need to wait for 10nm process for that to become reality. So for the immediate future I think it's going to look like the following 4C/8T mainstream 6C/12T performance 8C/16T Extreme Edition. I'd like 8C/16T for under 400$ but I will probably need to wait for Cannonlake for that. If we are lucky we might get something like i7 970, which was still way above 400$ it was quite a bit cheaper than EE. Well, after checking prices I retract that statement. We weren't lucky by any stretch of the imagination 870$ down from 999$ is noting(IMHO it should have been half that price) that's why I rarely if ever see that CPU in people's rigs, its successor i7 980 got the price right but by then it was too late for an updated nehalem CPU with SB already on the market. SB was way cheaper and thanks to its quite impressive improvement in IPC not to mention it even clocked better all of that made it way faster in single to lowly threaded apps and only moderately faster in MT performance, certainly not enough to offset the price difference and the ST performance deficit. I'd say those CPUs were comparable and which one was the better fit relied on what you run on it so it made sense to a very few people. If someone disagrees with my analysis please voice your opinion in a civilized manner if that's at all possible.

 

[NTMBK]

You sure you want to combine 5820k with 3 cards? The 5820k only has 28 PCIe lanes, meaning at best you will have x8/x8/x8. Whereas the 5930k has 40 PCIe lanes.

 

[Geforce man]

pci-e 3.0 8x = pci-e 2.0 @ 16x, he'll be good to go with 3 cards. Plus even with 40, you can't do 16x16x16 anyways.

All the new haswell chips are great though, problem is you could get a 4.0Ghz chip, or you could get a 4.8Ghz chip. Mega silicon lottery on these guys.

 

[NTMBK]

pci-e 3.0 8x = pci-e 2.0 @ 16x, he'll be good to go with 3 cards. Plus even with 40, you can't do 16x16x16 anyways.

Top level textures are getting much bigger now the next-gen consoles are out. If you're running with Ultra settings (which I kinda assume with 3 way SLI...) you're going to need all the bandwidth you can get.

Just my opinion. *shrug*

 

[DooKey]

I'm running a 5820K @ 4.5ghz 1.24v solid as a rock. I can do 4.6, but have to go to 1.3v and that's a little too much heat for my D14 to handle so I stay at 4.5ghz.

My batch is: 3422B721

I'm running this on an MSI X99S SLI PLUS with 2666 ram @ 2666.

3x PCI-E@ 8x is plenty at this time for tri-sli/tri-fire.

 

[Techhog]

Top level textures are getting much bigger now the next-gen consoles are out. If you're running with Ultra settings (which I kinda assume with 3 way SLI...) you're going to need all the bandwidth you can get.

Just my opinion. *shrug*

Having different lane counts might introduce microstuttering, though.

 

[Lepton87]

You sure you want to combine 5820k with 3 cards? The 5820k only has 28 PCIe lanes, meaning at best you will have x8/x8/x8. Whereas the 5930k has 40 PCIe lanes.

Yes, it should be fine. In my current rig which right now operates in native mode with 16 lines of PCI-E 2.0 which are handling 2xTitans with little performance penalty barring some compute workload which require card to CPU communicative but that's a scenario that won't be relevant to my needs. Granted I have a NF 200 PCI splitter which makes it perform almost like 32 lanes of PCI-E 2.0. There are tests that prove that. When I bought my computer SB-E wasn't available yet and I had three cards for a Quad fire and it turned out that 16 lanes with a PCI-E splitter was better than the aging X58 platform of the time and 28 lines of PCI-E 3.0 is head and shoulders better than what I have now. 8x/8x/8x PCI-E 2.0 will perform within 2% of 16X only communication.
ps. Are there any boards which feature PLX PCI-3.0 splitter that would make 3 cards as good as native 40 lines of PCI-E 3.0. With PCI splitter even HW' 16 lines of PCI-E would make imperceptible difference compared to native solutions. Right now even 2x8x PCI-E 2.0 isn't holding my card back perceptibly although there may be games out there where that PCI-E arrangement might be a bottleneck although I doubt it affects game-play mostly max FPS although I might be wrong.

 

[Lepton87]

i7s for 2011 are sold without coolers, right? You say it's a lottery with an enormous difference in OC potential of individual samples which is puzzling because 22nm process is very mature(old) at this point. Does this unusual variability have anything to do with the process not being planar? Is it the same for both 5820K and 5930K? In my country there's a law that you can return any product you bought on-line within 7 days of the purchase. I never used it because I got a bad OC sample and I usually do. I don't think it was meant for such purposes, I consider doing such a thing abusing that law but if I get a HW that overclocks to just 4-4.2GHz I'm seriously considering using this right. I've been too good for far too long and my karma doesn't get back to me, quite the opposite actually I won't use my new CPU for another 2 weeks or so but I won't settle for such a dud. I would even prefer 4790K at 4.8GHz to 5820K at 4.1GHz.

 

[njdevilsfan87]

Are there any boards which feature PLX PCI-3.0 splitter that would make 3 cards as good as native 40 lines of PCI-E 3.0. With PCI splitter even HW' 16 lines of PCI-E would make imperceptible difference compared to native solutions. Right now even 2x8x PCI-E 2.0 isn't holding my card back perceptibly although there may be games out there where that PCI-E arrangement might be a bottleneck although I doubt it affects game-play mostly max FPS although I might be wrong.

I think 8x will be fine for some time to come. I went with a 5960x myself for a 3x Titan + M2 SSD setup. If I had not gone the 5960x, I would have gone the 5820K myself which would have been perfect for 8x/8x/8x + 4x for the SSD. Only reason I went for the 5960X is I am putting a lot of effort into this water cooling build, so I figured since I spending all this money on water cooling stuff, I might as well justify that by spending even more money and going all out with a 5960X.

Though a 5930K will come with the benefit of being able to run 16x/16x/16x with a PLX chip. I know my motherboard can do that, but I'm not sure it can with the M2 SSD as well. I guess I'll find out.

What I am hoping is that I will be able to run 3x Titans at 16x PCIe 3.0, and the SSD at x4 PCIe 2.0 minimum. If not then I may have to look into the ASUS WS board which has two PLX chips I believe. Then everything on that board will run 3.0 speeds. I'm just OCD about this kind of stuff. Would not have been a problem with the 5820K.

 

[PhIlLy ChEeSe]

Yes, it should be fine. In my current rig which right now operates in native mode with 16 lines of PCI-E 2.0 which are handling 2xTitans with little performance penalty barring some compute workload which require card to CPU communicative but that's a scenario that won't be relevant to my needs. Granted I have a NF 200 PCI splitter which makes it perform almost like 32 lanes of PCI-E 2.0. There are tests that prove that. When I bought my computer SB-E wasn't available yet and I had three cards for a Quad fire and it turned out that 16 lanes with a PCI-E splitter was better than the aging X58 platform of the time and 28 lines of PCI-E 3.0 is head and shoulders better than what I have now. 8x/8x/8x PCI-E 2.0 will perform within 2% of 16X only communication.
ps. Are there any boards which feature PLX PCI-3.0 splitter that would make 3 cards as good as native 40 lines of PCI-E 3.0. With PCI splitter even HW' 16 lines of PCI-E would make imperceptible difference compared to native solutions. Right now even 2x8x PCI-E 2.0 isn't holding my card back perceptibly although there may be games out there where that PCI-E arrangement might be a bottleneck although I doubt it affects game-play mostly max FPS although I might be wrong.

Here's a helpful link on how to force PCI-E 3.0 mine works fine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzGSqsidL30

 

[Lepton87]

I like ROG series a lot

I was thinking about Asus Rampage V Extreme or something cheaper ASRock X99 Extreme6.

As for Asus boards I can only find 4

X-99Deluxe
X-99A
X-99S

and that ROG board.

Is is worth it to pay extra for ROG over Asrock?

Here's a helpful link on how to force PCI-E 3.0 mine works fine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzGSqsidL30

That's a surprise, so with my brand new 2011-3 CPU and X99 Board I have to force PCI-E 3.0? Unbelievable.

 

[Lepton87]

That's what I ordered:


Asus Rampage V Extreme

1 614,60 zł

2. Intel Core i7 5820K 3,30 GHz BOX
Intel Core i7 5820K 3,30 GHz BOX

1 515,90 zł

3. G.SKILL Ripjaws4 DDR4 4x4GB 2666MHz CL15 XMP2 Red

1 349 zł


That's what I ordered. I know that my motherboard is extremely expensive but I have ROG mobo and I think it's topnotch with no compromises but unfortunately I can't say that about the new ROG motherboard. It doesn't even have a single PLX chip when it should have featured 2 which is quite concerning to me and I'm not sure I made the right choice. Unfortunately X99-WS is even more expensive and ROG were supposed to be the best mobos and in case of my 1150 it really was but in case of X99 mobos I'm not so sure. I need 10 SATA slots and it has it but not much room for expansion unlike top mobos from Asrock. 8x/8x/8x should be indistinguishable from 16X/16x/16x but QUAD SLI is out of the question only Quad Fire remains viable but considering the state of Quad SLI it's not much of a problem, anything above 3 cards is too much for NV outdated SLI technology, I'm even wondering if 3 cards are worth it in the case of NV cards but from what I've seen SLI it scales reasonably well with GK110, not as good as Radeons but still decent, unlike terrible maxwell scaling. I've got one question, is there a space between each card in 3 cards set-up so they have some breathing room? So little comparisons of top of the line X99 mobos.
ps. how about a much cheaper mobo pared with a 5930K CPU for nearly the same price? I like having the best mobo but maybe that's a better option. OTOH I plan on upgrading to Broadwell-E.

 

[escrow4]

Buying a hexa core for gaming is pointless right now, the i7 4790K is still on top for the vast bulk of games and that much for a mobo is insane. 3 cards is also pointless - all the new "next-gen" games this year - how many even supported SLI? Some of them barely work well with one card. It makes way more sense to buy what you need now with something in reserve then going all out.

 

[Lepton87]

Fair enough, but upgrading from 4C/8T SB to HW that is also 4C/8T which on top of that will probably clock ever so slightly lower would net me at most 15-20% more performance I consider such an upgrade pointless. So 4970 is out of the question, too little performance gain and too few PCI-E lanes. I don't upgrade unless I can achieve more than a paltry 20% more performance and even that 20% figure is optimistic for a performance gain and on the low side when it comes to performance improvement required to entice me to upgrade barring some scenarios. Everything depends how much such an upgrade would cost. I don't buy CPUs and mobos for the immediate future either so current very lightly threaded benchmarks are given less weight by me then those more threaded. I'm going to keep the new parts at least until Skylake-E is out, maybe longer if it won't give much in the way of performance and focus almost exclusively on power consumption which I think might just happen. Anything under 20% is a no-go, above that depends on the price and other factors. Well, maybe if that 20% if solely due to single threaded improvement and the price is right then I might think. I put ST perf improvements over MT. So that's going to be 3 to 4 years until my next replacement. I change some other parts more often like graphics cards I kept my current motherboard for almost 4 years since the begging of 2011. Taking into account the current situation with node delays and no competition in the high-end platform I don't see a reason why I would keep that new mobo for less time then my current one. It's like going back to the times of E8X being compared to Quad Cores (Kentsfield or Yorkfield) a lot of people recommended going with the dual core option which made sense at the time but not much time has passed until Quad Core CPUs became a far superior option to dual core CPUs. Even the Kentsfield manufactured at 65nm process moped the floor with the newer dual core CPUs fabricated at a cutting edge (for the time)45nm process. Buying something which will last makes even more sense now because the progress in Big Cores slowed down(it's mobile CPUs like Core M and different varieties of ATOM where the true battle is being waged) because since then Intel essentially became a monopoly and it virtually only compete with itself. On top of that there's an upgrade path in the form of Broadwell-E which is supposed to be a drop-in replacement requiring only a BIOS update that's why I want top of the line MOBO. Maybe there's going to be a 8C/16T broadwell-E for a price that won't be considered to be fleecing their best retail consumers but I don't count on that but to be fair for all intents and purposes it's not a big deal to me. Games have just recently began to make use of more than 4 threads but it's going to take quite a lot of time until multithreading programming paradigm will take hold and programmers begin to at least use 8 threads and even longer for those additional threads to be intensive enough so that 8C/16C CPU will hold a tangible advantage over a 6c/12t one. Currently I have a ROG mobo and I like it a lot I know it's not the best value but it's cool in my opinion. I grew a weakness for that ROG MOBO series.

3 cards is also pointless - all the new "next-gen" games this year - how many even supported SLI?

All of them? Excluding Maxwell which still doesn't work well in SLI, especially above 2 cards. I've heard that even dual Maxwell produces horrible frame-times as measured using NVIDIA's own F-CAT and by empirical observation. But because I've got Kepler not Maxwell I didn't double check that info so I might be wrong.

,best regards

ps.1

As for the MOBO what do I lose by going with


Asrock X99 EXTREME6 instead of Asus Rampage V Extreme from the ROG series? The Asus motherboard is a whooping 50% more expensive!!! There's also ASRock X99 WS which slots right between the two in terms of price unfortunately none of them has the PCI-E 3.0 splitter wich is available on ASUS X99-WS but it's over 2000PLN compared to 1600 for ROG and 1100 for Extreme6 and 1200 for Asrock X99WS. I'm really at a roads end. I need some advice. I also haven't even chosen RAM, I decided that 4x4GB should be sweet spot but I haven't chosen the brand and I'm not even decided on the speed.

 

[Lepton87]

As for the MOBO what do I lose by going with


Asrock X99 EXTREME6 instead of Asus Rampage V Extreme from the ROG series? The Asus motherboard is a whooping 50% more expensive!!!

 

[BonzaiDuck]

If you ask me, tri-SLI/Crossfire is someone's compromise between expense, power-consumption, and performance.

Further, the trade-off can follow paths of severely diminishing returns for what is desired.

It then becomes a choice of whether to pay for an enhancement just because you want some extra increment in performance, and at some time, those increments can be quite small.

I've got a GTX 780 Asus card. The one tricked out in little splashes of red on a gray HSF shroud. I haven't even attempted to overclock it yet.

It seems to do pretty well with TitanFall and some milder games which distract me.

Anyway. Was the value of multi-card graphics (SLI/etc.) always most noticeable in the memory expansion? My 780 card has 3GB, and then there's some shared RAM. I'm even tempted to pick up another of those cards with recent sales-discount offers, before they're no longer available.

Personally, it doesn't seem like a gainful expenditure. But I also understand somebody else's optimum. I think that's fair to say.

 

[Lepton87]

I switched memory from

3. G.SKILL Ripjaws4 DDR4 4x4GB 2666MHz CL15 XMP2 Red

1 349 zł

to

Crucial DDR4 4x 4GB 2400MHz CL16 Ballistix Sport SR

2400 MHz for 1000zl

much better value

Not something I would notice ever, hardly noticeable in benchmarks. It's better to save some money on memory than on MOBO or even CPU.

I still haven't decided on the motherboard and I need to make a decision in the next few hours. Is ROG mobo really worth it? I'm extremely satisfied with my current MOBO, in general I have a weakness for ROG branded merchandise. I'm probably going to go all in and buy that ROG mobo altought I'm seriousely considering that X99-WS with PLX chips but on the other hand I'm not going to use Quad-SLI so those chips won't make much of use.

16x/8x vs 16x/16x and later 16x/16x/16x vs 8x/8x/8x won't make much of a difference. It's only really useful for Quad SLI and SLI is not really good, if four cards then AMD is a way better way to go. Does that RAMPAGE V Extreme handles 3 cards in 8x/8x/8x mode for sure instead of 16x/8x/4x for sure? the latter option would be a disaster so I don't think so. Also using M.1 SSD with 28 lanes CPU are 3 card is a no go for PLX less mobos. choices choices choices. I'm still thinking about low-cost 2011 mobo and 5930K

UPDATE:

I picked a mobo, it's going to be ASUS ROG RAMPAGE V Extreme, I would have chosen ASRock X99 Extreme11 if it were available yet, but sadly it's not and I won't be using 4-way M-GPU where it would be substantially better than X99 ROG. 18 SATA ports also sounds tempting as I already have 9 SATA devices with one remaining unused. So I can only add one more SSD but that should be fine as I have plenty of drives. The other drawback is that I won't be able to use 3 cards and M2 slot with 28 lanes CPU but I'm not planning on buying one. 2x256GB SSD SATA 3.0 drives are plenty fast for my needs. I seriously considered getting a cheaper mobo like ASrock Extreme3 with a 5930K(I can still change my decision if I hear good arguments for that choice) but I'll probably upgrade for BW-E with 40 lanes of PCI-E when it's available, hopefully it will cost way under 400$. At fist I wanted to skip this generatrion of 22nm CPUs but with all the delays BW-E is still way more than a year away, I expect it at around H1 of 2016 so that's too much of a wait.
PS. I know it's off-topic but BTW I've got 2 RAIDs installations one is with system and a few games so that's expendable but the other one are hard disks with the capacity of 3TB both, how do I migrate rhose RAIDs?
ps1. I can't find good reviews of that X99 ROG, with 3 cards does every card get a slot between one another for a breathing room so they are not sandwiched together? If not which mobo does that? I know Asrock Extreme 11 is like that but it's not for sale yet, at least in my country. That's actually very important.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

I switched memory from

3. G.SKILL Ripjaws4 DDR4 4x4GB 2666MHz CL15 XMP2 Red

1 349 zł

to

Crucial DDR4 4x 4GB 2400MHz CL16 Ballistix Sport SR

2400 MHz for 1000zl

much better value

Not something I would notice ever, hardly noticeable in benchmarks. It's better to save some money on memory than on MOBO or even CPU.

I still haven't decided on the motherboard and I need to make a decision in the next few hours. Is ROG mobo really worth it? . . . . .

Are you in a hurry to build this system?

Personally, I'd think that the slower RAM for fewer Zlotys should have a tighter CAS latency . . . not a looser one. What do the G.SKILL DDR3-2400 models look like in terms of spec voltage and timings?

The Rampage ROG boards are -- no doubt -- top flight. While I'd also consider one of those for myself, I will do a thorough search to see which mid-range or second-tier boards meet Rampage specs and performance without some various features that I'm not likely to need or use.

But the Rampage board is likely to be a win, and less likely to give you unpleasant surprises. No doubt about it.

 

[escrow4]

Fair enough, but upgrading from 4C/8T SB to HW that is also 4C/8T which on top of that will probably clock ever so slightly lower would net me at most 15-20% more performance I consider such an upgrade pointless. So 4970 is out of the question, too little performance gain and too few PCI-E lanes. I don't upgrade unless I can achieve more than a paltry 20% more performance and even that 20% figure is optimistic for a performance gain and on the low side when it comes to performance improvement required to entice me to upgrade barring some scenarios. Everything depends how much such an upgrade would cost. I don't buy CPUs and mobos for the immediate future either so current very lightly threaded benchmarks are given less weight by me then those more threaded. I'm going to keep the new parts at least until Skylake-E is out, maybe longer if it won't give much in the way of performance and focus almost exclusively on power consumption which I think might just happen. Anything under 20% is a no-go, above that depends on the price and other factors. Well, maybe if that 20% if solely due to single threaded improvement and the price is right then I might think. I put ST perf improvements over MT. So that's going to be 3 to 4 years until my next replacement. I change some other parts more often like graphics cards I kept my current motherboard for almost 4 years since the begging of 2011. Taking into account the current situation with node delays and no competition in the high-end platform I don't see a reason why I would keep that new mobo for less time then my current one. It's like going back to the times of E8X being compared to Quad Cores (Kentsfield or Yorkfield) a lot of people recommended going with the dual core option which made sense at the time but not much time has passed until Quad Core CPUs became a far superior option to dual core CPUs. Even the Kentsfield manufactured at 65nm process moped the floor with the newer dual core CPUs fabricated at a cutting edge (for the time)45nm process. Buying something which will last makes even more sense now because the progress in Big Cores slowed down(it's mobile CPUs like Core M and different varieties of ATOM where the true battle is being waged) because since then Intel essentially became a monopoly and it virtually only compete with itself. On top of that there's an upgrade path in the form of Broadwell-E which is supposed to be a drop-in replacement requiring only a BIOS update that's why I want top of the line MOBO. Maybe there's going to be a 8C/16T broadwell-E for a price that won't be considered to be fleecing their best retail consumers but I don't count on that but to be fair for all intents and purposes it's not a big deal to me. Games have just recently began to make use of more than 4 threads but it's going to take quite a lot of time until multithreading programming paradigm will take hold and programmers begin to at least use 8 threads and even longer for those additional threads to be intensive enough so that 8C/16C CPU will hold a tangible advantage over a 6c/12t one. Currently I have a ROG mobo and I like it a lot I know it's not the best value but it's cool in my opinion. I grew a weakness for that ROG MOBO series.



All of them? Excluding Maxwell which still doesn't work well in SLI, especially above 2 cards. I've heard that even dual Maxwell produces horrible frame-times as measured using NVIDIA's own F-CAT and by empirical observation. But because I've got Kepler not Maxwell I didn't double check that info so I might be wrong.

,best regards

ps.1

As for the MOBO what do I lose by going with


Asrock X99 EXTREME6 instead of Asus Rampage V Extreme from the ROG series? The Asus motherboard is a whooping 50% more expensive!!! There's also ASRock X99 WS which slots right between the two in terms of price unfortunately none of them has the PCI-E 3.0 splitter wich is available on ASUS X99-WS but it's over 2000PLN compared to 1600 for ROG and 1100 for Extreme6 and 1200 for Asrock X99WS. I'm really at a roads end. I need some advice. I also haven't even chosen RAM, I decided that 4x4GB should be sweet spot but I haven't chosen the brand and I'm not even decided on the speed.

TL-DR - there is no point buying X99 unless you really need the features. Its unnecessarily complex fiddling around with 2 or 3 GPUs and if this is purely for gaming you'd be far better off with a 4790K and Z97, then upgrade in 2-3 years rather than sticking with X99. In 3yrs Skylake and Cannonlake will be released/coming out and both will be as fast or faster than a 5820. Look at the 4770 now, its close or faster than the 3970X unless you have a heavily multi-threaded program. Look at the Evil Within CPU benchmarks I posted, Haswell-E is slower than a plain old i7 4770.

 

[Lepton87]

TL-DR - there is no point buying X99 unless you really need the features. Its unnecessarily complex fiddling around with 2 or 3 GPUs and if this is purely for gaming you'd be far better off with a 4790K and Z97, then upgrade in 2-3 years rather than sticking with X99. In 3yrs Skylake and Cannonlake will be released/coming out and both will be as fast or faster than a 5820. Look at the 4770 now, its close or faster than the 3970X unless you have a heavily multi-threaded program. Look at the Evil Within CPU benchmarks I posted, Haswell-E is slower than a plain old i7 4770.

I don't think it will look like that, games are getting more multi-threaded not less. 3 years is a hell of a lot of time and I won't buy another quad. Quad HW is not enough of a performance boost to bother not to mention those 16 lines of PCI-E which are going to limit 3-way set-ups. There are already games which benefit massively from hexacores or additional cache like WOW. I would prefer IB-E to HW or even SB-E. Of course after OC.
ps. I think you are overestimating skylake. Is HW faster than IB-E? Only in very lightly threaded apps and even than not by much when both are OCed. Cannonlake is irrelevant because when it comes to market we will already have Broadwell-E if not Skylake-E. HW-E won't be its competition. Besides IPC improvements are harder and harder to come by.

Are you in a hurry to build this system?

Personally, I'd think that the slower RAM for fewer Zlotys should have a tighter CAS latency . . . not a looser one. What do the G.SKILL DDR3-2400 models look like in terms of spec voltage and timings?

The Rampage ROG boards are -- no doubt -- top flight. While I'd also consider one of those for myself, I will do a thorough search to see which mid-range or second-tier boards meet Rampage specs and performance without some various features that I'm not likely to need or use.

But the Rampage board is likely to be a win, and less likely to give you unpleasant surprises. No doubt about it.

The cheapest DDR4 are 2133 CL 15 which cost 780zl which is only slightly less than those G-Skill 2400MHz CL16. I just want a ROG board I have one now and I think it's awesome.

 

[NTMBK]

Has there been any recent measurements of the impact of PCIe bandwidth on texture loads, not average framerates? I know that on my ancient AM2+ motherboard with PCIe 1.1 and dog-slow Hypertransport 1.0, it takes an absolute age for textures to pop up to full res in certain games. (XCOM is a notable example.)

 

[biostud]

When using a 5820k for tri sli you will need to check the motherboard manual to see if it runs 8x/8x/8x or 16x/8x/4x, since the latter does not support tri sli as nvidia requires at least 8x for all cards in sli configurations. My motherboard does not support tri sli with a 5820k.

 

[Lepton87]

Has there been any recent measurements of the impact of PCIe bandwidth on texture loads, not average framerates? I know that on my ancient AM2+ motherboard with PCIe 1.1 and dog-slow Hypertransport 1.0, it takes an absolute age for textures to pop up to full res in certain games. (XCOM is a notable example.)

Texture loads you mean how long it takes a level to load? I'd say that it's almost entirely reliant on the SSD's speed even with PCI-E 2.0 8X or lower which is still miles ahead of consumer SSDs in terms of speed and it cannot be saturated by SSDs barring some ultra-fast PCI-E solutions that utilize many controllers and cost in the thousands of dollars.

When using a 5820k for tri sli you will need to check the motherboard manual to see if it runs 8x/8x/8x or 16x/8x/4x, since the latter does not support tri sli as nvidia requires at least 8x for all cards in sli configurations. My motherboard does not support tri sli with a 5820k.

Thanks, but ASUS ROG is 8x/8x/8x for sure. There are two boards that I would prefer to it namely Asrock Extreme 9 and ASUS X99-WS both sporting 2 PLX chips and both unavailable where I live

 

[Lepton87]

ASUS X99-WS I found it for just under 10% more than ROG, is it worth it over ROG? Is it even better? It was only available for a reasonable price in 1 shop.

UPDATE: They want payment before shipping that's a bummer.
ps. X99-WS is positioned as a Workstation board is it as good of an overclocker as the ROG variant?

 

[Rvenger]

Unless you are going for world records, I wouldn't worry about how well the board overclocks. They all overclock, even the Asrock X99 Extreme 3. I just wouldn't put in a 5960x and run it at 5ghz.