Intel Xeon E3-1230 V3 same as i7 4770 for $60 less...

[JumBie]

http://au.cybergamer.com/forums/thr...70K-vs-Intel-Xeon-E3-1230v3-Performance-Test/

CPU Specs:
i7-4770K: http://ark.intel.com/products/75123/
E3-1230v3: http://ark.intel.com/products/75054/

Test Setup:
- Intel Xeon E3-1230 v3 @ 3.30GHz vs Intel i7 4770K @ 3.50GHz (Both processors were tested @ default values).
- ASUS Z87-C Motheboard (Latest BIOS)
- Kingston HyperX Blu 8GB (2x 4GB) 1600MHz DDR3 RAM
- ASUS GTX 770 DC2 OC Graphics Card - 2GB Version
- Samsung 840 EVO 120GB SSD
- Windows 7 Home Premium SP1 64-Bit

Benchmarks:
- 3DMark11 Advanced Edition (Preset: Extreme/Performance)
- PCMark7 Advanced Edition v1.4.0
- Unigine Valley Benchmark 1.0 (Preset: Extreme)
- Unigine Heaven Benchmark 4.0 (Preset: Extreme)

Results:

 

[ShintaiDK]

The IGP is the same so yes, same numbers for graphics.

However CPU wise the 4770 is faster with 4-5% or so. But again, the equal Xeon would be the 1275v3. Not the 1230v3.

http://ark.intel.com/products/75464/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E3-1275-v3-8M-Cache-3_50-GHz

 

[JumBie]

I have some more benchmarks for you guys, gaming related as well.
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/CPU-Hardware-154106/Tests/Xeon-E3-1230-v3-Test-1099616/

And some cpu task related benches.

 

[ShintaiDK]

As you can see, not the same.

 

[JumBie]

As you can see, not the same.

Actually, according to the numbers the highest FPS margin was in BF4 where there was a fps difference of 6.3 at stock. When the turbo is unlocked on the Xeon the fps margin is 3. In all other instances we see a difference of 1-5 fps difference. For $60 less, for a difference of 1-5fps (when turbo is not unlocked) I call that a win situation.

There is no need to even bother comparing the 4770 to another Xeon model closer to its price range when this $60 less model evidently is capable of staying within close proximity to the i7 in gaming.

 

[ShintaiDK]

You can just save another 60$ then and get a 4670. Its faster than the 1230v3 in everything at 4 threads and down.

 

[JumBie]

You can just save another 60$ then and get a 4670. Its faster than the 1230v3 in everything at 4 threads and down.

Thats when you have to look at the performance in things that use all threads. If you look at the chart below the gaming charts you start to see how well it performs in multi-threaded applications, hence the leverage it has over the 4670.

 

[JumBie]

1920x1080 Performance Benchmarks
http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/prozessoren/2013/intel-xeon-e3-1230-v3-im-test/2/

I am unsure of the hardware that was used in the test setup, these however are the numbers shown and are up for debate.

 

[Cerb]

The IGP is the same so yes, same numbers for graphics.

The IGP is disabled on one, so that's the GTX 770, not IGP .

Intel loves fitting everything into a niche. Sometimes, it works out. I didn't need HT, but that and a big SSD were major wants, as I could have used, and now do use, both to my advantage. So, the Xeon was a shoe-in--after mfenn caught a promo on it that I had missed, anyway.

If you're already not going to overclock, they can be good alternatives, depending on current price. They're the same chips, just with ever-so-slightly things turned on or off. Not overclocking, the speed differences are exceptionally small between all of Intel's current faster CPUs. The no-IGP bit makes the E3-1230V3 kind of niche, but since gamers will tend to not care much, if at all, about IGP, anyway, it can be a larger niche than it may first seem.

You can just save another 60$ then and get a 4670. Its faster than the 1230v3 in everything at 4 threads and down.

By a huge 1.03% margin, assuming whatever is being tested is limited purely by clock speed (the difference is small enough that the 2MB of cache could very well make up for it, even not using enough threads to make use of HT).

Sure, it would be nicer if Intel didn't segment their product lines so much, but they do, and this sort of situation is the result, especially since pretty much everyone but Asus supports the Xeon E3V3 lines on their boards.

 

[ShintaiDK]

The IGP is disabled on one, so that's the GTX 770, not IGP .

Intel loves fitting everything into a niche. Sometimes, it works out. I didn't need HT, but that and a big SSD were major wants, as I could have used, and now do use, both to my advantage. So, the Xeon was a shoe-in--after mfenn caught a promo on it that I had missed, anyway.

If you're already not going to overclock, they can be good alternatives, depending on current price. They're the same chips, just with ever-so-slightly things turned on or off. Not overclocking, the speed differences are exceptionally small between all of Intel's current faster CPUs. The no-IGP bit makes the E3-1230V3 kind of niche, but since gamers will tend to not care much, if at all, about IGP, anyway, it can be a larger niche than it may first seem.

By a huge 1.03% margin, assuming whatever is being tested is limited purely by clock speed (the difference is small enough that the 2MB of cache could very well make up for it, even not using enough threads to make use of HT).

Sure, it would be nicer if Intel didn't segment their product lines so much, but they do, and this sort of situation is the result, especially since pretty much everyone but Asus supports the Xeon E3V3 lines on their boards.

My point was that the 1230v3 is not the same performance as a 4770K. And with the same arguments used, you could just save even more by going 4670. The OP refuses to see that they are not the same, yet claims a 60$ saving for the exact same.

 

[JumBie]

My point was that the 1230v3 is not the same performance as a 4770K. And with the same arguments used, you could just save even more by going 4670. The OP refuses to see that they are not the same, yet claims a 60$ saving for the exact same.

Allow me to rephrase for you.

The Xeon E3-1230 V3 has near identical performance to that of the 4770 and is $60 dollars less. While there are anomalies in games that will skew the numbers the reality is that, for around $259 a Haswell chip that offers HT, more cache is definitely a steal. The price/performance here is incredible.

 

[WTSherman]

I've been following this for the past 6 months, I think this is the chip to get and what I plan to use in the motherboard I just ordered. Right now I'm running an old worn out Q9550 with 6 ghz ddr2 I had lying around.

 

[JumBie]

I've been following this for the past 6 months, I think this is the chip to get and what I plan to use in the motherboard I just ordered. Right now I'm running an old worn out Q9550 with 6 ghz ddr2 I had lying around.

Yeah, its a great chip. I myself am definitely considering moving over to one of these. Really would love to see how HT and more cores feel in certain applications and benching. I have never owned a processor with HT so this will definitely be an experience for me.

 

[know of fence]

E3-1240v3 (3.4-3.8) looks good 20 bucks for a 0.1 GHz bump is not so bad, next bump is 60 $ the one after that about 300$.

Not sure how barren the features of H81, H85, B85 chipsets are but there are similar savings to be had here as well. A 0.5 GHz OC gives you about the same performance boost in multithreaded tasks as HT ~15%.
Dropping the OC allows to choose an overall lower power PSU, which is a very good thing for idle power.

 

[tweakboy]

Gimmicks

Upon further investigation:

With no IGPU you lose out on QuickSync, and Wireless Display. There might be some other things you lose out on as well. So for people who care about these things (video encoding and syncing media with HDTVs) this is not the CPU for you.

 

[tweakboy]

YOu need a server MB and a expensive Xeon which you cant overclock.

Grab the 4770k and call it a day.

gl

 

[Blue_Max]

I'm revisiting this for myself - I'm not big on overclocking and need the absolute best bang-for-the-buck. I've also noticed that several of my background apps like Skype (even when not in active use) are pretty hungry! In short - I want the HT for folding@home as well as just a little future-proofing.

Getting it for $100 less than an actual i7, and cheaper than the 4670k, is VERY tempting!

Good reviews... I just have to make sure my board choice supports it in advance. I'm considering the V2 version for the lower TDP as well.

 

[crashtech]

The 4670K at Amazon right now kind of changes things for me. I've been keeping my eye on the 1230v3 and 1240v3, but the i5 is a pretty good value right now.

 

[Blue_Max]

It really boils down to whether you'd benefit from the HT. I know I will, where most gamers probably won't. At only ~$230 CDN for the 1155 E3-1230 V2, and an affordable B75 mobo, it's an affordable multitasker and great gamer!

 

[escrow4]

Xeon's are not available where I buy my parts from, didn't want to trust another retailer and custom order, and as $60 is a piffling amount for me, I went with 4770's for both my builds. I think I'll be replacing that 4770 with an 6/8 core Haswell E. Maybe.

 

[zir_blazer]

Good reviews... I just have to make sure my board choice supports it in advance. I'm considering the V2 version for the lower TDP as well.

V2 = Ivy Bridge, LGA 1155
V3 = Haswell, LGA 1150

Keep that in mind.

 

[Blue_Max]

V2 = Ivy Bridge, LGA 1155
V3 = Haswell, LGA 1150

Keep that in mind.

Yup yup. You anticipate much performance difference between the two, despite being rated for exactly the same standard/boost speeds? There's a $30 difference between the two (about 13% difference) so I'd hope for at least 10% faster real-world performance boost.

 

[Headfoot]

Feel bad for you guys, my local Microcenter has the 4770k for 249.99

 

[Blue_Max]

Feel bad for you guys, my local Microcenter has the 4770k for 249.99

I'm sick with jealousy! :'(

 

[sm625]

Yep Xeons are a godsend. I'm still running the xeon equivalent of the i5-750 which I found on ebay for dirt cheap almost 2 years ago.... clearly someone did not realize it was basically an i5 which sold for 2x the price at the time.