lehtv
Elite Member
- Dec 8, 2010
- 11,897
- 74
- 91
are you insinuating the 5820K is a bad value? It has 2 more cores and 2x as much cache as the 4790k for only $40 more.
That is exactly what I'm "insinuating".
For $40 more you get 0.7GHz slower stock clock speed which means it performs worse in games than 4790K, and lower absolute overclocking potential which means it won't catch up to 4790K even with overclocking. It requires an expensive X99 motherboard which is $200 minimum, while 4790K pairs great with a mere $120 SLI board, so in essence you're not paying $40 more, you're paying $120 more. And it lacks integrated graphics (great as an emergency backup), and consumes a lot more power especially with overclocking.
It's not a bad value for what it's designed - heavily multithreaded processing - but it is a bad value for gaming.
Last edited:
