Primarily Gaming Purposes - 4790K or 5820K ?

[sidrockrulz]

That's an awesome review and backs up my sentiment that if I were to buy now I would get the 5820K platform. When gaming, 4790k Max OC wins by less than 5%, when using multi-threaded apps, 5820k OC wins by 30-45%. Also, while the cost of DDR4 is high, you can reuse it in 4 years but DDR3 will be worthless. You do not need to buy a $400-500 X99 board either. Gigabyte UD4 or Asrock Exteme 4 or 6 are good boards at $220-260.

If you look at GameGPU data on recent titles like Son:Ryse of Rome or CIV: BE, the 5960X at just 3Ghz beats 4790K. All it takes is 1-2 major AAA popular games where the 6 core scales well, and it's game over for the 4790K. The extra 300mhz overclock on 4790K will do little for gaming over the long term. If you have a MC near you, the difference in platform costs is a lot less than $300-400. It is only that large if you spend $ on top boards, most of which are loaded with features you don't need and charge for marketing/branding.

Price out 4790K with Extreme 6 vs. 5820K with Extreme 4 and see what happens. Get 8GB of DDR4 now. When prices drop you can pick up more later.

Alternatively, if you will be gaming 99% of the time, then put the $ saved towards a larger SSD or faster videocard. You really can't go wrong with either option. Since I don't just game, I would pick the 5820K at this time. Maybe with Skylake's 14nm, 10% increase in IPC, > 5Ghz overclocks and PCIe4, I would not go with 5820K.

Since you can get 5820K at MC, you'll be able to sell it at minimal loss in value when BW-E comes out in 2016. If you are going triple monitors, 3x 970s are better than 2x 980s, which gives even more reason to go X99.

Also, I am not sure why you are ignoring PCIe SSD flash storage down the line. In 3-4 years prices might drop and you'll be able to get a very fast OS PCIe storage. With 2-3 cards and Z97, I would not go that route.

Sure thing... But now im also considering 290X is CF too... Decisions decisions !!

Also, I am not too keen on Skylake as it is going to need an all new 1151 socket.. Dont want to invest in that when Broadwell K is going to support 1150...

Any idea whats next for the 2011-3 socket ?

 

[crashtech]

Any idea whats next for the 2011-3 socket ?

Broadwell-E in 2016.

http://www.techpowerup.com/206536/intel-core-i7-broadwell-e-hedt-chips-arrive-in-2016.html

At which time its IPC will probably be eclipsed by the "Performance Mainstream" Skylake-K i7, though plans for unlocked Skylakes are sketchy from what I know.

 

[RussianSensation]

Broadwell-E in 2016.

http://www.techpowerup.com/206536/intel-core-i7-broadwell-e-hedt-chips-arrive-in-2016.html

At which time its IPC will probably be eclipsed by the "Performance Mainstream" Skylake-K i7, though plans for unlocked Skylakes are sketchy from what I know.

If unlocked Skylake never sees the light of day or is delayed to 2016, that would be very disappointing. Intel needs to make up its mind if it wants the X99 LG2011-3 socket to be its enthusiast platform or offer some quad-core K enthusiast chips to Z107. With Skylake on 14nm, it should be a great overclocker. If not, I'll be ditching the quad-core system for good and just move to the workstation platform if Intel ditches K on the Skylake.

 

[sidrockrulz]

Broadwell-E in 2016.

http://www.techpowerup.com/206536/intel-core-i7-broadwell-e-hedt-chips-arrive-in-2016.html

At which time its IPC will probably be eclipsed by the "Performance Mainstream" Skylake-K i7, though plans for unlocked Skylakes are sketchy from what I know.

Blech... Why cant they make skylake compatible with the 20011 or the 1150.. Worst

But i guess i can wait another 3 years before i jump on the skyklake bandwagon !

 

[sidrockrulz]

If unlocked Skylake never sees the light of day or is delayed to 2016, that would be very disappointing. Intel needs to make up its mind if it wants the X99 LG2011-3 socket to be its enthusiast platform or offer some quad-core K enthusiast chips to Z107. With Skylake on 14nm, it should be a great overclocker. If not, I'll be ditching the quad-core system for good and just move to the workstation platform if Intel ditches K on the Skylake.

if i get the z97 platform, Im so gonna hope the Skylake K gets delayed to 2017 Sorry !!:whiste:

 

[Geeksmirage]

This is an absolutely brilliant thread. Thanks OP for asking this question.
The issue is that I go one way and then the other with the 4790 / 5820 decision.
Im not a big OC guy.

For me, the diff is that I dont care about the minute texture differences, but I run so many apps that I run my comp like a beast.

I dont know if its allowed, but Im having issues trying to figure out my own build as well. "Urgent (Black Fr): $2k High End Gaming / Heavy Use Build"
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2410205

 

[tential]

All depends on how much you're willing to spend. Personally, if I had the cash, 5820k hands down. It's 6 cores vs 4 cores.

Last generation if you compared to the 4820k I would hands down be against it. But this generation? 5820k for the longevity. But it all depends on how much the extra performance matters to you. To many people, it may not matter at all. Probably even to me, it may not matter that much today, but future? Sure, and there already games that taken advantage of 6 cores.

Then of course, there is future. But maybe I'm just excited to see 6 cores at a much more reasonable price.

 

[tential]

This is an absolutely brilliant thread. Thanks OP for asking this question.
The issue is that I go one way and then the other with the 4790 / 5820 decision.
Im not a big OC guy.

For me, the diff is that I dont care about the minute texture differences, but I run so many apps that I run my comp like a beast.

I dont know if its allowed, but Im having issues trying to figure out my own build as well. "Urgent (Black Fr): $2k High End Gaming / Heavy Use Build"
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2410205

Your usage scenario
"My main usage is gaming and very heaving multitasking. What I mean by that, is that I generally have 30-100 Chrome tabs open, am running Steam, Battle.Net, Twitch streams, LoL etc, multiple VLC HD videos at the same time. "

Having Chrome tabs open isn't using cores it's storing things in Ram usually. Battle.net Steam, don't taek up CPU cycles either. You can do all of that on a much weaker processor. You could probably do all of this on a i5 or even an i3 processor lol.

Not to make fun of you though, just to let you know that in 99% of the time, you won't notice a difference in a 5820k vs a 4790k for what you just listed.

That said, I do similar things to you, and I still want the 5820k just to have it. But I have a 4770k and it does what you do with ease. It really is too much CPU power for what I do.
Curious as to how you watch multiple twitch streams and multiple VLC videos at the same time. 6+ videos at the same time?

Edit: A person who purchases a 5820k is doing things far more demanding than League of Legends by the way lol... I manage close to that useage on my 6 year old laptop lol....

 

[Geeksmirage]

I didnt phrase that out right. The videos arent playing, they are just open and paused.

my 2500k is running okay. And once I install my SSD, the 100% Disk usage issues i have will go away.

I just installed a fresh copy of windows on the SSD. For testing, I opened 10-15 youtube videos that started playing. My CPU usage spiked to 40%, and the browser froze.
So if this is the case on a fresh OS install, I shudder to think what would happen once I actually install all my software and have multiple processes running.

Hence, I want to upgrade.I agree with you on the fact that I may lean towards the 5820k just to have it. The issue is that if its $200-$300 more, I dont mind spending that to "relatively future proof". Its just that Ive been reading a lot on it, folks talking about instability, the next gen stuff coming out on 1150 and not 2011v3 etc.

 

[tential]

I just looked at your thread. Here is how I see it.
I think it's important for you to learn which processes are actually utilizing your CPU. Steam running doesn't utilize your CPU to a point where you worry about it.

If your 2500k is running your PC fine, chances are you won't see much of a benefit moving to the 5820k. That said, I say you should get the 5820k. Why? Because I don't believe the 4790k will be enough of an upgrade for you. You look like you want to upgrade and I just wouldn't recommend a 2500k user to upgrade to a 4790k. I'd say go to the 5820k because you'll ALWAYS wonder what performance you left on the board. You'll feel "better" getting it.

I had the same question to myself when purchasing the 4770k vs the 4670k. In the end, I went 4770k. I juts knew full well the "wondering" would be more than enough to annoy me.

Also, I think you need to understand whether a 5820k will actually make a difference. For example, you say you opened 15 youtube videos that played at once and the browser froze. A 5820k may STILL freeze doing the same task. If the task you're attempting to do can't be completed on either processor, it's best to just dial back the task you're trying to complete.

I'd say you should FIRST do some testing and learn how things are working. Keep Task Manager open on your PC, and watch the CPU utilization for tasks as your doing things. When you minimize a game and it's been minimized, does it still use CPU? How much? etc.

Learning how much of your CPU cycles are being used during tasks may help you more on making a decision.

I still lean towards the 5820k because I just don't think that even if the 4790k does what you want, that you'll be happy with yourself purchasing it. I know me, I couldn't upgrade to a 4790k from a 2500k. Just not possible. It'd have to be to a 5820k.

I think some of your specs on your build are OVERKILL, but I also think you'll just be generally more happy with a system like it than something weaker. But that's just my opinion and the sense I get from your post, and generally I feel I have a good sense of what a person is going for with their build.
Edit: Also, if you had 6+ HDDs in a case, build a server.... Not saying I'm any better, I also have filled on my drives on my mobo, but you should work towards a server now. It's cheap. My "test" server build I'm using a J1900 processor and 1 hard drive in a 1U server chassis. It's actually just a download server that downloads nonstop but I was ensuring it was accessible. It's cheap to build a server and you could easily build one for 200-300 dollars and move all your drives to it. That way you can also run a data protection to ensure whatever is on there is protected on a 1 drive failure. I'd need to know more about what you're doign with those drives but I'd recommend that definitely and it's my own enxt step.

 

[Geeksmirage]

@tential I think you've hit it on the head.
Logic says that the 4790 should be enough. The heart says go for the badass one, the 5820. It would have been a no brainer, except that moving to 2011v3, requires a newer expensive mobo and newer expensive RAM. Thats why I hesitated.

Excellent advice on the CPU Util part. I do watch it a decent amount, but had been focusing on my HDD usage since than maxes out. And I noticed post boot, its mostly coz of AMD CCC. For CPU Util, Games generally use up another 20-30%, getting me to about 50% total. Minimized, not so much. But recently I had a pretty bad situation. I ran Dragon Age, default settings. And until I closed my browser, it dragged along, framing a lot! Even after that, it was very janky. CPU Util was still around 40-50%, but the gameplay was terrible.

What parts do you feel are overkill (other than the RAM)? Im using the GPUs mainly for the extra output slots.

For the server part, thats what I thought. I have a separate thread i just posted on that.
"2 Drives Failed: Seagate BlackArmor NAS 440 (Raid5)"
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=36940522#post36940522
It would be awesome if you could reply to that thread. Coz now Im wondering if RAID is the way to go and if I shouldnt simply put the HDDs in directly? If never had those fail.

 

[MongGrel]

Just received my X5680 I picked up for $150, gonna see how hard I can kick the old system up this weekend on air.

:sneaky:

Will be my last X58 chip I imagine, can put the X5650 in another.

 

[tential]

I mean most are overkill?
But that's kind of the point isn't it? To have enough.
IMO, I think you even played less on your PSU lol than I thought you would have. I have an 820 W PSU for far less components.

Actually, I don't think the build is unreasonable.

It's the usage scenario that is the issue.

I'd say only plan on building this PC if you plan to switch the majority of your game playing to PC (You can hook your PC up to an HDTV and play with a controller.... that's how I play my PC is nothing but an expensive console).
I'd say only pick a GTX 970 over the R9 290x if you plan on gaming at 4K resolution. If you don't plan on getting a 4K HDTV/Monitor R9 290x it is.
I'd also say only get a 5820k over a 4790k if you understand you won't see a performance benefit with the 5820k in 95% of cases. League of Legends is a joke game... my 6 year old Laptop runs it fine at max settings.
Games that are minimized don't usually eat up much of anything.
Dragon Age isn't a good game to judge anything off of, it's still being patched and these new age games are a JOKE when it comes to optimization. When these games come out you're essentially paying to betatest now so issues are most likely due to the game and not your PC.

Just realize that. I recommend you to purchase the 4790k, or even just to stick with the 2500k and upgrade to an SSD and play around and see if you can't learn to close things.
But I personally would purchase a 5820k... and I own a 4770k now and it sits idle 95% of the day so I really can't be one to tell you how to spend your cash. My 4770k gaming rig rarely games... it's usually just a media server, but I still have it lol....

 

[Geeksmirage]

Ah, ur tearing my heart out. I keep oscillating between the two.

Fyi, ur right. I dont think I need such a powerful PSU.
See the 2 images here:
http://imgur.com/6ODUIhl,2fkf9O0
(The 5829 shows data for only 1 GPU, not two).

I actually do game 90% of the time on my PC. Rarely on my PS4.
I am a bit of a monitor fanatic, have been dying to get the ultrasharps. But just too expensive. So im sure I would switch to 3x4K if I could get 3 monitors for ~$200-$250 each. In fact, I just may go 6x and use 3x4K, 3x normal

What you said is actually what I just did. I put in a new 1TB Samsung Evo 840 SSD, and used it as my primary one time. I did that yesterday, so havent ported everything yet, coz if I get a new comp, dont want to format for drivers etc again.

The crux of it is what you mentioned "only get a 5820k over a 4790k if you understand you won't see a performance benefit with the 5820k in 95% of cases."
It just feels like Im trying to save $300-400 bucks for something "old" vs something "new". And the fear that the "old" thing will force me to upgrade again soon. Like I always regretted getting the i5 2500k instead of an i7, even though reviews said it is marginally better.

And yes, my 2500k is more of a media / multitasking machine, gaming is relatively rare. But when I do play, I want it to not compromise.

 

[tential]

I said that because I thought you don't game on your PC and game on your PS4...
You game on your PC, pick up the 5820k then.
Spend Under $200 or close to it for the X99 mobo. You won't see some performance gain for a expensive mobo.
Same with the Ram, spend less of course I'd go for the $400 kit.

PSU get the one you wanted (if it's a good price for that many watts).

Ya, in that case just get the 5820k system though. I can't see a reason you wouldn't enjoy having it more. Right now, if I was in your situation, it's a no brainer. I'd pick up the 5820k. One of the biggest things I always say is don't make a purchase you'll regret later. Sometimes, it's not about the performance anymore, it's about feeling good about your purchase. My 4770k was a feel good purchase over the 4670k. I'm happy I spent the money even though I doubt I would see the performance benefit in 95% of the situations I used it.
Edit: I'd also switch to a single 4K Monitor for gaming for now with Gsync if you go with the GTX 970s SLI. (You can use multiple monitors for other things though.)

 

[Geeksmirage]

I completely understand and agree with the qualitative side of ur discussion.
So the decision is made on the 5820.

Now, going forward, there are so many X99 mobos at many diff prices.
Same for RAM.
and then other components.
Any thoughts / recommendations?
https://pcpartpicker.com/user/GeeksMirage/saved/#savedbuild_1701423

Fyi, Im discussing the same thing on my original thread, there may be less redundancy if we move this there?
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=36940838

I'm not sure about the 4k monitor .. They seem to be super expensive, ~$500. Plus ive heard that with the tech right now, the basic 720p, 1080p stuff doesnt really look great on it. And there isnt too much media on 4k right now?
So makes sense to wait until next year and then just get 3 of those?

=========================================

Mobo:
GIGABYTE GA-X99-UD4
GIGABYTE GA-X99-GAMING 5
GIGABYTE GA-X99-UD5 WIFI
ASUS X99-DELUXE
ASUS RAMPAGE V EXTREME

RAM:
Corsair Vengeance Pro 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR3-2133 or Corsair Vengeance LPX 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR4-2666
Any difference between the Pro or LPX? Seems the same to me, i dont really overclock.
How about G Skill (however, not the tall ones, dont want another height issue). Or any other brands?

 

[tential]

4K is niche I guess. I can see what you're saying. I would use it solely for gaming but yes there are drawbacks. HUD Scaling is horrendous, etc. If you want the most use out of it, then yes, get it next year.

I'd only get 3 of them if you want to use them for Windows. No GPU will handle 3 4K monitors. If you like 3 1080p monitors for gaming though use it.

Again, need to know exactly how you use your system. As for RAM, I don't OC so I just pick a cheap option. Corsair, GSkill, etc. doesn't really matter to me. They ALL have lifetime warranties so don't care.

 

[Geeksmirage]

Let me see the discounts this year on 4k monitors, may decide to get one if it falls to the ~$200 range.

I dont do gaming across 3 monitors, just on one, others are for random stuff.

Usage:

As we discussed, my main use is multi-tasking. Some games, a few HD streams, quite a few apps (spotify, Plex etc) .. Mainly, 50-100 browser tabs.
I like having tons of USB ports, coz I currently use up all 8-10 at the back, and 2-3 in the front.

Plus, my boot time is horrendous. Without a SSD, my POST takes about 1 minute until the login, post login until everything loads, 5-7 mins easy.

Any other specific details you need? Coz Im not sure how else to explain my use

 

[Geeksmirage]

Im wondering if this is a better build:
http://pcpartpicker.com/user/GeeksMirage/saved/FN76Mp

Since Im not really using the GPUs for gaming, only for the ports, its something that is easily upgradable later. So if I put in a cheap GPU (or use my old HD 6850), I save about $700, which I can put into getting the 5960. And if I optimize the cooler, DVD Rom etc, I can get the Asus Rampage V for the same budget.

Thoughts?

 

[Dimicron]

For what it's worth, I had the same decision with my recent upgrade. I chose to pretty much go all out and went with an X99 based system because I figured that I can always overclock, but I can't glue more cores on to my CPU

 

[Geeksmirage]

For what it's worth, I had the same decision with my recent upgrade. I chose to pretty much go all out and went with an X99 based system because I figured that I can always overclock, but I can't glue more cores on to my CPU

Can you link me your build? Would love to know what you wound up with?

 

[Dimicron]

Can you link me your build? Would love to know what you wound up with?

Sure, I went from this:

CPU: AMD FX-8120 @ 3.9GHz w/ Stock Cooler
Mobo: Asus Sabertooth 990FX v1
RAM: 16GB (4x4GB) Patriot DDR3-1666
PSU: Antec HCG-900
Video: Asus GTX 770 (x2 SLI)
Boot: Samsung 840 EVO 500GB

To this:
CPU: Intel i7-5930k w/ Corsair H100i
Mobo: MSI X99S SLI Plus
RAM: 16GB (4x4GB) Patriot DDR4-2400
PSU: Antec HCG-900
Video: Asus GTX 770 (x2 SLI)
Boot: Samsung 840 EVO 500GB
M.2 Samsung XP941 256GB. Will be making this my boot disk after I buy a new jump drive(Fun with UEFI/GPT boot devices lol)

The power supply, video cards, SSD, and all HDD's moved from my old system to my new system.

 

[Geeksmirage]

Very interesting. My basic question is, why these parts?
1. 5930 over 5820?
2. MSI? Not Gigabyte or Asus Deluxe or Asus Extreme?
3. Why Patriot? Ive heard that G Skill or Corsair is better?
4. Antec? Any particular reason?
5. 2x770? I see the 2x 770 costs the same as 2x 970?
6. XP941. Very interesting. What the adv. to using this over the evo ?

 

[Geeksmirage]

Right now, Im basically trying to make a few decisions.

1. Should I go for the 5820k or the 5960k (Notice: NOT the 5930k). The cost difference is massive, $380 vs $1000. But that is the top of the line processor. Plus that should take care of all my multitasking needs for a few years.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErDF4jkVRsI&list=UUzqOB6Yvp2mAw8UAJoFqMWQ

2. Mobo: Asus Deluxe vs Extreme? (I will start OC the first time with this system)
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/asus-x99-rampage-v-extreme-review,1.html

3. GPUs: Since I dont game THAT much, I can either use my old Radeon 6850 HD or get ONE 970, because adding a second 970 later is easy. What is not easy is changing ur processor / mobo.

The rest, RAM, PSU, Cooler etc is a secondary decision i guess.

 

[Dimicron]

Very interesting. My basic question is, why these parts?
1. 5930 over 5820?
2. MSI? Not Gigabyte or Asus Deluxe or Asus Extreme?
3. Why Patriot? Ive heard that G Skill or Corsair is better?
4. Antec? Any particular reason?
5. 2x770? I see the 2x 770 costs the same as 2x 970?
6. XP941. Very interesting. What the adv. to using this over the evo ?

1. I have family who works for Intel. Got a smoking deal on the 5930k that I couldn't say no to.
2. Had initially purchased an Asus X99-A, however it failed to power on, no LEDs were lit no nothing. reseated it, no joy. Exchanged it at Fry's. Second one had a BIOS error and wouldn't get me in to the BIOS to correct it. Exchanged it for the MSI one and had no issues.
3. There are only 2 good companies that make the actual memory chips, Micron or Hynix. Any manufacturer that uses one of those two brands to make their RAM sticks will produce a decent product.
4. Had good luck with them in the past. And it's one of the parts that I carried over from my old build.
5. Same thing here. I've had them for about 1 year now. 9xx series video cards just don't interest me enough to make the jump from what I currently have. My gaming is done at 1920x1080, so I'm ok for now with the 2 x 770's.
6. The SATA connected Samsung 840 EVO can only do a max of about 550-600 MB/s (not counting RAPID mode which is glorious for benchmarks). The PCIe x4 Samsung XP941 meanwhile can hit about 1500 MB/s in the Samsung Magician disk benchmark. It's all about speed