• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

So what CPU is really all you need for 4k gaming?

S

SaltyNuts

Platinum Member
Probably getting a new computer, sole use is for work (word, excel, etc.) and gaming. Shooting for a 4k gaming machine. I want a CPU that can push the 4k games all they can be pushed, knowing that at 4k resolutions the CPU is not the limiting factor unless it is SLOW.

Can anyone suggest a CPU based on this? I'm willing to pay for the CPU I need, but do not want to pay any excess hahaha.

Many thanks!

P.S.: Overclockability is a plus hahaha.
 
FYI, the CPU needs to maintain a given framerate are exactly the same at 4K as at, say, 1280x720, you just need a much beefier GPU. If you have, for instance, an FX-6300 that can deliver 40fps at 1280x720, it won't suddenly deliver much higher framerates at the higher resolution, you're just going to have to spend disproportionately more on a GPU to maintain the same framerates. So really, the question you should be asking is, "What CPU will deliver my target framerates in modern games?"
 
I will second the recommendation of a 5820k, at least based on today's software. Keep an eye on Ashes of the Singularity when it moves from alpha to beta . . . allegedly, there will be some attempt to make use of iGPUs for compute/GPGPU functions in the presence of a dGPU. Theoretically, that could make something like the 6700k or 5775C faster than a 5820k or even 5960x; however, there is a potential pitfall. In my limited experience with GPGPU, I find it necessary to tie up one x86 core/thread to feed the iGPU. That was using HSA via aparapi-lambda.

Also keep in mind that AotS is just one game. It is not necessarily indicative of the future of the entire PC gaming industry.

So the 5820k is a safe bet.
 
Tough call between 5820k, 5930k, and 6700k.

Suggesting 5930k because of faster clocks (maybe a chance of better binning) and it also has more PCI-E lanes, which could be important in a 4K system with multiple next gen gpus. But it is quite a bit more expensive.

6700k has better ipc and stock clocks, and will use less power, but only has 4 real cores. Again, we come back to the fact it is too bad there is no mainstream hex core on the latest process with the best architecture. If spending the money for a 4K system though, I would definitely go with either an i7 or Haswell E. Either is not that much more expensive than an i5 in the context of a high end system, and games are starting to use more thread/cores these days.
 
frozentundra123456 said:
Tough call between 5820k, 5930k, and 6700k.

Suggesting 5930k because of faster clocks (maybe a chance of better binning) and it also has more PCI-E lanes, which could be important in a 4K system with multiple next gen gpus. But it is quite a bit more expensive.

6700k has better ipc and stock clocks, and will use less power, but only has 4 real cores. Again, we come back to the fact it is too bad there is no mainstream hex core on the latest process with the best architecture. If spending the money for a 4K system though, I would definitely go with either an i7 or Haswell E. Either is not that much more expensive than an i5 in the context of a high end system, and games are starting to use more thread/cores these days.
Click to expand...

While this is true, we rarely see i5's being any slower than i7's if you're only shooting for 60fps. And, I can't see anyone shooting for 4k 120hz with any existing video cards.

I'd probably still go for a high-end CPU for the reasons you've listed, but I figure it's important to point this out.
 
Yuriman said:
While this is true, we rarely see i5's being any slower than i7's if you're only shooting for 60fps. And, I can't see anyone shooting for 4k 120hz with any existing video cards.

I'd probably still go for a high-end CPU for the reasons you've listed, but I figure it's important to point this out.
Click to expand...

I see your point about 60FPS. You are basically saying you will be gpu limited, with which I agree. If you are disputing the bolded part about games using more threads, just look up the cpu usage charts on game.gpu for BLOPS III, GTA V, or Crysis 3 to name a few. With much more powerful (assumedly) gpus coming out in a year or so, I think one wants as much cpu power as possible, as this may shift the load toward the cpu, even at 4K.
 
So now I'm thinking about dropping a 980ti I'm my existing computer. It's an Intel 4790. How much is that a limiting factor at higher resolutions? If it's bad, what if I try and over clock the snot u out of it - likely to make and big enough difference to make up a good bit of the gap?

Thanks!
 
Here's about where your 4790(K?) stands:

76797.png


76796.png


76798.png


76799.png
 
You can definitely spend the money better on a gpu upgrade than going from a 4790 to skylake. Since you mentioned overclocking, I assume the 4790 is actually a 4790K?
 
Thanks guys! Seems my CPU is A-OK for the task. And it is indeed at 4790K. Whew. 🙂

Anybody have a guesstimate as to how much it might overclock? Just so I know a better place to start.

Thanks!
 
SaltyNuts said:
Thanks guys! Seems my CPU is A-OK for the task. And it is indeed at 4790K. Whew. 🙂

Anybody have a guesstimate as to how much it might overclock? Just so I know a better place to start.

Thanks!
Click to expand...

It depends on your ability to cool it. With the stock heatsink I wouldn't overclock at all. With an entry level tower cooler like the Hyper212, I expect you could get 4.4-4.6ghz out of it on all 4 cores. By default, it already turbos up to 4.4 on a single core, and 4.2 on 4 cores. So, you can expect another 200-400mhz realistically, which is 5-10%. The 4790K is already pretty close to the max you can squeeze out of Haswell.
 
SaltyNuts said:
Thanks Yuriman. This the cooler you are talking about?

http://www.amazon.com/Cooler-Master...=UTF8&qid=1447195037&sr=8-1&keywords=Hyper212

Might it be worth it to try the more expensive Hyper 612 (or other cooler) to try and nudge a bit more out of it? I'm not above spending a bit more $$$, but it sounds like it might be a waste as chip is not far from being maxed out, no matter how much you cool it.

Thanks!
Click to expand...

That's the one. A more expensive cooler might net you 1-200mhz, but you're drawing the same conclusion I am. Your CPU is already pretty stout, so I wouldn't worry about squeezing every last mhz out.
 
SaltyNuts said:
Might it be worth it to try the more expensive Hyper 612 (or other cooler) to try and nudge a bit more out of it?
Click to expand...
I agree 100% with Yuriman's answer, when it comes to the extra overclocking. If it's worth it to you for your system to be quieter at the same speed as the Hyper 212, though, is up to you. It for sure will be, assuming you don't already have loud case fans.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top