Talk me into X79

[moonbogg]

I went from 2600k to 3930k and experienced only a much lighter wallet. The extra PCI lanes will increase your MAX fps quite a bit, but won't help the mins at all. When I say max FPS I mean I used to max out at around 120fps on BF3 when, and now I max out at around 150. Does this matter? Nope. Mins are the same as with the 2600k as far as I can really tell. It might have improved about 5% or a bit more, but nothing worth going over the numbers over again.
Haswell is your only upgrade option.

 

[Maximilian]

Just picked up a 2nd 680 and a big ol' 2560x1440 display and...well, this 2600K seems a little wimpy.

I'm thinking it's time to go X79 with a nice 3930K, but I worry that in 6 months' time, my chip will be obsolete.

Can someone help talk me into it? Thanks

Maybe... I talked myself into X79 recently. I dont need it but ive just wanted a hexacore since they came out and a friend is selling one. Heres some reasons why its a good idea:

- You know you want one

- It has six cores

- People waste thousands on cars etc whats a few hundred on computer parts

- Its physically bigger so if it could it would win in a fight against your current smaller chip

- It has six cores

- You get a new toy to play with

- Doing the smart thing and upgrading when you need to is boring

- six cores!

:awe:

 

[skipsneeky2]

Moon does have a good point,i remember his post right after the upgrade and how he saw basically no difference in that game and its one of the more tasking games atm as far as the processor goes.

One can assume perhaps the Op might do much more then just game if X79 is considered.

A Q6600 went from a overpriced chip in 2007 that no one gamed on to a must have by the year 2010 and now its the single most popular chip for those with dual cores who wanna cling to their core 2 setups,or the chip that still has some life in it for tons of people.:awe:

Perhaps a 4ghz 3930k will have this same effect in the years to come but for pure gaming it would be a waste,i ran my Q6600 with encoding programs so it came in handy really for that,then it came in handy for games big time.:biggrin:

 

[cytg111]

Moon does have a good point,i remember his post right after the upgrade and how he saw basically no difference in that game and its one of the more tasking games atm as far as the processor goes.

One can assume perhaps the Op might do much more then just game if X79 is considered.

A Q6600 went from a overpriced chip in 2007 that no one gamed on to a must have by the year 2010 and now its the single most popular chip for those with dual cores who wanna cling to their core 2 setups,or the chip that still has some life in it for tons of people.:awe:

Perhaps a 4ghz 3930k will have this same effect in the years to come but for pure gaming it would be a waste,i ran my Q6600 with encoding programs so it came in handy really for that,then it came in handy for games big time.:biggrin:

That, and compared to haswell's ipc gain + clock gain + overclockable gain over -E platform + TX memory gain on concurrency. Is it enough to warrent a Haswell >= SB-E ? for 99% of workloads? The only reason i am holding that thought back is because Intel is still keeping IVY-E on the roadmaps, Intel would only do that if it was competetive... so on some level haswell will have to dissapoint. Right?

 

[Arkaign]

It's a cool setup, but if you're not running pro apps, super heavy encoding, then more than 4 physical cores is a waste of money.

For gamers, it's a pure waste of money.

It's not that it's bad in any way whatsoever, but it's a poor allocation of resources for what you're trying to do if you're looking for better gaming performance. Having $ ready for 8xxx/7xx series cards, and going to the best current ones in CF/SLI, along with watercooling, overvolting, and overclocking is the best way to get gains in gaming FPS for now. Anything 2600k/2700k/3570k/3770k is basically gold for gaming.

Exception is 3 or more GPUs, and that is generally more trouble than it's worth right now imho.

 

[Gillbot]

Maybe... I talked myself into X79 recently. I dont need it but ive just wanted a hexacore since they came out and a friend is selling one. Heres some reasons why its a good idea:

- You know you want one

- It has six cores

- People waste thousands on cars etc whats a few hundred on computer parts

- Its physically bigger so if it could it would win in a fight against your current smaller chip

- It has six cores

- You get a new toy to play with

- Doing the smart thing and upgrading when you need to is boring

- six cores!

:awe:

I agree with this 100%.

I went from a 980x to a 3930k and I saw a nice bump, but most of my bump was for work related processing which needed the ram (64gb over 48gb) more than anything. In games thus far, i've seen zero difference.

However, if you want it and can afford it, get it!

 

[NTMBK]

You could always go for 8 cores and get a Piledriver. :awe: (Okay, 8-ish,)

 

[BrightCandle]

I have it and can't recommend anyone get it unless they know they have a use for the 6 cores. Ivy bridge is just so much cheaper and faster for games (IPC advantage and clock speed advantage).

 

[lehtv]

There's no clock speed advantage with Ivy Bridge, in fact the 3930K should overclock more easily

 

[BrightCandle]

There's no clock speed advantage with Ivy Bridge, in fact the 3930K should overclock more easily

3930k's top out around 4.4-4.5 GHz normally. A few go higher but in general this is what you will get around 1.35V. At that they pump through a lot current as well and I am seeing signs ofdegredation after a year.

Ivy Bridge on the other hand very often goes to 4.5 and beyond. So there is a small but notable clock speed advantage, and a sizeable IPC advantage. Lots of people mistake 1155 over clocking with 2011 and think the 3930k goes up as high as a 2600k, but on average they really don't.

 

[Grooveriding]

Think 4.4-4.5 is pretty conservative. I've had two different 3930Ks and both did 4.8 on air with less than 1.4V. My current one is slightly better than the last one I had.

I would do it OP. It's not so much breaking down the fine points of is it worth it as much as it is just wanting to play with it It's still the best platform out there. Not that you'll notice the difference in most cases, but it is also better in most recently released games that take advantage of all the cores: BF3, MP3, FC3, Crysis 3 etc..

 

[lehtv]

It's still the best platform out there.

Depends on the intended use. In general, 1155 is a better platform. SSD caching, integrated graphics for backup, support for the fastest gaming CPUs (3570k and 3770k), lower power consumption, no need for quad channel RAM for optimal performance, etc.

 

[Arachnotronic]

I agree with this 100%.

I went from a 980x to a 3930k and I saw a nice bump, but most of my bump was for work related processing which needed the ram (64gb over 48gb) more than anything. In games thus far, i've seen zero difference.

However, if you want it and can afford it, get it!

I actually had a 980X that I do miss. For heavy CPU tasks, it was very clearly superior to my 2600K today. At the time, I was pretty broke, so I sold the CPU when my motherboard died to fund the 2600k + mobo.

I can now afford a 3930K + motherboard. I think I'm going to go for it.

 

[ShintaiDK]

I can now afford a 3930K + motherboard. I think I'm going to go for it.

I think you regret it badly in a few months....

 

[Grooveriding]

I actually had a 980X that I do miss. For heavy CPU tasks, it was very clearly superior to my 2600K today. At the time, I was pretty broke, so I sold the CPU when my motherboard died to fund the 2600k + mobo.

I can now afford a 3930K + motherboard. I think I'm going to go for it.

:thumbsup:

Make sure to get a good motherboard if you are planning on overclocking. I previously had a Gigabyte X79-UD5 that was just atrocious. It took me 1.4v to get 4.5Ghz on it, after switching to my current board it took my 1.3v to get the same frequency. Everything I've gotten above that on the new board would probably of not been possible on the Gigabyte.

Not that you need an R4E or an Asrock x79 Extreme11, but you want a good high quality mobo to overclock these.

 

[AdamK47]

Yes, a good motherboard can make a significant difference in overclocking SB-E. The Asus P9X79 Deluxe could get my 3960X to 4.3GHz with around 1.375V at load. The ASRock Extreme11 gets it to 4.5GHz with just 1.33V at load.

 

[Gillbot]

I actually had a 980X that I do miss. For heavy CPU tasks, it was very clearly superior to my 2600K today. At the time, I was pretty broke, so I sold the CPU when my motherboard died to fund the 2600k + mobo.

I can now afford a 3930K + motherboard. I think I'm going to go for it.

:thumbsup:

I think you regret it badly in a few months....

Replace that with any other part purchase and it could be the same. I grabbed a 3820 and then saw a 3930k for sale not 2 weeks later. Had I skipped the 3930k and waited for yet the NEXT step, i'd never buy anything because there will ALWAYS be something better only a few months away.....

 

[Arachnotronic]

X79 supports Ivy Bridge E, so I'll be able to drop a new chip right on in within 6 months and sell the old one for a good premium.

Heck, I might buy the 3930K used to save $ (no used mobo, though). Off to the FS/FT forums...

 

[BrightCandle]

If you had bought this a year ago it would have made a lot of sense. Even 9 months ago once ivy bridge was out it was competitive in some circumstances. But there genuinely is a new platform coming really soon that will make sb-e and ib-e obsolete, expensive wastes of money for all but a small class of problem. Its bad timing, even getting ib is bad timing now.

 

[skipsneeky2]

I always remember people raving about how awesome the e8400 was due to its 45nm tech and overclockability and how it was a better choice over the 65nm Q6600,today people are simply wanting to scoop up those Q6600s to replace their e8400 chips simply cause in the end the old dog won.

Yeah the 3930k is only on the highend platform,it cost more but damn with ivy-e drop in and the overall longevity,i could see such a system still having some life 8 years from now,if that is a light gamer or emailing tower who knows but your quad core tech is hitting 6 years old.

From the fast single core to the slower dual core debate to the newer dual core versus older quad core debate,in the end more cores+oc simply outwitted their rivals,in the longrun this will be the case with your 3930k and 3960x chips as well.

 

[Bill Brasky]

At least wait a few months for Haswell to be released and make an informed decision. You've been with a 2600k for how long now and you can't wait 3 months? The Haswell IPC will remove the cpu bottleneck much more effectively than a 6 core sandy bridge. Games don't use more than 4 cores man. You need IPC, not cores.

 

[Gillbot]

I'm sticking to LGA2011 for now in the hopes 8 or 10 core parts are coming soon.

 

[BrightCandle]

From the fast single core to the slower dual core debate to the newer dual core versus older quad core debate,in the end more cores+oc simply outwitted their rivals,in the longrun this will be the case with your 3930k and 3960x chips as well.

I strongly agree. I think in the end if you hold onto a computer beyond a few years the extra cores will give it considerably longer useful life. If that is the ops goal than sb-e is likely a better choice, it will probably last another 2 years in useful web browsing capability compared to a standard quad core of today. It likely won't out do a haswell however as by that point all those lovely avx2 instructions will be making haswell the equivalent of 4x 2x 1.25 (avx twice as quick as current, 25% ipc advantage of ocy followed by haswell) = 10 SB cores.

 

[AdamK47]

Depends on the intended use. In general, 1155 is a better platform. SSD caching, integrated graphics for backup, support for the fastest gaming CPUs (3570k and 3770k), lower power consumption, no need for quad channel RAM for optimal performance, etc.

Actually, my ASRock Extreme11 supports Intel Smart Response Technology for SSD caching. I'm not sure how they were able to enable it for X79. The engineers at ASRock created one heck of a motherboard.

 

[skipsneeky2]

I strongly agree. I think in the end if you hold onto a computer beyond a few years the extra cores will give it considerably longer useful life. If that is the ops goal than sb-e is likely a better choice, it will probably last another 2 years in useful web browsing capability compared to a standard quad core of today. It likely won't out do a haswell however as by that point all those lovely avx2 instructions will be making haswell the equivalent of 4x 2x 1.25 (avx twice as quick as current, 25% ipc advantage of ocy followed by haswell) = 10 SB cores.

6 core support+64gb system support and people wanna know why such a platform has such a higher cost,its all about longevity and made to last.


Been inspired by how long people have kept their Q6600 chips,using myself atm a x4 9150e being a first generation phenom@1.8ghz and besides being a dog in modern games,it is more then fine for browsing and multitasking and this chip came out in 2008 and was much slower then the Q6600 which came out a year earlier.

Hell i knew a neighbor who rocked a 1.8ghz 423 pentium 4,2gb of rambus memory and aol dial up back in 2008,happy as a clam in water so there is people who buy a system with the goal of seeking maximum usage.