• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Is a i7-4770k worth the extra cost over a i5-4670k for gaming

1kiwi said:
Agree with above. The consoles have moved to 8 core platforms so I would imagine that the next gen games over the coming years will be designed to full utilise multi-core CPUs. It's 2013, do you really want to a dual core? That's all an i5 is at the end of the day - a CPU with 2 real cores with 4 available threads.
Click to expand...

BS totally wrong.
 
teppic said:
It's not an assumption, it's what developers say. Next gen engines are multi-threaded, there's no doubt about that.

You certainly can get better results on a single monitor with a single card with a 4770K over a 4670K if the game is well threaded.
Click to expand...

this is the kind of bs daily on here.

games will mainly be developed priority wise for consoles. the next gen . why do you think mantle and the like are trying to get in?

to lower cpu resources (consoles cpu is alrady slower than a i5 by some way) and make gpus work. consoles will last atleast 5 years min.

so look at it logically by the time you actually need more cores your i5 or even the same platform i7 will be gone and upgraded as the games are mainly catered for consoles ! so many flout figures you know what a console cpu can do so a i5 is fine for many years yet ! mantle and other software which is bound to come out now the next gen consoles are here will do the same thing.

there are litterally only a very very small handful literally none ! that show any benefit in either a i5-7 in difference.

only difference is in multiple gpu set ups which with mantle and other software coming soon even that may close the gap or make it no different in the only thing with makes it worth having a i7 for in gaming.

ive shown numerous benchmarks in bf4 for eg and as usual people still say i7 vastly performs better when it clearly doesnt.

so my input is if you do editing a lot go i7 .
if you play wow a lot go with i7
multiple gpu set up now or possible future i7

all rest save money get a better gpu and a i5. no current card bottlenecks a i5 so your fine for even cards like a titan or 780 ti.
 
BF4 is a buggy game that is possibly not utilizing the GPU's properly and compensating it with the CPU. Why else would you get double-digit FPS improvements with driver updates?

It's a bad example in my opinion.

Or do you think they actually coded it to be 12-threaded as it's running an AMD sponsored engine?
 
All Frostbite 3 games will use 8+ threads. There is no doubt whatsoever that all the new engines are multi-threaded.

Once you start using more than 4 threads the 4770K pulls ahead, anything from 10-20%. Older games don't have high multi-threaded demands and so there's no difference in those.
 
teppic said:
All Frostbite 3 games will use 8+ threads. There is no doubt whatsoever that all the new engines are multi-threaded.

Once you start using more than 4 threads the 4770K pulls ahead, anything from 10-20%. Older games don't have high multi-threaded demands and so there's no difference in those.
Click to expand...

Anvil Next is Ubisofts and I know AC3 was a bit of a mess CPU wise, it's somewhat threaded, but that's doesn't mean it's going to be great.

AC4's just launched, and it's on the same engine, but that's their current "new" engine.

To the OP, I'd only consider an i7 if I had plans for multi GPU, that said, it's likely I'm upgrading my i5 to a 4670K within this month (And it'll only cost me a cool 50 quid)
 
Last edited:
Most games won't perform any differently between an i5 and an i7, whether it's one GPU or two makes no difference inherently. If a game uses multiple threads and is demanding on top, then it makes a difference.

Sandy however will give a bandwidth bottleneck with two GPUs, so a 2500K to 3770K will make a difference.
 
It's not huge, but it's there:

http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6934/54511.png

As for AnvilNext, I know that Ubisoft has said that it will use as many cores as it needs - but we'll have to wait for benchmarks.

edit:

DSOGaming: One of the biggest issues we’ve encountered in AC3 was its inability to take advantage of more than three CPU cores. That problem was also present in Splinter Cell: Conviction. However, Blacklist pleasantly surprised us with its CPU multi-core support (game runs better than its predecessor and there were performance differences between tri-cores and quad-cores). Will Assassin’s Creed IV be better optimized on the PC than AC3?

LP: There was a major optimisation pass that was done on the engine, not just for the PC, but for every platform. The scheduler used for the rendering was rewritten from the ground up. In AC4, the engine will use all the cores it needs until it sees that using more cores brings no more gain. So, yes we should expect better performance on PC than AC3, especially on DX11 hardware.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
MooMoo444 said:
I've been shots of BF4 using all 12 cores/threads on a hexcore i7.

i5's are becoming handicapped. Go for i7.
Click to expand...

hahahahaha hyperbole much !

go check bf4 benchmarks available with single cards hen come back with every review showing vast improvement. theres like one review or two out of the lot :p most show the i5 level or actually ahead in some reviews.

also why do you think matle is being done its to make the gpu work more so people are getting this backwards. a console cpu however you look at it now or in 3 years time will still be slower than a i5.

by the time you actually need maybe a i7 minimum you will of upgraded to a better cpu anyway. if i5s are becoming handicapped how come they can run the fastest 780 tis with no bottleneck ? :D such bs as usual.

only benchmarks shown again with dualcards :p show proper benchmarks singlw cards with i5vi7 in games.
 
+1 As above, but would add that even an Ivy i5 at 4.7Ghz doesn't bottle neck 2x7950's in BF4 Max settings.

But most i5's only hit 4.5Ghz so it wouldn't be a good choice if sli/crossfire is your goal. (Unless Mantle changes the cpu overhang).
 
Giggz said:
If you've got the money spare I would, future proofing yourself better.
Click to expand...

future proof from what? its such a silly term.

as said games are going to be 90 percent made for the new consoles which have a less powerful cpu than a i5 now it isnt going to increase.

by the time you need a newer cpu youll be upgrading anyway to a newer platform.

wait for mantle lets see how that fairs then decided ;).
 
just get an i7 if you have the cash, then you have nothing to worry about. its better then getting an i5 now then in a years time thinking damn i should have bought an i7. ethier cpu at this moment in time is fine!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom