yes, an upgrade for a mere 4 fps faster or the same speed is definitely a waste of money, Broadwell is the wisest choice because you dont need a new MOBO/RAM.
Last edited:
-
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.
Poll: POLL: HASWELL-E, DDR4 & X99, WHO's IS UPGRADING TO IT?
- Thread starter Gibbo
- Start date
yes, an upgrade for a mere 4 fps faster or the same speed is definitely a waste of money, Broadwell is the wisest choice because you dont need a new MOBO/RAM.
I was thinking of getting Haswell-E but those Ram prices really makes it unattractive at the moment, and then already combined with the low performance increase vs Z97 + 4790K and some times negative performance (compared to that combo in even games and some video rendering scenarios).
Oh no I want something to increase my gaming performance now, and such a setup won't do that, so instead I'm looking where the "horse power" is to get - yup I'm looking at you GTX 980
Oh no I want something to increase my gaming performance now, and such a setup won't do that, so instead I'm looking where the "horse power" is to get - yup I'm looking at you GTX 980
This right here.
Although six cores does sound attractive, lack of games which take advantage of them coupled with high prices for DDR4 means I'll sit out this round.
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2012
- Posts
- 12,407
- Location
- UK.
Don't worry I'm sure there will be many 4 core 'non soldered' with IGPU, and 5% CPU performance increases on the mainstream for at least another one or two generations
I can't wait to get off of Z97 and onto a proper manly setup
X99 here I come yeah boi !
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 5,162
- Location
- South Wales
I saw the review on wccftech, using longer graph bars to make the difference look huge when it's not 
other than that it seems decent. Not for me though as it barely makes a difference in games.. Will just wait for my Xeon cpu to arrive, upgrade gpu when new ones come out and then wait to see what Skylake brings.
other than that it seems decent. Not for me though as it barely makes a difference in games.. Will just wait for my Xeon cpu to arrive, upgrade gpu when new ones come out and then wait to see what Skylake brings.Don't worry I'm sure there will be many 4 core 'non soldered' with IGPU, and 5% CPU performance increases on the mainstream for at least another one or two generations
I can't wait to get off of Z97 and onto a proper manly setup
i doubt it, because if you're gaming only you'll be dissapointed, read the reviews carefully, stop believing all the rubbish hype !
i was thinking of buying another 7990, except quadfire AMD support isn't supposed to be that good.
all that's needed is the OC increased to 4.7.... or a Broadwell and X99 wont be worth considering at all, making the next mobo upgrade in 2016
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2012
- Posts
- 12,407
- Location
- UK.
Rubbish hype, I'm not sure what CPU you're referring to?
The 5820K is basically a 4960X with less PCI lanes but improved IPC and DDR4 controller, £285 VS £750. I mean when you compare that to a 4790K £260 it's obvious which is the better value. Whether you're gaming or using your PC for other applications the 5820K will be a monster !! Even at it's lower stock CPU speed it's able to trade blows with and in many cases surpass the £750 4960X, this is very impressive to most people for a chip that costs less than £300. Power consumption is great on these as well..
I bought my 4790K at launch and it cost me only £10 less than the 5820K I ordered today, the 5820K is so much better that I find it hard to believe anyone would try and fault it, but hey whatever man.
Each to their own I always say, but I'm using a 4790K that does 4.9Ghz, I would take X99 + 5820K over that anyday... And I will soon
Last edited:
Rubbish hype, I'm not sure what CPU you're referring to?
Apologies if I've missed the point (I haven't read the whole thread) but Mal said "if you're gaming only you'll be disappointed".
Those last two graphs you posted seem to back up what he said.
I still have a very hard time seeing a 5820K as an "upgrade" to 3820/4820K... and if going from a 3930K/4930K or higher to a 5820K I can't stop feeling it's a downgrade - simply because of the gimped PCI-e lanes.
Might be that 5820K makes 6 cores from Intel mainstream now, but to put it in an enthusiast platform where multi gpu system more often than not are build into, seems to me to be a weird step. Who'd want to run 3x GTX 980's at 8x8x8 ?
Might be that 5820K makes 6 cores from Intel mainstream now, but to put it in an enthusiast platform where multi gpu system more often than not are build into, seems to me to be a weird step. Who'd want to run 3x GTX 980's at 8x8x8 ?
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2008
- Posts
- 6,062
Sounds like a lot of people trying to tell themselves why they don't have to buy because newer design and more expensive does not equal better 
.
It dooeesssss!!!
.It dooeesssss!!!
Mate, x99 and haswell-E are enthusiast level. They are the TOP tier of computing intel has to offer. Period. There is no entry level on the whole platform, it's the best but you have to pay for it.
Google is your friend
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 11,270
Sounds like a lot of people trying to tell themselves why they don't have to buy because newer design and more expensive does not equal better
It dooeesssss!!!
its how much better though isn't it ? and in some cases its slower! lol, its not worth hundreds if your only getting a few % increase
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2012
- Posts
- 12,407
- Location
- UK.
Yeah I still don't get it. Even in gaming the stock clocked 5820K @ 3.6Ghz keeps up with the 4790K @ 4.4Ghz. I'm really not seeing much not to like with the 5820K, A £285 chip that bests the 4960X (£750), I really don't see how anyone can be disappointed, but then there are always people that are just very hard to please
Yeah I still don't get it. Even in gaming the stock clocked 5820K @ 3.6Ghz keeps up with the 4790K @ 4.4Ghz. I'm really not seeing much not to like with the 5820K, A £285 chip that bests the 4960X (£750), I really don't see how anyone can be disappointed, but then there are always people that are just very hard to please
I'm waiting to see an overclocked 5820 compared to a [email protected], until then I won't consider changing. Looks like X99 has similar heat issues so that won't dissapoint me
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2012
- Posts
- 12,407
- Location
- UK.
I'm waiting to see an overclocked 5820 compared to a [email protected], until then I won't consider changing. Looks like X99 has similar heat issues so that won't dissapoint me
Yeah we should get some in depth 5820K reviews over the next few weeks, I imagine Intel are quite happy for the attention to be falling on the higher priced models for now. The 5820K is the stand out gem here for sure.
At stock (3.6Ghz) it trades blows with and more often than not beats the 4960X (4.0Ghz), so overclocked things are only going to be better.
If you're thinking about 5820K VS 4790K, I looked at it like this, I'm getting an 50% more cores, nearly twice the cache, a CPU that doesn't require delidding, plus more. All for an extra £10 over the 4790K. 5820K really does make a lot of sense..
Gaming benches tend to be done on GPU bound single player titles. In this instance any CPU will pretty much do.
The real gains come from CPU intensive games such as BF4 64p multiplayer. It loves more cores but because you can't generate a consistent 5min time demo you won't even seem something like this in a review.
5820K for anything on a modern multiplayer engine such as Frostbite 3.
The real gains come from CPU intensive games such as BF4 64p multiplayer. It loves more cores but because you can't generate a consistent 5min time demo you won't even seem something like this in a review.
5820K for anything on a modern multiplayer engine such as Frostbite 3.
When I did the man maths the system (5820K) I priced up was around £850.00. I could get £400 for my 4790l/mb & ram so it will cost me a little more
Associate
- Joined
- 1 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 2,149
- Location
- Dundee, Scotland
Yeah I still don't get it. Even in gaming the stock clocked 5820K @ 3.6Ghz keeps up with the 4790K @ 4.4Ghz. I'm really not seeing much not to like with the 5820K, A £285 chip that bests the 4960X (£750), I really don't see how anyone can be disappointed, but then there are always people that are just very hard to please
how much better is it then my 4930k at 4.5ghz? i only see my chip in one or two slides most?