• 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.

i5 to i7 Impressions

Soldato
Joined
24 Feb 2013
Posts
4,261
Location
East Midlands
Just the other day I made the choice to upgrade my i5 3570k to a i7 3770k as a stop gap until 2017 and probably the main stream release of 6+ core. I personally don't see ddr4 plus the other features worthwhile currently if on Ivybridge or greater and given my PC is used predominantly for gaming. I also never intend to go dual card for the foreseeable future.

There's always lots of posts about this choice on various forums including during the decision on a new build so I thought I'd post my initial impressions, as it's a mixed bag from what I've seen online.

After sale of the i5, the upgrades probably in the region of £100 give or take on my 1155 platform. I did however pay a little more than I could have in buying from a reputable seller and to secure a good batch number (not really important given my mild clock and cooler setup).


Installation couldn't of been easier, BIOS auto detecting new CPU - F1 into setup and no need for the key in windows again.


My 3570k was ran at 4.3 @ 1.24v max under an Alpenfohn Matterhorn. I'm using the same cooler on the 3770k currently also at 4.3 @ 1.2v. This may need tweaking however and it's fair to say the 3570k could have probably been ran at a lower voltage, however the temperatures never bothered me. All other settings are identical. The 3770k does run noticeably hotter given the hyper-threading despite the decrease in voltage. Whilst I may see a 1-2c drop after full cure time, it's still a good 5c-6c over the i5 despite the decrease in voltage. If your cooling isn't sufficient to hold an i5 under 80c in prime or the like, it's certainly worth changing your cooler, which adds to the cost and makes everything less worthwhile compared to a new full/near full build.


In terms of performance, on Windows 10 even with a SSD, it does appear slightly snappier in overall use. Full boot time seems marginally quicker, shut down time is certainly quicker. It's not like going from a HDD to a SSD as you would expect though.


So far, I've benched the following:


Cinebench R15:

3570k @ 4.3 - 599
3770k @ 4.3 - 783

31% gain


3D Mark 11:

3570k @ 4.3 - P12,435
3770k @ 4.3 - P13,541

8% gain

It's worth noting that in the 3d mark 11 physics test, the increase was 24%. The combined test was also noticeably better.


I have also managed to take a look CPU usage in The Division. This was the game that got me wanting to upgrade. My 3570k at 4.3 would regularly see 80%+, sometimes 90%+ and very occasionally see the full 100% usage. This isn't on max settings either, not even close in fact. This kind of use made me reluctant to want to upgrade the gpu. So far on the i7, I've yet to see into 70%+. I would guess the average has dropped in the region of 15-20% on the 3770k at 4.3.


I've yet to test BF4 minimums, TW3 and to see how Doom does (supposedly well multi threaded), however already I would say the upgrade is worthwhile in giving some longevity to older systems. I've gone from contemplating thinking of selling this build to at most wanting a 1070 onto eyeing a 1080, happily moving to 1440p and still not feel like I'm missing out. I'll just have to ignore the fact that some of the tech in the system is as old as when the iPhone 5 was the latest thing :D
 
Last edited:
Your unlikely to see anywhere near a 8% gain let alone 33% in actual 'gaming'.
Cinebench will bias naturally because of the number of threads.

£100 for a 3 series i5 to i7 is more of a side step 'upgrade' to be honest.
Probably better spent going from 780 to a gtx 970 or similar then upgrading your mobo/ram/cpu when intel release better offerings.
 
Your unlikely to see anywhere near a 8% gain let alone 33% in actual 'gaming'.
Cinebench will bias naturally because of the number of threads.

£100 for a 3 series i5 to i7 is more of a side step 'upgrade' to be honest.
Probably better spent going from 780 to a gtx 970 or similar then upgrading your mobo/ram/cpu when intel release better offerings.

I can't think of anything worse than buying a 970 currently with pascal so close.
 
Very interested in your BF4 test. Results I've seen online show no difference between the most basic cpu and the best i7. I.e the game is gpu limited. Would genuinely be interested in your results though.
 
Frostbite engine responds well to more cores apparently.

4.3 is quite a conservative overclock, most will do 4.5 with ease.
 
Glad your happy with your CPU - however I'll never understand people spending money on old tech. If on an extreme budget then of course I understand, but for most Z170 is in reach and has fantastic performance/features. It will actually be worth something when you upgrade also.
 
Glad your happy with your CPU - however I'll never understand people spending money on old tech. If on an extreme budget then of course I understand, but for most Z170 is in reach and has fantastic performance/features. It will actually be worth something when you upgrade also.

Disagree, not a lot of gain buying a skylake cpu, ddr4 and mb vs just buying a better cpu if you already have the board and ram.

performance isn't much better and the new features like M2 + nvme boot and usb3.1 are nice to haves but not essential.

This is from someone with Skylake.
 
Glad your happy with your CPU - however I'll never understand people spending money on old tech. If on an extreme budget then of course I understand, but for most Z170 is in reach and has fantastic performance/features. It will actually be worth something when you upgrade also.

As above. New cpu, board and copy of windows etc and I may as well move to x99. It's a lot extra for not that much gain compared to just £100 for 4 more threads.
 
Last edited:
I can't think of anything worse than buying a 970 currently with pascal so close.

I was trying to suggest that you could sell your current card and spend it on a GPU, whether it was a second hand 980ti or a 1070, opposed to a £100 sidestep CPU upgrade.

It is gaming your interested in, right..? and not an encoding/ rendering machine?
 
Last edited:
I have also managed to take a look CPU usage in The Division. This was the game that got me wanting to upgrade. My 3570k at 4.3 would regularly see 80%+, sometimes 90%+ and very occasionally see the full 100% usage. This isn't on max settings either, not even close in fact. This kind of use made me reluctant to want to upgrade the gpu. So far on the i7, I've yet to see into 70%+. I would guess the average has dropped in the region of 15-20% on the 3770k at 4.3.

But what about frame times?
 
I was trying to suggest that you could sell your current card and spend it on a GPU, whether it was a second hand 980ti or a 1070, opposed to a £100 sidestep CPU upgrade.

It is gaming your interested in, right..? and not an encoding/ rendering machine?

I'll be doing this anyway at pascal 3rd party revision releases. Bad time to buy anything else right now.

But what about frame times?

I can't honestly tell the difference when it comes to this, at least in the division. Perhaps 60hz and vsync plays a part? The areas that previously saw the peaks of 100% usage are improved.
 
Very interested in your BF4 test. Results I've seen online show no difference between the most basic cpu and the best i7. I.e the game is gpu limited. Would genuinely be interested in your results though.

It won't be much of a test, more just general comments. I'm expecting good gains when it comes to the minimums in the destructible environment maps. Outside of this, I expect no difference whatsoever bar a fraction more heat.
 
For BF4 and 1-2 other games you may need to do the disable core parking thing with the i7 (if you aren't already configured for it) to get the best results - otherwise you may encounter some stutter.

The difference I find in BF4 isn't so much in the raw framerate (which isn't hugely different) but if you are playing at above 60Hz/FPS there is a fair difference in smoothness between 4 cores and 4 cores + HT (i.e. more consistent frametimes).
 
Back
Top Bottom