Sorry fellow AMD guys but!

[pete910]

The 4770K supports some of the common virtualisation features IIRC but the 4820K has a more complete set of those features - I only really use the more basic ones (the odd debian VM for testing stuff) so not sure how big a deal that is.

Just noticed you have the I7 4820, what's the X79-UD3 board you have like Rroff ?

Found a B-grade up for £90 !

 

[gpuerrilla]

What's your current motherboard? If it's not a decent AM3+ one capable of taking an FX8320 (While I absolutely don't recommend an R9 290X and an FX83 together at 1080p, think it's a very bad combination for the price, but at 1440P, while I'm hesitant to recommend it, I wouldn't be completely against it as I usually am) then go for the i7 if you want.

This is interesting. So an FX at 1440P isn't bad? Genuinely intrigued if I upgrade my monitor soon.

 

[cwgk91]

Im not finding my FX and 290 bad at 1080p, gets playable frame rates in everything Ive played, including terribly threaded games (WoT) - still get the occasional drop, but usually does well. Its brilliant in bf4, no problems at all.

Definitely think its worth the price.

 

[gpuerrilla]

At the moment I am now on a 1680x1050 which sucks but if a 1440p is going to perform better on the FX than a 1080p im all ears.

 

[Avenged7Fold]

At the moment I am now on a 1680x1050 which sucks but if a 1440p is going to perform better on the FX than a 1080p im all ears.

If that's your resolution, its a no brainer!

Your spec can get decent frame rates at 1440p with considering the nice fx and your card. Obviously games come into it but tbh, any game which makes so little use of the extra cores will still be playable.

 

[Boomstick777]

If the OP isn't bothered about overclocking a Xeon 1230v3 gives 4770K performance at i5 price. No IGPU, runs a bit cooler than 4770K as well.

1230v3 is £185. I would go for that personally, especially if gaming @ 1440P. Like Mankini says the higher res you go the more GPU dependent games are.

Xeon 1230v3 + 290X would be a very nice setup.

 

[Rroff]

Just noticed you have the I7 4820, what's the X79-UD3 board you have like Rroff ?

Found a B-grade up for £90 !

Wasn't the happiest with it at first - took til the f18 bios til all the little issues with it were ironed out and its not quite as good as gigabytes other/older ud3 boards imo, on the plus side the onboard audio is fairly decent if you don't use a dedicated soundcard and the layout is better than some.

Make sure you get the 1.1 revision, the 1.0 power circuitry isn't really up to higher end CPUs.

 

[pete910]

On a 890fxa-ud5 at the mo, so a FX chip is out, Not a clue what to do now.

Might just get A monitor first now though, Asus PB278Q am going for.

On 1680x1050 res same as you Th0nt so will notice a big difference I think. Probably akin to like i did going to SSD from H HDD

Never considered a Xeon tbh, supports VM's too, mmm more food for thought

 

[pete910]

Wasn't the happiest with it at first - took til the f18 bios til all the little issues with it were ironed out and its not quite as good as gigabytes other/older ud3 boards imo, on the plus side the onboard audio is fairly decent if you don't use a dedicated soundcard and the layout is better than some.

Make sure you get the 1.1 revision, the 1.0 power circuitry isn't really up to higher end CPUs.

They seem to do that quite often, takes them a few bios updates to get things sorted from what I've read, never had that myself though but been on the AMD side of there range.

 

[almighty15]

Get the i5 to begin with as then you still have an upgrade path in the future as you can drop in an i7 later on.

1440p will move some of the strain over to the GPU but if you CPU is giving you low FPS at 1080p then moving to 1440p won't make that higher as minimum FPS does is linear and does not scale.

With the 990FX and FX series you're just dropping money on a dead, slower platform with no upgrade options compared to Intel's 1150.

 

[gpuerrilla]

If that's your resolution, its a no brainer!

Your spec can get decent frame rates at 1440p with considering the nice fx and your card. Obviously games come into it but tbh, any game which makes so little use of the extra cores will still be playable.

Well that's changed my radar then as I was going to go for a half decent 1080p, now a 1440p on offer is what I will look out for!

Might just get A monitor first now though, Asus PB278Q am going for.

On 1680x1050 res same as you Th0nt so will notice a big difference I think. Probably akin to like i did going to SSD from H HDD

Yeah with a 290/290x it probably looks awesome pete.

 

[Martini1991]

On a 890fxa-ud5 at the mo, so a FX chip is out, Not a clue what to do now.

Might just get A monitor first now though, Asus PB278Q am going for.

On 1680x1050 res same as you Th0nt so will notice a big difference I think. Probably akin to like i did going to SSD from H HDD

Never considered a Xeon tbh, supports VM's too, mmm more food for thought

I'd probably just jump into the 4820 if I was you, since you play planetside, I'd probably do that before the monitor upgrade, as if you find Planetside struggling now, 1440P won't change that on the AMD side.

 

[gpuerrilla]

That's strange considering PS2 got optimised around christmas time. It was certainly not taxing my setup and the settings were cranked up loads after the patch. My gaming buddy has a hex core AMD with a GTX660 and he was playing it reporting smooth gameplay.

 

[joeyjojo]

That's worrying, 4770 dosn't support VM , mmm may have to have a rethink. I do rum Vbox quite often.

I run *nix most of the time but use Vbox for package compiling and what not. Just game on windows.#

No no no. Any CPU from the last 5 years can run virtual machines as it's all done in software.

The Intel virtualisation extensions (vt-x, vt-d, and vpro) are only for exotic features like hardware pass through and dedicated devices to the VM (e.g. dedicating a graphics card for optimal graphics performance). In short, you probably don't need them, or have the hardware to support these features through the whole chain.

 

[Panos]

If you are between 4820K and 4770K it all depends your personal preference at the end they are both the same as power goes.


However, Ivy-E has an upgrade path to 6 core CPUs if you need that power, overclocks well (the 4820K), full VM functionality, doesn't have onboard GPU, runs MUCH MUCH cooler, has 40 PCI-e lanes, quad channel RAM controller and as platform isn't that much expensive than 4770K.


As for motherboard, the MSI X79 GD45 Plus, with latest BIOS, is a monster of motherboard both as overclocking and features go.

Because is the cheapest X79 board, doesn't mean is like those cheap £50 Z87s, but in par with the ones of the same price range

Running the 4820K at 5Ghz three months now (see sig), and compared to the 5Ghz FX8350 I had when upgraded, the difference is HUGE.

I doubt if I will need a CPU upgrade for years to come. Especially since new APIs need less CPU power than before.

 

[gpuerrilla]

Glad you had a good shift there Panos. Don't forget us mere FX mortals though!

 

[pete910]

That's strange considering PS2 got optimised around christmas time. It was certainly not taxing my setup and the settings were cranked up loads after the patch. My gaming buddy has a hex core AMD with a GTX660 and he was playing it reporting smooth gameplay.

I agree,It was running well, However.

Just tried tonight on medium settings and it's struggling to pull 25fps in a fight

It was doing 55+ but as I said the last major + a few minor patches have seemed to have trashed it(Have checked diff GC drivers). BF4 on the other hand is flying on mine at the mo, with mantle admittedly.

Anyway, ordered A asus monitor 27" 1440p Should be here tomorrow.(Any one else feel like a child when they've ordered something shiny/New and want it like.... NOW )

I'll make my mind up over the weekend about MB/CPU.

I very nearly pulled the triger on a asus M6 formula and the 4770k when ordering the monitor I think its the fact I can add it to my existing loop and its red/black the AMD part of me is showing it's *cough* colours *cough* , so to speak.

 

[pete910]

As for motherboard, the MSI X79 GD45 Plus, with latest BIOS, is a monster of motherboard both as overclocking and features go.

Because is the cheapest X79 board, doesn't mean is like those cheap £50 Z87s, but in par with the ones of the same price range

Running the 4820K at 5Ghz three months now (see sig), and compared to the 5Ghz FX8350 I had when upgraded, the difference is HUGE.

I doubt if I will need a CPU upgrade for years to come. Especially since new APIs need less CPU power than before.

That sounds good too be honest, Not had the best experience with MSI in the past. Was 10+ years ago I admit. Might be worth giving them another shot. mmmm

 

[Panos]

I had 2 MSI motherboards, both with my only Intel CPUs ever bought.

The first P7N SLI Platinum, because those days you had tough luck if you wanted Intel chipset & SLI support.
That clocked my Q6600 at 4Ghz without sweat and had it for 3 1/2 years without issue, then gave it to my ex wife, which still has it running up to this day with a Corsair H50 as far as I know (6th year now in total).
Consider the Q6600 was a 2.4Ghz CPU, that was almost 67% overclock.

And now this one which I bought because it was the cheapest, while the reviews were good, which clocked the 4820K at 5Ghz. I believe if had full watercooling solution, not a H100i, can push the CPU more.
Bear in mind, that until they patch the BIOS in December, for almost a month the onboard soundcard wasn't working on windows 8.1 (did work on 8 and 7 though). Not that bothered me, because I have headphones however it was a little annoying thing. But is working with the latest bios.

My FX83 motherboard, was a Gigabyte 990FXA UD3 one, which worked fine with the T1090, but not with the FX even if had the latest BIOS.

 

[pete910]

Well the good news is my monitor turned up this morning (unbelievable difference btw)

And your right not a huge difference in FPS. BF4 looks awesome. Quite impressed.

Down side is still not decided on MB/cpu though.

No no no. Any CPU from the last 5 years can run virtual machines as it's all done in software.

The Intel virtualisation extensions (vt-x, vt-d, and vpro) are only for exotic features like hardware pass through and dedicated devices to the VM (e.g. dedicating a graphics card for optimal graphics performance). In short, you probably don't need them, or have the hardware to support these features through the whole chain.

Dont use/need GC access , USB is handy though. So the 4770 would be fine for Vbox then(basic usage that is)?