Lupaz Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 There seems to be a big difference in price between the i7 4930k and the i7 4820k. The first one is $550 and the second one $330. I'm assuming it's the number of cores (6 vs 4). Does anyone know if it would be a mistake to get the 4820k? Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
numerobis Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 yes, 50% more cores for 66% more money If you don't plan to update to a 4930K in the future you could go with a 4770K Haswell quadcore. Slightly faster, less power consumption, Integrated Graphics (maybe for a render node) and cheaper mainboards (and only dual channel needed - maybe a point, if you don't need more more than 16GB RAM) http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/63119-intel-i7-4930k-i7-4820k-ivy-bridge-e-review-3.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lupaz Posted March 26, 2014 Author Share Posted March 26, 2014 Thanks numerobis. If you don't plan to update to a 4930K in the future You are saying this because the socket's different, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
numerobis Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 (edited) yes 4820K/4930K = socket 2011 4770K = socket 1150 Edited March 26, 2014 by numerobis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lupaz Posted March 26, 2014 Author Share Posted March 26, 2014 ok got it. I'll go with the 4930k, which seems to be a good buy. Thanks a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dimitris Tolios Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 The 4820K forces you in a more expensive platform (s2011 boards are notably more expensive than s1150), for slightly inferior performance core-per-core/clock per clock vs. a 4770K. Reason is, the 4820K - just like the 4930K - are still based on intel's 3rd gen Core architecture, Ivy Bridge, while the 4770K is based on the more refined "Haswell", 4th gen architecture. The 4820K is a 3770K with more cache, quad channel ram and more PCIe lanes, all of which are nearly irrelevant for real life performance in the CG/CAD/DCC world. The 4820K is far from useless ofc, it is a great chip that you might be able to find dirt-cheap in some occasions. I actually used the predecessor, 3820 as a steppingstone to the 3930K back in the day, as it was available for $225 brand new through Microcenter, along with a $50 instant discount when bundled with a s2011 mobo. I ended up buying a 3820+P9X79-Pro board for a few dollars more what a 3770K + P8Z77-V Pro would be...I later on sold the 3820 used for...$225, when I was able to find a 3930K around 40% off the retail. But starting fresh in the s2011 without special offers, I would say go straight for the 6-core. "All-or-s1150". =) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lupaz Posted March 26, 2014 Author Share Posted March 26, 2014 I wouldn't mind building s1150 instead... I just checked at the Intel website for an s1150 processor with similar performance than the 4930K, just to compare. No luck though. Do you know if there's anything better than the 4770k for s1150 in case I want to upgrade in, say, a year from now? (Is it just me or Intel likes to make things complicated?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dimitris Tolios Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 If you mean a 6-core for s1150, it won't happen. The haswell chips that will replace the 49xx line, will come at the end of this year, featuring probably 8-cores* and DDR4 support** All that will happen with the new, s2011-3 socket, incompatible with either the existing s2011 and ofc s1150 CPUs. I doubt that any Quad in s1150 will come close to 4930K multithread performance. s1150 refresh has already been announced with some validations spotted in the wild, but what intel promised was better overclocking for the unlocked parts and better TIM (haswell s1150 runs pretty hot when overclocked due to having thermal paste between the metal cover you see in the package and the actual CPU die. s2011 CPUs are soldered on their heat-spreader, providing better thermal contact. The new s1150 CPUs will still use TIM paste, but supposingly of better quality/conductivity. *8-cores verified for the Xtreme part, which means $1000 price point for the CPU alone, we don't know if the equivalent $550-600 part will be 6 or 8 cores ** we don't know if it will be DDR4 only, or DDR3 motherboards will still be available...I would be tempted in a DDR3 version to be honest, as I expect DDR4 pricing to be brutal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lupaz Posted March 27, 2014 Author Share Posted March 27, 2014 Right, yes, I meant a 6 core for s1150. 6-core s2011 it is then. I wouldn't look forward to an upgrade that's just a better overclocking! Thanks buddy!! shocking knowledge! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
numerobis Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 I just checked at the Intel website for an s1150 processor with similar performance than the 4930K, just to compare. No luck though. Do you know if there's anything better than the 4770k for s1150 in case I want to upgrade in, say, a year from now? (Is it just me or Intel likes to make things complicated?) The s1150 and s2011 are both dead ends. The next generations of both platforms (consumer and high end) will need a new socket and chipset and the s2011-3 comes with DDR4 RAM. If you can wait a few months you could skip Ivy-E and take the Haswell-E for s2011-3 which has been announced to be released in Q3 and maybe even in June... ( http://www.kitguru.net/components/cpu/anton-shilov/intel-pulls-in-introduction-of-core-i7-extreme-haswell-e-5000-series-to-q2/ ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lupaz Posted March 27, 2014 Author Share Posted March 27, 2014 Unfortunately I can't wait. Even if I could, prices will probably be prohibitive. You know, for being the latest of the latest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
numerobis Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 (edited) prices are fairly constant for intel processors, so it doesn't matter much if you buy it early or later (if you don't buy it in the first two weeks). The last time i have seen a reasonable price drop for a intel processor at the end of production was the i7 970. Everything else stayed high to the end. The normal Intel price categories for the high end processors are $1000, $600, $400. So IF it really comes true that the 5930K is also a n 8-core CPU it will definitely be the better buy compared to the 4930K. If not... then it won't be worth upgrading from a 4930K to a 5930K with new RAM and mainboard for maybe 5-7% more speed... Then the only option would be the $1000 5960X - like it was 4 years ago with the 980X as first desktop 6-core. And i fear that this is the way they will go... but we'll see. But even $1000 is great for an unlocked 8-core compared to current 8-core Xeons. I will definitely buy it when it gets released. But yes, if you need it now there is not much to think about it... and even if it gets released in July, it is not clear how long it takes for DDR4 to be available at reasonable quantities and prices. Edited March 27, 2014 by numerobis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyderSK Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 Haswell-E for s2011-3 which has been announced to be released in Q3 and maybe even in June... ( http://www.kitguru.net/components/cpu/anton-shilov/intel-pulls-in-introduction-of-core-i7-extreme-haswell-e-5000-series-to-q2/ ) Now that would be an awesome birthday present but I guess it sounds too good to be true that early :- ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dimitris Tolios Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 Now that would be an awesome birthday present but I guess it sounds too good to be true that early :- ) Presents in the range of $2,000, have to be awesome...guess-timating $1000 CPU / $600ish 32GB DDR4 / $400ish Mobo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyderSK Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 I don't care, it will be the first time I will pair it with custom water loop, you inspired me. A toy I need. Xeons are cool but they're just for work. What do you personally expect of the DDR4 ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dimitris Tolios Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 I don't care, it will be the first time I will pair it with custom water loop, you inspired me. A toy I need. Xeons are cool but they're just for work. What do you personally expect of the DDR4 ? My expectations from DDR4 are very low at the moment and for the short-term/couple of years. You can hardly see any performance difference in real life going from DDR3 1600 to DDR3 2400 - a 50% theoretical bandwidth increase. APUs / IGPs like it, but that's it. Even high-end boutique systems like BOXX that have nothing to lose by pairing their systems with higher RAM speeds (only to win impressions should those help them do better in reviews), and certainly clients with enough $$ to support such an "upgrade", don't even bother with more than DDR3 1600 even in their "extreme" configurations with factory clocked i7s. It might improve a few frames per second in BF4 or something trivial like that, in an already beasty i7 system, and that's unchanged since Sandybridge, and all the way through Haswell. Since the new extreme i7s will be based on haswell, I don't see how going to DDR4 with slightly higher speeds (and slightly worse latencies) would help that much. RAM is not the bottleneck for quite some time now. I have no idea on the DDR4 speeds in the initial launch months, but I think the best demonstrated so far are 2400 up to 3200, but it is rumored that they might start lower. Remember, the official DDR3 rate for Haswell is "just" 1866, so getting 2133 DDR4 support is technically an upgrade for the industry. Data centers will probably like the considerably lower wattage, as they deal with thousands over thousands of dimms crammed in tiny spaces, and they pay millions $ a year just for conditioning temps in their facilities. Shaving 3-4Watts from a desktop workstation, even a mid-range render farm is a joke tho. They do promise higher densities per dimm, so for sure we will see more than 8GB/dimm non-ECC RAM getting cheaper after a few years that supply will be normalized, and by then mainstream adoption will push both speeds (making higher latencies irrelevant) and perhaps either better RAM utilization in future CPUs, HSA support or both that will increase the utility in getting higher speed RAM the 1st place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyderSK Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 Ah well, so not much... I am also at 1600 for all my computers. The least thing I would have invested. DDR4 just sounds cool...3 has been here for so long and I still remember the revolution from SDRAM 133 back in day. Well, anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now