# i7-4790k + (what cooler) = good OC?



## Smigze (Nov 4, 2014)

I need a cooler for 5ghz OC


----------



## adulaamin (Nov 4, 2014)

Build a custom water loop? Is the OC going to be 24/7?


----------



## Smigze (Nov 4, 2014)

It's practically all day long. How does the OC affect its lifespan?


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Nov 4, 2014)

Uh, whats a 4970k? I've heard of a 4790k and a 4960k, but not a 4970k.


----------



## FireFox (Nov 4, 2014)

Smigze said:


> I need a cooler for 5ghz OC


read here:
http://www.pcpowerplay.com.au/review/intel-i74970k,391334


----------



## Smigze (Nov 4, 2014)

my OC dreams have been crushed and it looks like I mixed a bit of gtx 970 into the 4790k


----------



## FireFox (Nov 4, 2014)

Smigze said:


> my OC dreams have been crushed and it looks like I mixed a bit of gtx 970 into the 4790k


Don't take it that way, there are many good Chip in the market that can be Overclock it at 5.0Ghz, and cost less than the 4790k and you can get the same or better performance of it.


----------



## Kursah (Nov 4, 2014)

Smigze said:


> my OC dreams have been crushed and it looks like I mixed a bit of gtx 970 into the 4790k



Make 5.0 a distant goal...work your way towards it. Also remember you will not notice a difference in gaming between stock 4.0/4.4 turbo and OC'd 4.0/5.0 turbo. Why? Because if you have a stock CPU that powerful, everything else in your system needs to catch up.

I am running my 4790k at stock speeds and undervolted. I also had a 4770k that I ran from stock to 4.5Ghz and back again...never noticed a difference honestly. Might save a few seconds on transcoding, might gain a few unnoticeable FPS in games...and squeeze a few extra points from a bench mark. OC-ing is fun, that's why I do it...but with modern CPU's I don't expect a huge performance increase, if any at all from it anymore. Just some food for thought.


----------



## FireFox (Nov 4, 2014)

Sometimes use Google and read it doesn't hurt.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2461705,00.asp

Edit:
Every thought is a world.
Every of us have a different way to think, many of the reviews that I has reading about this Chip  wasnt that great at all, I am not saying no to buy it just read a bit around.


----------



## FireFox (Nov 4, 2014)

Kursah said:


> but with modern CPU's I don't expect a huge performance increase, if any at all from it anymore. Just some food for thought.



That is the big point where i agree with you 
10+


----------



## Frick (Nov 4, 2014)

Kursah said:


> but with modern CPU's I don't expect a huge performance increase, if any at all from it anymore. Just some food for thought.



I really miss the olden days. .(

Also remember every chip is different. Some overclock like mad and uses little power doing so, some require tons of voltage to achieve the same result, if they even can get to it. There's no such thing as a guaranteed overclock. The K means they can be overclocked, but it doesn't say anything about how much and what it takes to get there.


----------



## FireFox (Nov 4, 2014)

Frick said:


> I really miss the olden days. .(
> 
> Also remember every chip is different. Some overclock like mad and uses little power doing so, some require tons of voltage to achieve the same result, if they even can get to it. There's no such thing as a guaranteed overclock. The K means they can be overclocked, but it doesn't say anything about how much and what it takes to get there.



i dont know how far could be pushed the 4770k, but in my own experience older Chips like 2500k-2600k-2700k and 3700k i own one my self can do better overclock , Intel released a few moderns CPU's but no deal when we talk about Overclock it.

what is all about buying new moderns CPU's?
an excuse to upgrade to _Modern CPU sockets.
and what with that?
buy the _latest CPU's that Intel release without ANY BENEFIT and performance for what you paid.


----------



## Champ (Nov 4, 2014)

Kursah said:


> I am running my 4790k at stock speeds and undervolted. I also had a 4770k that I ran from stock to 4.5Ghz and back again...never noticed a difference honestly. Might save a few seconds on transcoding, might gain a few unnoticeable FPS in games...and squeeze a few extra points from a bench mark. OC-ing is fun, that's why I do it...but with modern CPU's I don't expect a huge performance increase, if any at all from it anymore. Just some food for thought.



This is why I will probably keep my rig stock. I think hyperthreading elimates the need for OCing


----------



## Kursah (Nov 4, 2014)

Champ said:


> This is why I will probably keep my rig stock. I think hyperthreading elimates the need for OCing



Welllll... yes and no. Depends on the title, which right now are very few that utilize 2 or even 3-4 cores (physical or HT logical). It's more dependent upon processing efficiencies and current base speeds being more than sufficient for modern gaming and media purposes. HT really only comes into play if you're a power user that does more than just gaming, at the same time, with several other tasks running at once...or have the rare game that supports 4+ cores and actually needs them...which as I just stated...is rare.

HT is useful for power users at this point, say you want to transcode one or two movies, play a new fancy game, browsing the web on another screen, while running a VM for other tasks and don't want to have the slowdown a non-HT CPU would give you.

My point is based on the last couple years worth of tests, where they show stock vs OC'd, and with games, seeing more than even a small handfull of extra frames isn't even noticeable because at that level, you're already experiencing a smooth gaming experience. Say for instance you play at 1080p resolutions and you already have 80FPS at 3.5GHz on a stock 4770k....then at 4.5GHz, you are seeing 85FPS... is it really worth the extra heat, power consumption, cooling required, and possibility for instability? Meh. 

OC-ing is fun, but anymore that's where it ends for me...I like to see what I can achieve 24/7 with the lowest voltage and temps, and keeping it closer to stock power consumption... with Haswell and every other CPU, there is that boundary you cross when OC-ing where power consumption increases A LOT, which means the return on performance investment is really reduced overall. At least that is based off of my experience and research.

Just my thoughts. Now I'm off to work. Have a good afternoon folks!


----------



## FireFox (Nov 4, 2014)

Are the moderns CPU's making people to change mind about Overclock and giving up? or maybe I am just overreacting


----------



## 荷兰大母猪 (Nov 4, 2014)

Actually 4770k is hotter than 5960x because of the bad silicone grease, but I don't know about 4790k. Heard that Intel changed better silicone grease on 4790k? But I think it is much weaker than soldering tin  which is on 5960x.


----------



## FireFox (Nov 4, 2014)

荷兰大母猪 said:


> Actually 4770k is hotter than 5960x because of the bad silicone grease, but I don't know about 4790k. Heard that Intel changed better silicone grease on 4790k? But I think it is much weaker than soldering tin  which is on 5960x.


I posted some links read it if you have time.


----------



## 荷兰大母猪 (Nov 4, 2014)

Knoxx29 said:


> I posted some links read it if you have time.


where are the links? and forgive me I am a Chinese, I don't understand what is rig.


----------



## FireFox (Nov 4, 2014)

荷兰大母猪 said:


> where are the links? and forgive me I am a Chinese, I don't understand what is rig.



here: http://www.pcpowerplay.com.au/review/intel-i74970k,391334

and here: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2461705,00.asp


----------



## FireFox (Nov 4, 2014)

Kursah said:


> Welllll... yes and no. Depends on the title, which right now are very few that utilize 2 or even 3-4 cores (physical or HT logical). It's more dependent upon processing efficiencies and current base speeds being more than sufficient for modern gaming and media purposes. HT really only comes into play if you're a power user that does more than just gaming, at the same time, with several other tasks running at once...or have the rare game that supports 4+ cores and actually needs them...which as I just stated...is rare.
> 
> HT is useful for power users at this point, say you want to transcode one or two movies, play a new fancy game, browsing the web on another screen, while running a VM for other tasks and don't want to have the slowdown a non-HT CPU would give you.
> 
> ...



so here is my Silly question.
when we Overclock a Cpu we need to increase Clock speeds, increase voltages an bla bla bla, adding more heat  and power consumption, and risking to domage the chip.

running an overclocked Cpu means could fail, die or be damage ( Cpu no safe)

running a cpu to stock clock speeds and voltage ( Cpu safe)

and what happen overclocking a Cpu and undervolting, which are the risks?


----------



## Kursah (Nov 4, 2014)

@Knoxx29 

Undervolting has stability issues as well..just like not enough voltage at OC. I don't imagine it'll hurt anything, but if you have continual crashes and BSOD's, expect data corruption and eventual hardware failure as it's being treated outside of operating parameters.

But also, if done like OC-ing testing and stability validation, you can expect to run a slightly lower voltage, which means better than stock power consumption, cooler temps and no change in performance.


----------



## FireFox (Nov 4, 2014)

Kursah said:


> @Knoxx29
> 
> Undervolting has stability issues as well..just like not enough voltage at OC. I don't imagine it'll hurt anything, but if you have continual crashes and BSOD's, expect data corruption and eventual hardware failure as it's being treated outside of operating parameters.
> 
> But also, if done like OC-ing testing and stability validation, you can expect to run a slightly lower voltage, which means better than stock power consumption, cooler temps and no change in performance.


so we can say that running my 3770k to 4.5Ghz and 1.25v is safe?


----------



## OneMoar (Nov 4, 2014)

you aren't gonna hit 5Ghz with a 4790k  try more like 4.4 to 4.6 even that's asking a lot from haswell they even a 2500k/3770k isn't gonna hit 5Ghz without silly levels of voltage
beyond 4.2Ghz haswell starts requiring ~1.25v


----------



## FireFox (Nov 4, 2014)

OneMoar said:


> you aren't gonna hit 5Ghz with a 4790k  try more like 4.4 to 4.6 even that's asking a lot from haswell they even a 2500k/3770k isn't gonna hit 5Ghz without silly levels of voltage
> beyond 4.2Ghz haswell starts requiring ~1.25v



OneMoar here are my results:
4.5GHz 1.23v/1.24v/ 1.25v stable
temperatures in full load 50c

4.9Ghz 1.30v stable
temperatures in full load 55c

5.0Ghz 1.38v stable and solid like a rock.
Temperatures in full load 65c

Edit: 4.5Ghz 1.25v 50c
1.23v and 1.24v I didn't test the temperatures.

No all Cpu needs Silly voltages


----------



## OneMoar (Nov 4, 2014)

1.30V is what I would consider "silly" you severally shorten the lifespan of the chip at over 1.35V especially on haswell@lga 1150
the op is clueless and has literally zero chance of successfully hitting 5Ghz sorry but as my grandpa would say "demz da brakes"


----------



## manofthem (Nov 4, 2014)

A 4790k should hit 5ghz on stock hsf; their tim is much better than earlier cpus

/


----------



## Kursah (Nov 4, 2014)

Knoxx29 said:


> so we can say that running my 3770k to 4.5Ghz and 1.25v is safe?



That's great. Also you don't have Haswell, which is the CPU family that Onemoar is referring to.

The 4790K is 4.0GHz stock and 4.4GHz stock turbo, generally at 1.25-ish voltage. Reaching 5GHz might happen if you have a good chip, a really good one.

I am able to run around 1.16-1.18 atm...seems stable, but not 100% sure it's 24/7 ready yet.

Edit: @manofthem 

The 4790K I have seems to run a touch hotter than my 4770k did...and that's on a Noctua U14S..the stock cooler with this chip would surely hit close to the thermal throttle point of 100C under an OCCT load. The TIM is supposed to be much better...and I do plan to shoot for 5GHz to see if I can pull it off at sub 1.30v...but I have my doubts. This is just one chip though... I am sure many are capable of hitting it, but there's still the silicon lottery.


----------



## FireFox (Nov 4, 2014)

Kursah said:


> That's great. Also you don't have Haswell, which is the CPU family that Onemoar is referring to.
> 
> The 4790K is 4.0GHz stock and 4.4GHz stock turbo, generally at 1.25-ish voltage. Reaching 5GHz might happen if you have a good chip, a really good one.
> 
> I am able to run around 1.16-1.18 atm...seems stable, but not 100% sure it's 24/7 ready yet.


My goal is 4.5Ghz with the lowest voltages


----------



## Kursah (Nov 4, 2014)

Knoxx29 said:


> My goal is 4.5Ghz with the lowest voltages



1.23v for 4.5Ghz is solid man... my 4770k could do it with 1.25v. I wouldn't worry too much at that level, if you can keep your temps below throttle and voltage at an acceptable level (below 1.35v, or as some would prefer, 1.30v, I prefer 1.30v btw)...then call it good. Do yourself a favor and see if that OC is even worth your time though. Even with your slightly older CPU, you might not receive the gains you expect beyond just having a higher CPU turbo clock speed.


----------



## FireFox (Nov 4, 2014)

Kursah said:


> 1.23v for 4.5Ghz is solid man... my 4770k could do it with 1.25v. I wouldn't worry too much at that level, if you can keep your temps below throttle and voltage at an acceptable level (below 1.35v, or as some would prefer, 1.30v, I prefer 1.30v btw)...then call it good. Do yourself a favor and see if that OC is even worth your time though. Even with your slightly older CPU, you might not receive the gains you expect beyond just having a higher CPU turbo clock speed.



setting voltage to 1.30v i can hit 4.9Ghz and temps stay maximun 60c just when using some stability test, Linx, prime95 on so on.

is worth to have it at 4.9Ghz 1.30v rather than 4.5Ghz 1.25v?


----------



## OneMoar (Nov 5, 2014)

manofthem said:


> A 4790k should hit 5ghz on stock hsf; their tim is much better than earlier cpus
> 
> /


Don't be trolling the nubs they will believe that


----------



## Kursah (Nov 5, 2014)

Knoxx29 said:


> setting voltage to 1.30v i can hit 4.9Ghz and temps stay maximun 60c just when using some stability test, Linx, prime95 on so on.
> 
> is worth to have it at 4.9Ghz 1.30v rather than 4.5Ghz 1.25v?



That's a question you can totally answer yourself, and really only you can. Do you feel you need the faster clocks? Why are you overclocking in the first place? What is your goal?

Why not take a couple of your favorite games, load a good save where you can reproduce a sequence of events and run Evga Precision or similar with FPS OSD (On Screen Display) and see? 

Honestly, once you start going past a certain point, your return will be reduced, your power consumption will go up, and noticeable performance increases will cease to exist. I don't see a point...but running that cool and even at 1.30v, that's a nice OC. If you were running 3-4 cards in CFX or SLI, and was doing A LOT of CPU heavy stuff, I'd say maybe that OC would be worth it. 

I honestly wonder if you'd notice a difference with stock vs. your current OC. Maybe you could run some tests to verify. I don't mean 3Dmark, or benchmarks, but things you actually do with your PC.


----------



## OneMoar (Nov 5, 2014)

can't we not derail the ops thread


----------



## Kursah (Nov 5, 2014)

Sure thing boss.


----------



## Smigze (Nov 5, 2014)

So I should just focus on OCing the GTX 970 and leave the CPU alone to increase gaming performance? 
How loud is the stock fan for the 4790k? Because my AMD Phenom II X4 965's is loud as hell.


----------



## Kursah (Nov 5, 2014)

Smigze said:


> So I should just focus on OCing the GTX 970 and leave the CPU alone to increase gaming performance?
> How loud is the stock fan for the 4790k? Because my AMD Phenom II X4 965's is loud as hell.



Why worry about OC-ing in the first place?

If you research you will see both the CPU and GPU have Turbo modes...that is...factory OC-ing, supported out of the box.

My GTX 770 is stock, and runs ALL my games smoothly and MAXED out at 1080p. 

What are your goals here? I recommend you put it all together and run it stock, see if you even need to overclock in the first place. The stock Intel coolers aren't too noisy, but aren't very effective...I recommend an aftermarket 92mm or 120mm fan tower cooler (I usually recommend the Cooler Master 212 EVO... an affordable and effective air cooling solution).

If you feel you need to increase gaming performance, which for most is usually FPS piped to the screen, then yes, the GPU is what you should target. Also keep in mind that drivers can have quite an impact on games as well. And overclocking GPU's also leads to extra power consumption, heat creation, and louder fans. My Gigabyte with the cooling solution it has is great, but gets noisy above 80%.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Nov 5, 2014)

5ghz is not guaranteed, stop worrying about ocing and enjoy your spoils


----------



## fullinfusion (Nov 5, 2014)

Ha I got a 4790k that uses just 1.040 @ stock
1.18 @4.6ghz
1.20 @ 4.7
1.28 @ 4.8
1.3785 @ 4.9
1.50 @ 5.0

And its water cooled and at 5ghz she's in the upper 80's

Good luck op and have fun trying for a 5ghz clock.

Oh and a 3770k at 5 GHz is not as fast as a DC at even 4.6-4.7 GHz...

I've had 2700k @ 5.4
A 3770k @ 4.8-4.9
There was a close match clock vs clock but sorry a 3770k is no where as fast as a 4770k or DC chip...

Wanna play  ?


----------



## FireFox (Nov 5, 2014)

fullinfusion said:


> Ha I got a 4790k that uses just 1.040 @ stock
> 1.18 @4.6ghz
> 1.20 @ 4.7
> 1.28 @ 4.8
> ...




You got a 4790k that uses just 1.040 @ stock, that's great.


4790k                   
1.18 @4.6            
1.20 @ 4.7           
1.28 @ 4.8           
1.3785 @ 4.9      
1.50 @ 5.0           


3770k
1.18@ 4.6  (no tested it)
1.25 @ 4.7 (i have to test lower voltages)
1.28 @ 4.8
1.30 @ 4.9
1.38 @ 5.0


The 3770k its water cooled too and at 5ghz hit maximum 65c just under stability test.


----------



## fullinfusion (Nov 5, 2014)

Yes that's what the bios reads off the chip.

Its a great chip and its going to be a sad day when I have to sell it. There's so many deeper bios over clocking settings to hit 5ghz on this chip that I've never seen before.. There's the normal extreme settings page but within that page there's a tweakers Paradise where the secrets lay in over clocking beyond the norm. 

Have you or does your chip support boot strap options? Like 125/150/200/250 bus settings? 

I've had great luck using the 125 boot strap setting with a 40x multi for 5ghz. But a 50x is a no go. I can boot into windows but it can't run any type of stress test but the bootstrap change and fiddling with the tuning Paradise page settings work well. Winter is so near that I'll be shooting g for over 5ghz


----------



## Champ (Nov 8, 2014)

okay, so tomorrow I'm gonna start building my rig and 4K is my goal. The 4770k stock with boost should be enough to handle 4K? I'm sure my gpus are more a determining factor, but I thought you'd want everything bawls to the wall for 4K? I'm wondering if I'd need to invest into a better cooler for higher clocks?


----------



## gnflag (Dec 19, 2014)

Hello , as a new forum, I wonder stable enough with 5 MHz clock 4790k.com motherboard coller air i7 V4 GTS 120 mm MSI Z97 , if you can not . how can I achieve this?

I hope I'm right translation


----------



## cadaveca (Dec 19, 2014)

gnflag said:


> Hello , as a new forum, I wonder stable enough with 5 MHz clock 4790k.com motherboard coller air i7 V4 GTS 120 mm MSI Z97 , if you can not . how can I achieve this?
> 
> I hope I'm right translation





You need best cooler possible. Not the place to try to save a few pennies, if 5 GHz is possible. Cooling may not be the only limit. You want guarantee 5 GHz, try phase-change or LN2 cooling.


----------



## Nabarun (Dec 19, 2014)

I agree with @Kursah about little benefit to gaming from OC. The only people who actually benefit from oc are the ones who do a LOT of rendering in multimedia apps. I do it just for fun. My H220 is good-enough for the VERY HOT 4670K I got, but it's not the temperature which holds it back - it's the insane voltage requirements. Currently I'm running it at undervolted stock with all the power-saving stuff enabled. Only a good GPU can make a significant difference in gaming, so invest on that. However, if you want to have some fun with overclocking, and you don't want to go full custom loop water cooling, the new Swiftech H220x and H240x can be a safe bet, and they look incredible. Not to mention very quiet operation.


----------



## FireFox (Dec 19, 2014)

gnflag said:


> Hello , as a new forum, I wonder stable enough with 5 MHz clock 4790k.com motherboard coller air i7 V4 GTS 120 mm MSI Z97 , if you can not . how can I achieve this?
> 
> I hope I'm right translation



Take note of what @Kursah @eidairaman1 @fullinfusion @cadaveca and i posted above, in order to have a better idea of what you want to do and which are the advantages and disadvantages.

 I don't know what are your purposes to overclock to 5.0Ghz , 1- just for fun?
2 - gain performance in games? if the second one is yes than you have to read what we posted above carefully,
i dont see the needed to run a machine 24/7 at 5.0Ghz fixed If that's what you mean to do, I hope I am wrong.

Example:
I did Overclocked  my 3770k at 5.0Ghz 1.38v but that was just fun and nothing else, now I am running my CPU at 4.5Ghz dynamic OC, why dynamic? 
in order to give a break to the CPU and not be running at full speed even when it doesn't need it.



cadaveca said:


> You want guarantee 5 GHz, try phase-change or LN2 cooling.


Why phase-change or LN2?
We can get high overclocks with Aircooler or Watercooler too, am I right or wrong?


----------



## cadaveca (Dec 19, 2014)

Knoxx29 said:


> Why phase-change or LN2?
> We can get high overclocks with Aircooler or Watercooler too, am I right or wrong?



Sure, but you should really only expect 4.6-4.7 GHz for 24-7 longterm use on average. You can always push voltage to dangerous levels and then use the Intel Tuning plan to RMA and get another CPU. It's only $25, and is basically  a "no questions asked" replacement policy (physical damage does not apply, damage from OC completely covered).


----------



## gnflag (Dec 20, 2014)

My goal is to play ,
I wonder my safe v4 5  mhz good


----------



## ensabrenoir (Dec 20, 2014)

manofthem said:


> A 4790k should hit 5ghz on stock hsf; their tim is much better than earlier cpus
> 
> /





.............OH  just caught the wink at the end,,,,,,,,


----------



## gnflag (Dec 20, 2014)

What Maximo I can handle clock with i7 4790k is no problem? that Chi dayz play to me the level fps with average video card


----------



## manofthem (Dec 20, 2014)

ensabrenoir said:


> .............OH  just caught the wink at the end,,,,,,,,




Forgot about that post.  Yes, that was my attempt at trolling, but it didn't work that well.


----------



## FireFox (Dec 20, 2014)

cadaveca said:


> you should really only expect 4.6-4.7 GHz for 24-7


That's right, but i think that 4.9Ghz 1.30v wouldn't be worst and temperatures doesn't go above 60c.
Of course having a delidded CPU is a big advantage to keep temperatures no too high.

Note: I have hit 5.3Ghz 145v but i still have to do an accurate stability test before i can say that it's 100% stable.


----------



## cadaveca (Dec 20, 2014)

Knoxx29 said:


> That's right, but i think that 4.9Ghz 1.30v wouldn't be worst and temperatures doesn't go above 60c.
> Of course having a delidded CPU is a big advantage to keep temperatures no too high.
> 
> Note: I have hit 5.3Ghz 145v but i still have to do an accurate stability test before i can say that it's 100% stable.


Delidding is not something I recommend as it invalidates warranty. Changing the TIM interface between IHS and CPU die prevents the fail-safes built into the CPU from working properly and can lead to unexpected problems in domains of the chip where temperature monitoring is not provided, such as the FIVR, VCCSA, I/O and cache domains. If you've delidded, then sure, 5 GHz is possible. It's not supposed to be except in the rare occasion of an superior CPU, as the current draw required to push this clock can cause damage in a large percentile of retail CPUs. IF Intel could have soldered IHS and presented higher clock speeds, the would have, and simply charged you for it. The idea that the TIM used was to save on CPU costs is silly... it was done for an entirely different reason... safety and longevity of the product, and acceptable yields.


----------



## FireFox (Dec 20, 2014)

gnflag said:


> My goal is to play ,
> I wonder my safe v4 5  mhz good


That's what @Kursah recommend: If you feel you need to increase gaming performance, which for most is usually FPS piped to the screen, then the GPU is what you should target.


----------



## FireFox (Dec 20, 2014)

cadaveca said:


> Delidding is not something I recommend as it invalidates warranty. Changing the TIM interface between IHS and CPU die prevents the fail-safes built into the CPU from working properly and can lead to unexpected problems in domains of the chip where temperature monitoring is not provided, such as the FIVR, VCCSA, I/O and cache domains. If you've delidded, then sure, 5 GHz is possible.


The warranty is the last thing i worry about, is something goes wrong due to a wrong Overclock or becasue I have delidded the CPU then I just replace the CPU and problem solved, I have Overclocked my 3770k to 5.0Ghz 138v  before the CPU was delidded it but temperatures were too high if I am not wrong 70c/75c when doing stability test, that's why i didn't think twice and I delidded and after that temperatures dropped 20c, so far I am very happy with the results, how long can my 3770k handle? I don't know and I don't worry to know it.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Dec 20, 2014)

gnflag said:


> What Maximo I can handle clock with i7 4790k is no problem? that Chi dayz play to me the level fps with average video card


eh? you know that CPU clocking mostly give near nothing to null fps improvement if the GPU remain the same? (at last in all game except MMO and RTS ) and it explain also why a i5 4690K (4670K) or non K are way enough for games over a i7 4790K and give quite similar result (again not MMO/RTS but the difference is minor plus not a lot of games use more than 4 core so the HyperThreading is not a major advantage)

IE: if i keep my 290 @ 1150/1500 and my 4690K @ 3.5(stock) in most of my games i get 65-80fps if i push the 4690K to 4.4-4.5 i get 66-81 fps (quite the improvement) ofc, as i use Blade and Souls as a exemple, when i move to a more crowded place i get less fps drop than when i am alone.

now for a 5ghz 24/7 : useless, little to no improvement, that kind of frequencies and above are more for enthusiast or bench addict, @4.4 my 4690K has enough juice to keep up with anything. (ofc i will try to get higher but ... not for seeing improvement or gain, as they are not worth the hassle)


----------



## FireFox (Dec 20, 2014)

GreiverBlade said:


> 4.4 my 4690K has enough juice to keep up with anything.


Well said.
4.4Ghz or 4.5GHz with the lowest voltage that can be applied are enough.


----------



## gnflag (Dec 21, 2014)

Games How Dayz and Weapon 3 , i5 vs i7 Having imais HyperThreading does best difference? I read this forum


----------



## GreiverBlade (Dec 21, 2014)

gnflag said:


> Games How Dayz and Weapon 3 , i5 vs i7 Having imais HyperThreading does best difference? I read this forum


hyperthreading : no big difference in games, except some heavily multithreaded RTS and some i forgot the name, who use more than 4 cores but you can count them on the fingers of one hand ...

short: game i5 4690K = i7 4790K no big differences

oh wait i did already answer that question ... before it was asked 


GreiverBlade said:


> (again not MMO/RTS but the difference is minor plus not a lot of games use more than 4 core so the HyperThreading is not a major advantage)



gaming : i5 4xxx is enough, no real argument in paying more for a i7 unless you want to (i could go i7 4790K but i decided that the i5 4690K was enough)
crunching/encoding/streaming massively : i7 4xxx/5xxx


----------



## OneMoar (Dec 21, 2014)

cadaveca said:


> Delidding is not something I recommend as it invalidates warranty. Changing the TIM interface between IHS and CPU die prevents the fail-safes built into the CPU from working properly and can lead to unexpected problems in domains of the chip where temperature monitoring is not provided, such as the FIVR, VCCSA, I/O and cache domains. If you've delidded, then sure, 5 GHz is possible. It's not supposed to be except in the rare occasion of an superior CPU, as the current draw required to push this clock can cause damage in a large percentile of retail CPUs. IF Intel could have soldered IHS and presented higher clock speeds, the would have, and simply charged you for it. The idea that the TIM used was to save on CPU costs is silly... it was done for an entirely different reason... safety and longevity of the product, and acceptable yields.


you seem awfully sure of that dave using the TIM under the IHS has a limiter is just as silly as saving costs on TIM ... intel could have just as easily gone with a mirco-code update to cap the voltage at 1.25v whith is far harder to work around .
lowering temperatures increases the tolerance for higher amperage .. and you know that so I am unsure why you keep telling people that terrible tim wasn't a cost/time saver ...
the whole idea that intel would be concerned over possible damage due to overclocking is a bit silly when they offer the tuning protection plan ... and chip life span is a non issue when not overclocking
I think it was more todo with a change in manufacturing process for  it being the first implementation of FIVR and they needing to pull chips for testing after they where on-package or late in the production line after the IHS would have normally been applied


----------



## cadaveca (Dec 21, 2014)

OneMoar said:


> I think it was more todo with a change in manufacturing process for  it being the first implementation of FIVR and they needing to pull chips for testing after they where on-package something they can't do if they solder it


Haswell-E has FIVR with nearly twice the power limit, and is soldered. So...interesting idea, but incorrect.

Intel actually takes OC more seriously than you think, and also thinks about catering to those with extreme cooling and LN2 benchmarking habits. Most of these guys work at partner firms, and help sell chips, after all. It's about marketing and profits, and ensuring that they can capitalize on their products in the most efficient way.


----------



## OneMoar (Dec 21, 2014)

cadaveca said:


> Haswell-E has FIVR with nearly twice the power limit, and is soldered. So...interesting idea, but incorrect.
> 
> Intel actually takes OC more seriously than you think, and also thinks about catering to those with extreme cooling and LN2 benchmarking habits. Most of these guys work at partner firms, and help sell chips, after all. It's about marketing and profits, and ensuring that they can capitalize on their products in the most efficient way.


it just doesn't make sense they would use that method there are far more "secure" ways they could have gone about it
haswell-e also has a much beefier FIRV as well as more contacts and we know some of them are dedicated to testing so maby it was a diagnostic related thing and they changed it on the LGA 2011 chips so they could get it from the bottom ..
the problem I see is that nobody has done any extended testing at >1.30V to get a clear idea of what the absolute limit is I have seen people push >1.4 for quick benching but nothing sustained ... what we need are a few volunteers to delid there chips and cram a bunch of voltage down them and see how long they last


----------



## xvi (Dec 21, 2014)

I don't think anyone has recommended a cooler yet. Best value is usually attributed to the Hyper 212 Evo. For AIO water coolers, you generally won't see improvements over air until 240mm or more. AIO coolers are generally what people consider to be "decently good". If you want to push for above average overclocks 24/7, go for custom water or sub-ambient.
Other people will likely say otherwise and, honestly, I'd trust them more than me. I went for custom water just because I wanted big clocks on my FX 8350, but I didn't get much cooling over my Xigmatek S1283.


----------



## FireFox (Dec 21, 2014)

OneMoar said:


> what we need are a few volunteers to delid there chips and cram a bunch of voltage down them and see how long they last


I am the first Volunteer.


----------



## OneMoar (Dec 21, 2014)

Knoxx29 said:


> I am the first Volunteer.


I know lol


----------



## GreiverBlade (Dec 21, 2014)

xvi said:


> I don't think anyone has recommended a cooler yet. Best value is usually attributed to the Hyper 212 Evo. For AIO water coolers, you generally won't see improvements over air until 240mm or more. AIO coolers are generally what people consider to be "decently good". If you want to push for above average overclocks 24/7, go for custom water or sub-ambient.
> Other people will likely say otherwise and, honestly, I'd trust them more than me. I went for custom water just because I wanted big clocks on my FX 8350, but I didn't get much cooling over my Xigmatek S1283.


in fact it was answered since the 2nd post but let's add some serious HSF
Thermalright HR-02 Macho Rev.A,
Scythe Ashura,
Raijintek Ereboss,here you go 3 of them and all king in the value/perf category

the Hyper 212 is just too ... small ... ok the price/perf ratio is good but not good as the 3 i mentioned time to ditch definitively those cheap build (sorry i find it cheap ... just worth the price asked) cheap price CM air cooler, i can't help it i hate them xD

AIO well the Nepton 240/280 line is good (corsair? nope... and yes i know why ... i had 4 Corsair AIO only the last one had no problems, and they are overpriced ... any other brand are cheaper) in 240 the one from Deepcool and Raijintek are good too.
but AIO over custom loop? never (i used AIO because i was a bit frisky about doing a loop but not anymore and a 290 @1150/1450 29-30° idle 38-46° gaming is priceless)

custom waterloop : hum well ... it's still the top idea for a clocker and a 24/7

but still none of these solution are for a 5ghz 24/7 (and not because they couldn't cool it but because 5ghz 24/7 is pointless.)


----------



## FireFox (Dec 21, 2014)

GreiverBlade said:


> 5ghz 24/7


I wouldn't run my Machine even for a week at 5.0Ghz, albeit I have a good watercooling setup.


----------



## hat (Dec 21, 2014)

The 4790k will turbo to 4.4. It can only be overclocked to 4.6-4.7 safely/reliably? What's the point in that?


----------



## FireFox (Dec 21, 2014)

hat said:


> The 4790k will turbo to 4.4. It can only be overclocked to 4.6-4.7 safely/reliably? What's the point in that?


that's the same question that I made myself, I'm still looking for a logical response


----------



## hat (Dec 21, 2014)

At least on Newegg, the 4770k and 4790k are the same price. If you're upgrading to the 4770k may as well just get the 4790k.

The performance increases seem to be becoming quite stagnant. Bloomfield -> Sandy Bridge seemed the last really good one.


----------



## cadaveca (Dec 21, 2014)

hat said:


> The 4790k will turbo to 4.4. It can only be overclocked to 4.6-4.7 safely/reliably? What's the point in that?


IT's still the older Haswell CPU, just a new PCB. the older 4770K is often stuck @ 4.4 or less, commonly 4.3 GHz, so they made a cpu that at stock, goes above the limits that many 4770K have.

All Intel CPus have the same clock speed limits, in general, since the core design is functionally the same. 2600K, 3770K = die shrink; 3770K, 4770K, = moving voltage regulation into CPU and iGPU/cache improvements; 4770k,4790k = PCB change to provide added power (which also needs a Z97 board to take full advantage of, since z87 and z97 are the same physically, except for VRM change on boards, and inclusion of new drive connectors)...

So, why would you think it would clock any faster, exactly? where's the magic that changed that? Higher stock speed just means they changed binning process to get these chips reliably for that speed at stock, and Intel has said that this is exactly the case. Check Newegg's video with Intel about this on youtube, Intel rep says this quite clearly that they changed how they source CPU for Devil's Canyon to reliably have parts that clock better than other Haswell CPUs...within that 90W power design.

Intel is pretty honest and open about this. Many users were mad about 4.3 GHz limit on OC, 4790K removes that limit. You expect more from a PCB change, and specific binning, on same CPU design? only the "K" chips get this PCB, TIM, and binning, and the best they could do was 400 MHz more? Yeah...and it took that TIM change, that PCB change, and binning to do so. All that, just 400 MHz... All that...just for those that like to OC.

However, this is desktop platform, not high-end platform.. that's Haswell-E. You want better performance, you need to buy Haswell-E. Normal Haswell isn't a high-performance CPU..it's a mobile CPU. Straight up.


----------



## FireFox (Dec 21, 2014)

cadaveca said:


> Normal Haswell isn't a high-performance CPU..it's a mobile CPU. Straight up.


+1 many users just go and buy the first CPU Intel releases, that's why I just wait a few months when a new CPU is released and see if it's worth to upgrade or not.


----------



## RealNeil (Dec 21, 2014)

Frick said:


> I really miss the olden days. .(
> 
> Also remember every chip is different. Some overclock like mad and uses little power doing so, some require tons of voltage to achieve the same result, if they even can get to it. There's no such thing as a guaranteed overclock. The K means they can be overclocked, but it doesn't say anything about how much and what it takes to get there.



That's why they call it the Silicon Lottery! (EDIT: corrected my spelling,....one track mind)

I usually go into it with the expectation that my OC will be crappy. Then, if it is, I'm OK with it. If I get a good OC with it, then that's a huge plus.
Remember that an i7-4790K will have stellar performance on stock settings. While we want that OC goodness, it's not necessary in the grand scheme of things.


----------



## cadaveca (Dec 21, 2014)

RealNeil said:


> That's why they call it the Silicone Lottery!




Silicone usually involves doctors and surgery. That "e" on the end makes all the difference. 



ROFL.


----------



## FireFox (Dec 21, 2014)

I have a great Chip, I love it.

Intel have blessed my Chip lol


----------



## RealNeil (Dec 22, 2014)

cadaveca said:


> Silicone usually involves doctors and surgery. That "e" on the end makes all the difference.
> 
> 
> 
> ROFL.



I guess I was referring to a different kind of lottery,..........


----------



## GreiverBlade (Dec 22, 2014)

cadaveca said:


> Silicone usually involves doctors and surgery. That "e" on the end makes all the difference.
> 
> 
> 
> ROFL.


and on Silicon the letter that make a difference on a CPU is "ES" ... wait what? Engineering Sample are not cherry picked piece to give the best result while the "normal" one are just "average" ?


----------



## cadaveca (Dec 22, 2014)

GreiverBlade said:


> and on Silicon the letter that make a difference on a CPU is "ES" ... wait what? Engineering Sample are not cherry picked piece to give the best result while the "normal" one are just "average" ?


Actually, usually ES are worse than retail, as that is best situation for testing for OEMs, since having a "poor" chip allows to test for worst-case scenario, and good chips work better and don't allow for testing products under "worst-case" conditions.

I can honestly say that ES samples (since I have gotten ES direct from Intel), are not hand-picked... that hand-picking is done by those that get ES from Intel, and takes some time to test.

For my reviews, though, I don't use ES, I use retail CPUs. I currently have ES 4790K  (as well as other ES CPUs) and retail 4790K, retails are better.


----------



## RealNeil (Dec 22, 2014)

cadaveca said:


> I currently have ES 4790K  (as well as other ES CPUs) and retail 4790K, retails are better.




That's surprising. I would think that ES Chips would be their best.


----------



## cadaveca (Dec 22, 2014)

RealNeil said:


> That's surprising. I would think that ES Chips would be their best.


Nah, like I said, that would be contradictory to what they are provided for. Oc'ing is a very small part of the market, and while you or I might be interested in it, pretty much 95% of all users could care less about it. So, ES chips need to account for the worst possible chip that Intel might sell at any given SKU, otherwise, there might be stability problems. For example, with 4770K, there are some FANTASTIC CPUs out there, but there are also some absolute DOGS... ES needs to account for those DOGS as well as the good ones, so more often then not, a large selection of CPUs is sent out, wit ha widely varying quantity as you would find in retail, if not including some a bit worse, since ES doesn't have warranty that needs to be covered.

So, if you see some guy with fantastic ES CPU, either he had a bunch, and picked the best, or someone did that for him. And because that's how it works, I refuse to use ES CPUs in reviews, because I want to present the experience the end user gets, not what an ES chip can give, so either way, I cover my butt.

Like, Haswell-E launch...I had reviews on launch day, using retail CPU. Most other sites used ES. If little ol me can get retails early, how come other sites do not? Honestly, I have no idea... but I don't feel using ES CPUs is the right way to do reviews.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Dec 22, 2014)

cadaveca said:


> Actually, usually ES are worse than retail, as that is best situation for testing for OEMs, since having a "poor" chip allows to test for worst-case scenario, and good chips work better and don't allow for testing products under "worst-case" conditions.
> 
> I can honestly say that ES samples (since I have gotten ES direct from Intel), are not hand-picked... that hand-picking is done by those that get ES from Intel, and takes some time to test.
> 
> For my reviews, though, I don't use ES, I use retail CPUs. I currently have ES 4790K  (as well as other ES CPUs) and retail 4790K, retails are better.


well technically it was a sarcasm but sarcasm on the internet are like a fat gi... wait... nevermind  

and i pretty much thought about that 


cadaveca said:


> as that is best situation for testing for OEMs, since having a "poor" chip allows to test for worst-case scenario, and good chips work better and don't allow for testing products under "worst-case" conditions..


----------

