# Intel Haswell i5-4670K vs. i7-4770K Comparison



## FireKillerGR (Aug 13, 2013)

We compare the top two Intel Haswell processors Core i5-4670K and Core i7-4770K at stock and overclocked. Ivy Bridge results are included, too, to determine whether an upgrade makes sense. We also did a run with liquid nitrogen, resulting in maximum clocks of over 6 GHz.

*Show full review*


----------



## Ghost (Aug 13, 2013)

Get your shit together, TPU. You can do better than this.


----------



## Frick (Aug 13, 2013)

Ghost said:


> Get your shit together, TPU. You can do better than this.



Anything specific you don't like?


----------



## puma99dk| (Aug 13, 2013)

Frick said:


> Anything specific you don't like?



that i would like to know aswell


----------



## BiggieShady (Aug 13, 2013)

Great comparison, I'm glad to see real summer load temperatures on these CPU-s. Too many reviewers test in over air conditioned space - when it's 40 celsius outside, no one has AC at 20 degrees.


----------



## dj-electric (Aug 13, 2013)

Uhmm... one question. On what sequence the BF3 test was on? I've tested many many CPUs and never seen such a huge difference between these two.


----------



## Lionheart (Aug 13, 2013)

Ghost said:


> Get your shit together, TPU. You can do better than this.


----------



## FireKillerGR (Aug 13, 2013)

Lionheart said:


> http://cassandrajaneismyname.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/dafuq.jpg



Please dont feed the troll 
Already asked him politely(!!!) via pm, cause I wanted to know what was the problem but he never replied 



Dj-ElectriC said:


> Uhmm... one question. On what sequence the BF3 test was on? I've tested many many CPUs and never seen such a huge difference between these two.



Ran first "level" (train map) for 60 seconds (for each test). Yeah difference was more than expected to say the truth this is why I ran the game two more times but not huge difference from first tests.



Lionheart said:


> http://teamorthodoxy.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/942-okay-meme.jpg



Hehe


----------



## Lionheart (Aug 13, 2013)

FireKillerGR said:


> Please dont feed the troll


----------



## Melvis (Aug 13, 2013)

Those temps are insane!! Is that under water cooling?


----------



## Lionheart (Aug 13, 2013)

Melvis said:


> Those temps are insane!! Is that under water cooling?



Yeah I always wondered why they ran so damn hot then I remembered these CPU's have GPU's built into em


----------



## FireKillerGR (Aug 13, 2013)

Melvis said:


> Those temps are insane!! Is that under water cooling?



Yeah, I have tested 6x i7 4770K in total, these samples had really bad TIM (not that the retails should be that better though).
The main problem is that the TIM is not that great in order to transfer the temperature fast enough, so cores are getting really hot.
You also have to think that not only the GPU is build into the die but the VR (or better, part of them) as well.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Aug 13, 2013)

FireKillerGR said:


> Yeah, I have tested 6x i7 4770K in total, these samples had really bad TIM (not that the retails should be that better though).
> The main problem is that the TIM is not that great in order to transfer the temperature fast enough, so cores are getting really hot.
> You also have to think that not only the GPU is build into the die but the VR (or better, part of them) as well.



Is it really worth buying one if you are not going to de-lid it I wonder.


----------



## FireKillerGR (Aug 13, 2013)

tigger said:


> Is it really worth buying one if you are not going to de-lid it I wonder.



Processors are ok, I have learnt to keep them as is, warranty will do the rest in case of any possible issue


----------



## dj-electric (Aug 13, 2013)

Maybe some people will prefer the best of both worlds. I chose to have a 3770K, i selected a good chip that does 4.5Ghz at a fairly low power consumption, re-lidded it after applying liquid pro and lemme tell ya son, life is beautiful


----------



## RCoon (Aug 13, 2013)

Awesome review my friend! Temps are incredibly disappointing though, I expected better on water, obviously with the integrated stuff intel have thrown in its killing the thermals. Nice to see the difference between the 4 and 8 threads, I dont think I can see myself upgrading my processor in a long time.

I'm half tempted to jump back on a 2700K.



Ghost said:


> Get your shit together, TPU. You can do better than this.



Remember the time Santa got sand in his shoe?


----------



## ChristTheGreat (Aug 13, 2013)

WHat version of wPrime you took? I runned v 1.55 and v2.09, and I really don't get the same time on my 2700k @ 4.5ghz (RAM 1600mhz)

V1.55: 175.25s
V2.09: 192.527s


----------



## FireKillerGR (Aug 13, 2013)

RCoon said:


> Awesome review my friend! Temps are incredibly disappointing though, I expected better on water, obviously with the integrated stuff intel have thrown in its killing the thermals. Nice to see the difference between the 4 and 8 threads, I dont think I can see myself upgrading my processor in a long time.
> 
> 
> 
> Remember the time Santa got sand in his shoe?



Thanks buddy 



ChristTheGreat said:


> WHat version of wPrime you took? I runned v 1.55 and v2.09, and I really don't get the same time on my 2700k @ 4.5ghz (RAM 1600mhz)
> 
> V1.55: 175.25s
> V2.09: 192.527s



V1.55 if the official which is used on hwbot.org, so I picked this one


----------



## ChristTheGreat (Aug 13, 2013)

FireKillerGR said:


> Thanks buddy
> 
> 
> 
> V1.55 if the official which is used on hwbot.org, so I picked this one




okay, so I guess my time is okay xD still great increase over sandy and ivy


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Aug 13, 2013)

time to buy a delid' kit


----------



## puma99dk| (Aug 13, 2013)

FreedomEclipse said:


> time to buy a delid' kit



now oki, that pic is like no no no x_x

but i guess that's how the track goes.


----------



## Buff Hamster (Aug 13, 2013)

I was under the impression that i7 performed the same as i5 for gaming.

Interesting how the i7 does perform better with some titles.

Does this also apply to ivy bridge or is it only haswell that has an improvement for i7 over i5?


----------



## erixx (Aug 13, 2013)

20 years gaming and i didn't ever heard about "MOBA" games.. 
Maybe it means Massive Online Beerdrinking Alchoholics?????


----------



## FireKillerGR (Aug 13, 2013)

Buff Hamster said:


> I was under the impression that i7 performed the same as i5 for gaming.
> 
> Interesting how the i7 does perform better with some titles.
> 
> Does this also apply to ivy bridge or is it only haswell that has an improvement for i7 over i5?



To say the truth, I dont really know, cause I havent tested BF3 on Ivy cpus 



erixx said:


> 20 years gaming and i didn't ever heard about "MOBA" games..
> Maybe it means Massive Online Beerdrinking Alchoholics?????



LOL, Riot calls it MOBA


----------



## Ed_1 (Aug 13, 2013)

I am little confused with top temp graph , Are all the CPU done with the Prolimatech Megahalem ?
Cause I can see the 4770k/4570k being warm but 3570k seems real hot , even stock speeds .


----------



## FireKillerGR (Aug 13, 2013)

Ed_1 said:


> I am little confused with top temp graph , Are all the CPU done with the Prolimatech Megahalem ?
> Cause I can see the 4770k/4570k being warm but 3570k seems real hot , even stock speeds .



Yeah, its from previous comparison. That 3570K was really hot!!!


----------



## ogharaei (Aug 13, 2013)

erixx said:


> 20 years gaming and i didn't ever heard about "MOBA" games..
> Maybe it means Massive Online Beerdrinking Alchoholics?????



Online Battle Arena


----------



## Ed_1 (Aug 13, 2013)

FireKillerGR said:


> Yeah, its from previous comparison. That 3570K was really hot!!!



That is interesting ,the IHS must have big gap on that chip , I get 60c@4.0ghz under load with a 212 evo .

Do the 3570/4570 run hotter than 4770/3770 on avg even though have added HT .
Might just be roll of the dice as you would think with added HT the 3770 an4770 would avg hotter on avg .
That is if you had chance to test many of each kind .


----------



## Buff Hamster (Aug 13, 2013)

FireKillerGR said:


> To say the truth, I dont really know, cause I havent tested BF3 on Ivy cpus



Any chance testing the Ivy Bridge on BF3?


----------



## FireKillerGR (Aug 13, 2013)

Buff Hamster said:


> Any chance testing the Ivy Bridge on BF3?



Sure, will try 
Will do with the next review which is on the way


----------



## FireKillerGR (Aug 13, 2013)

Ed_1 said:


> That is interesting ,the IHS must have big gap on that chip , I get 60c@4.0ghz under load with a 212 evo .
> 
> Do the 3570/4570 run hotter than 4770/3770 on avg even though have added HT .
> Might just be roll of the dice as you would think with added HT the 3770 an4770 would avg hotter on avg .
> That is if you had chance to test many of each kind .



No 3770K and 4770K should be hotter than the 3570K

and just to correct you, its 4670K not 4570K


----------



## Buff Hamster (Aug 13, 2013)

This may sound stupid but what were your settings for your games? I can't find the details anywhere.


----------



## FireKillerGR (Aug 13, 2013)

Buff Hamster said:


> This may sound stupid but what were your settings for your games? I can't find the details anywhere.



Max settings @1920x1080


----------



## VulkanBros (Aug 13, 2013)

Enough Intel - give me an AMD FX 9590


----------



## Major_A (Aug 13, 2013)

Minor nitpick...

RE: Page 2

In America we put the $ sign before the amount, i.e. $243 and $350.  I say this cause I assume you pulled the info from Intel's website.

Other than that I always like articles like this.  It shows you that for an extra $107 you don't get that much more performance.


----------



## buildzoid (Aug 13, 2013)

Those temps are insane I have a 5ghz 3960x and at 32c ambient my water loop kept it sub 70c. These have a better manufacturing process pull less than half the power and run hotter. DAFUQ


----------



## Supercrit (Aug 13, 2013)

FireKillerGR said:


> Max settings @1920x1080



I'm not sure if that's a good way to stress the CPUs, although a good indication for real life scenario, since nobody plays at 800x600 ultra low with that setup


----------



## FireKillerGR (Aug 13, 2013)

Yeah 1680 and 1920 are the most common res right now


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Aug 13, 2013)

I'd really like to see the Sandy Bridge CPU's thrown into this mix if possible. Seems everytime I see a IB or Haswell review, my SB cpu looks better and better, but I'd like to see actual number for all 3 generations. Especially since all three generations are so close to each other performance wise.


----------



## FireKillerGR (Aug 13, 2013)

BarbaricSoul said:


> I'd really like to see the Sandy Bridge CPU's thrown into this mix if possible. Seems everytime I see a IB or Haswell review, my SB cpu looks better and better, but I'd like to see actual number for all 3 generations. Especially since all three generations are so close to each other performance wise.



Thanks for your suggestion, will add this on the schedule


----------



## tongey54 (Aug 13, 2013)

Good comparison overall but as a gamer, I would like to see a much larger list of games comparisons. However, glad you went for 1080p comparisons and not 1024x768 just because it was a CPU comparison.


----------



## RCoon (Aug 13, 2013)

BarbaricSoul said:


> I'd really like to see the Sandy Bridge CPU's thrown into this mix if possible. Seems everytime I see a IB or Haswell review, my SB cpu looks better and better, but I'd like to see actual number for all 3 generations. Especially since all three generations are so close to each other performance wise.



I'll +1 this, I want to see if a 26/2700K is in the same viscinity as haswell and IVB in terms of all of these tests.


----------



## Sasqui (Aug 13, 2013)

FireKillerGR said:


> Yeah, its from previous comparison. That 3570K was really hot!!!



Great to see this review and especially comparisons to Ivy, well done.

The 3570 and 3770 are notorious for shitty TIM.  Delidded and saw a 10c-15c decrease across the board.

The comparison between the Ivy i5 and i7 is pretty close to Dave's review.


----------



## Ikaruga (Aug 13, 2013)

Thanks for the review.

Two questions:
1, Why don't you sort the charts in an ascending or descending order if they are color coded?

2, Do you happen to have power consumption figures for this review?


----------



## FireKillerGR (Aug 13, 2013)

1, preferred model order from 3570K to 4770K 

2, consumption results will be included on future reviews


----------



## Delta6326 (Aug 13, 2013)

Fantastic review, can't wait to see more!
My only suggestion, possibly a overall performance summary per frequency. Other than that you did a great job.


----------



## HeavensRevenge (Aug 13, 2013)

*Can you disable the IGP on Desktop CPU's?*

Hello, this is my 1st post here 

I was wondering if there was any way to disable the IGP in the high-end chips like 4770k, you guys & girls do this all day so your updated domain knowledge of current chips are way beyond my slightly old-school understanding.

I always feel like having that GPU there in the way causes problems, how "disabled" is it, it is just low priority while still sucking voltage?

Any possibly way to disable the GPU even if its a permanent operation to see if a 100% disabled IGP can do for over-clocking with more stability than having it be there but just logically disabled in some weird way when a 3rd party card is in the PCIe slot? 

I know there are many i7 chips which have the IGP completely disabled in laptops like the 3610QM and 4700HQ that Asus give in them so is there any magic sequence to send the CPU+IGP for a "divorce" heh to only get a CPU without its IGP baggage for potentially way better overclockability and perf of the CPU by itself?


----------



## Ikaruga (Aug 13, 2013)

HeavensRevenge said:


> Hello, this is my 1st post here
> 
> I was wondering if there was any way to disable the IGP in the high-end chips like 4770k, you guys & girls do this all day so your updated domain knowledge of current chips are way beyond my slightly old-school understanding.
> 
> ...



Yes you can disable the IGP, and yes, it can help with the OC sometimes.

ps.: Welcome to TPU!


----------



## Hilux SSRG (Aug 13, 2013)

Ikaruga said:


> Yes you can disable the IGP, and yes, it can help with the OC sometimes.
> 
> ps.: Welcome to TPU!



Is it simply done in the bios?

I don't have a current Intel CPU with IGP.


----------



## EarthDog (Aug 13, 2013)

Yes. Most bios have the ability to enable/disable the iGPU.

In my experience, there is no difference with it enabled and disabled when overclocking under LN2.


----------



## Ikaruga (Aug 13, 2013)

EarthDog said:


> Yes. Most bios have the ability to enable/disable the iGPU.
> 
> In my experience, there is no difference with it enabled and disabled when overclocking under LN2.



I think Dave wrote it somewhere that disabling the IGP stopped getting BSODs from somebody's OC-ed Haswell .


----------



## HeavensRevenge (Aug 13, 2013)

EarthDog said:


> Yes. Most bios have the ability to enable/disable the iGPU.
> 
> In my experience, there is no difference with it enabled and disabled when overclocking under LN2.



Unfortunate how disabling it doesn't have much effect on the overclockability of the chip.  I was thinking that the IGP was getting in the way with more things to go wrong/fail.

Well hopefully they can get a nice breakthrough for Skylake 

Thanks for the info!


----------



## EarthDog (Aug 13, 2013)

Ikaruga said:


> I think Dave wrote it somewhere that disabling the IGP stopped getting BSODs from somebody's OC-ed Haswell .


Good to know. I have only really mucked with it a couple times and it didnt do squat, so I just leave it as is.


----------



## Raghar (Aug 14, 2013)

Wow I thought I'd write rest of the review out of pity when I'd get my i7-4820K. That's quite a difference when I compare it to PSU reviews.

Well I'm not your superior to find all problems in your review and force you to remedy them, it's a sign of quality reviewer to make his own stuff and be creative.

That i7, was that a Intel supplied chip, or a random chip bought from a computer shop? The same question about i5.

I didn't see voltages you used for overclocks. Can you list them?


----------



## FireKillerGR (Aug 14, 2013)

Raghar said:


> Wow I thought I'd write rest of the review out of pity when I'd get my i7-4820K. That's quite a difference when I compare it to PSU reviews.
> 
> Well I'm not your superior to find all problems in your review and force you to remedy them, it's a sign of quality reviewer to make his own stuff and be creative.
> 
> ...



Welcome to the forum.
Glad you did your first post on my review.
Thanks for your feedback as well. Btw, you shouldnt feel pity as I dont feel so about my reviews..
Also, I would like to make it clear that I prefer showing a review which will include "part" of me than smth which wont.
I dont aim to post 100% professional reviews ( at least not yet), I just want to add my "signature" (make my reviews a bit different) and become better through  my work.

As for the chips, both are samples.

For the 4670k I used 1.28v for 4.2 GHz and 1.24v for the 4770k to achieve 4.7 GHz.


----------



## Nabarun (Aug 14, 2013)

Would be nice to see how the I5 did on a Asus Z87 board, preferably using H100i. Thanks for the review.


----------



## HeavensRevenge (Aug 14, 2013)

Nabarun said:


> Would be nice to see how the I5 did on a Asus Z87 board, preferably using H100i. Thanks for the review.



For the Haswell CPU's I've tried, it seems that the chipset & controller improvements meant to be paired with a Haswell chip actually influence benchmarks and performance more than the CPU.

The benchmarks I'd love to see since I see this effect myself a bit, are benchmarks with different combination of the previous generation chipset/controllers AND CPU's set in them if possible.

Example: 
Z77 + Ivy Bridge CPU
Z87 + Ivy Bridge CPU
Z77 + Haswell CPU
Z87 + Haswell CPU

Since Haswells seem to have such a tiny miniscule improvement, yet many aspects of a system are increased when it's paired with an Z87 chipset.  For example, my SSD speeds are way better on a Lynx Point chipset even though it's the same SSD being used each time.  It's obvious a new chipset would be better but I'd love to know exactly how much better 

Can't wait for the next bench, keep them coming


----------



## Nordic (Aug 14, 2013)

HeavensRevenge said:


> For the Haswell CPU's I've tried, it seems that the chipset & controller improvements meant to be paired with a Haswell chip actually influence benchmarks and performance more than the CPU when a Z77 based mobo is used.
> 
> The benchmarks I'd love to see since I see this effect myself a bit, are benchmarks with different combination of the previous generation chipset/controllers AND CPU's set in them.
> 
> ...



z77 and haswell don't go together. Neither do z87 and ivy/sandy.


----------



## ViperXTR (Aug 14, 2013)

3570K starts at 3.5Ghz?


----------



## HeavensRevenge (Aug 14, 2013)

james888 said:


> z77 and haswell don't go together. Neither do z87 and ivy/sandy.



Sad


----------



## Nordic (Aug 14, 2013)

HeavensRevenge said:


> Sad



Ya, lga1155 is sandy/ivy. Haswell is lga1150. I want a z87 board but don't want the lga1150 cpu.


----------



## Ocssor (Aug 14, 2013)

I would like to know why the temperatures are so different under load with the 4770 in this comparison, compared to your actual review of that chip?

@ 4.2 on the review of the chip it's at 78 but on this review it's at 86.

Bit of a discrepancy, is there a reason for this? Apologise if I've misread or made a mistake, just got me a bit confused.


----------



## FireKillerGR (Aug 14, 2013)

Its a different 4770K. 
The 4770K from the previous review was 100% retail, and the best one when it comes to temperatures.


----------



## Ocssor (Aug 14, 2013)

Ah, that makes sense. I've just ordered a build with a 4770k overclocked @ 4.5 with megahalem rev c and got a bit worried seeing those comparison temperatures...


----------



## springs113 (Aug 14, 2013)

Haswells are temp whores...not so bad in my loop @4.5 stress test goes mid to high 70s now.


----------



## Ocssor (Aug 14, 2013)

Yeah I'm hoping it won't be too bad. The ambient temp will be ~20c and the case itself comes with 3 fans (2 on top 1 on front) + a noiseblocker pro for rear cooling. Cpu cooler is as I've mentioned megahalems red rev c. Hopefully it will run just fine and not too hot.


----------



## Nabarun (Aug 14, 2013)

It's usually ~30C here in Kolkata. Gets >40C in summer...


----------



## Ocssor (Aug 14, 2013)

It's 20c outside just now and that's considered warm here! So inside ambient temperature will actually be lower than that I guess. Might revise my original temp to 13-16c


----------



## Nabarun (Aug 14, 2013)




----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Aug 14, 2013)

FireKillerGR said:


> Its a different 4770K.
> The 4770K from the previous review was 100% retail, and the best one when it comes to temperatures.



Is that the one you are keeping then


----------



## TheGuruStud (Aug 14, 2013)

Wow, what a crappy 4670k. It should only take 1.2v to do that (at 1.27 you should be doing 4.5 at least).

I assume you were able to do 1:1 with the uncore clocks?


----------



## FireKillerGR (Aug 14, 2013)

Yeah, I could do 1:1 uncore but the gain wasnt that high.

Will re-test, it may be the gpu :S


----------



## TheGuruStud (Aug 14, 2013)

FireKillerGR said:


> Yeah, I could do 1:1 uncore but the gain wasnt that high.
> 
> Will re-test, it may be the gpu :S



Oops, reedited lol (not as relevant to me haha). Yeah, those fps numbers are weiiird.

Odd that the uncore boost didn't give good gains, too. I thought that's what everyone has been harping about doing when OCing.


----------



## Nabarun (Aug 14, 2013)

FireKillerGR,
If you have access to an Asus Z87 board, could you please try and see if better OC/performance can be achieved with the I5?


----------



## Raghar (Aug 15, 2013)

Nabarun said:


> FireKillerGR,
> If you have access to an Asus Z87 board, could you please try and see if better OC/performance can be achieved with the I5?



I doubt that. That i5 looks like a bad chip, or bad overclocker. 

BTW would you run test with something that really taxes the CPU, like with 4 instances of Dwarven fortress? World generation is quite meaty, and well, it took about 20 minutes on my computer, at least that version I tried. I think it would be a fair real world comparison between i5 and I7.



Interesting, Chrome is smart enough to offer correct choice to fill the random question.


----------



## Nabarun (Aug 15, 2013)

Raghar said:


> Interesting, Chrome is smart enough to offer correct choice to fill the random question.



The question is not _that_ random. And the answer is in the cache. Works in ff too


----------



## haswrong (Aug 15, 2013)

Ghost said:


> Get your shit together, TPU. You can do better than this.



he probably meant that you should test the cpus with crysis 3 to spot the true beneficical effect of hyper-threading..


----------



## EthanDW (Aug 15, 2013)

Hi everyone,
I often read the reviews on this site, but I have never thought to register to it.

However, the anomalies found on this review, at the BF3 test, which conflict the general assumption that HT has practically no benefit for gaming, made me register to it and post a comment.

In this review, we see nearly 7FPS difference (34FPS vs 41FPS) in BF3 at 4.2Ghz.
This is approximately 20% difference, definitely not negligible as the common belief suggests (this is like the difference between gtx 760 and gtx 660).

*FireKillerGR*,
Would you please make a test with HT disabled, so we may find out whether the cause for the 7FPS difference in BF3 is the extra logical cores or the bigger cache?

Thanks in advance


----------



## FireKillerGR (Aug 15, 2013)

Sure 
I will re-test the 4670K too 
Just give me some time cause I will leave tomorrow and will return 1st of Sept.


----------



## EthanDW (Aug 15, 2013)

Thank you very much!
I highly appreciate it and i'm looking forward to reading your updates


----------



## arbiter (Aug 15, 2013)

Um, not sure what water cooler was used, I have a corsair h80 on my 4770k and at 3.7ghz which is normal turbo boost. Mine only tops out at 60c running prime95, So why 73c was seen.


----------



## FireKillerGR (Aug 15, 2013)

arbiter said:


> Um, not sure what water cooler was used, I have a corsair h80 on my 4770k and at 3.7ghz which is normal turbo boost. Mine only tops out at 60c running prime95, So why 73c was seen.



Once again, every cpu is different, it can oc differently and needs different voltage.
On both chips vring was @1.13v and also you compare the voltage of a stock cpu (which is around 1.05~v stock) to an oced with more than 1.2v voltage.


----------



## arbiter (Aug 16, 2013)

FireKillerGR said:


> Once again, every cpu is different, it can oc differently and needs different voltage.
> On both chips vring was @1.13v and also you compare the voltage of a stock cpu (which is around 1.05~v stock) to an oced with more than 1.2v voltage.



i was comparing mine at 3.7 with intel's turbo to one on here at 3.5. So temps should be pretty close to same. 13c is a pretty considerable margin. only time i seen 73c range on mine was OC'ed to 4.3ghz @ 1.25volts.


----------



## Timber1900 (Aug 17, 2013)

Great review! 

I was really shocked by the BF3 scores though, as other people have... mostly I'm curious on this bit: 

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_780/8.html

The GTX 580 scored 54.2 FPS at 1900x1200 on an i7-3770k. You used a Classified 580 with a newer and more overclocked processor at 1080p and at most got into the 40s on this review. 

Are these different levels? I saw you mentioned you'd be doing another review soonish where you'll run the game on a different level. Can you please run it on the same level as the GTX 780 review to normalize? 

Either way, I'm picking up a 4770k and an Asus Hero in the next few weeks. Should be quite the leap from my Phenom X4 965, right? I'm hoping to squeeze a few more frames out of my PC for BF4


----------



## FireKillerGR (Aug 17, 2013)

Timber1900 said:


> Great review!
> 
> I was really shocked by the BF3 scores though, as other people have... mostly I'm curious on this bit:
> 
> ...




Thanks 

No need to worry, I will have an Asus DCII 780 GTX before even starting the re-tests 
Yeah a 4770k will be a great upgrade


----------



## Vario (Aug 20, 2013)

I wonder if the haswells will really last long at those temperatures...

I am only 50*C load (on air) with my 1230v2, however thats basically just an undervolted 3.5ghz 3770k.  Also got a 2550k that should hit 5.0ghz, funny that the sandy bridge's amazing overclockability can still push it to the top of the pile.


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 20, 2013)

Vario said:


> funny that the sandy bridge's *EASE OF OVERCLOCKING *can still push it to the top of the pile.




Fix'd that for ya.


----------



## TheDeeGee (Aug 22, 2013)

Currently running my 4770K at 4,5 GHz @ 1.175 volts. (OCCT Linpack + AVX stable)

Golden Chip?


----------



## Nabarun (Aug 22, 2013)

Svarog said:


> Currently running my 4770K at 4,5 GHz @ 1.175 volts. (OCCT Linpack + AVX stable)
> 
> Golden Chip?



Wow. What's the cache and memory like?


----------



## vega22 (Aug 22, 2013)

Svarog said:


> Currently running my 4770K at 4,5 GHz @ 1.175 volts. (OCCT Linpack + AVX stable)
> 
> Golden Chip?



you want to come and join the hwbot team dude


----------



## TheDeeGee (Aug 22, 2013)

Nabarun said:


> Wow. What's the cache and memory like?



Didn't touch the cache, and memory runs at it's default 2133 MHz.

Havn't tried 4.6 yet tho, might hit the cliff there.

I also been undervolting and only need 1.015 for stock speeds.


----------



## springs113 (Aug 23, 2013)

Hey Dave I have since changed my case and added another rad to my h220 loop...and to all that say that h220 pump is weak, I say hell no it aint, i max out currently around mid 50s.  I may try and push my oc but I'm kind of satisfied with where I'm at.  I guess the next thing for me to do is to try and see if I can lower my voltage to the process meanwhile maintaining my stability.


----------



## Nattydraddy (Sep 23, 2013)

*The hot temperatures of the Intel Core i5-4670K*

From the review:
"Its biggest disadvantage is not only the temperature but also its low overclocking potential."

I can see from the graphs that the i5-4670K gets hotter than the i7-4770K under load, even if the i5-4670K is not overclocked. But i can see no reason for it other that the used i5-4670K is a bad sample. Different samples of the i7-4770K were used by the author of the test but maybe not of the i5-4670K. Is that the reason that the i5-4670K runs hotter than the i7-4770K?

I want to build a system wich runs without a loud cooling. Unfortunately seems all Haswell chips to run hot. The Haswell chips with a low TDP just clock lower but are not more efficient.

My computer mostly justs music. I wouldn´t wonder if an i7-4770K would be the quietest cpu for that, despite it's much to poweful features.


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Sep 24, 2013)

Nattydraddy said:


> My computer mostly justs music. I wouldn´t wonder if an i7-4770K would be the quietest cpu for that, despite it's much to poweful features.



You dont need a i7 just to play music - even a cheap second, 3rd or 4th hand single core could do that too as well as browse the internet and watch HD content. even when it comes to casual games that require a half decent system to run single core isnt really a problem, I used to run L4D on a FX-55 or overclocked 3000+@2.8Ghz and never had a problem with it.

In fact, thats the last time i think i ever ran a single core system.... the board i used stopped working and i never replaced it


----------



## Nabarun (Sep 24, 2013)

I'm too drunk to quote everybody... correctly. So sorry for fvck-ups in advance. 


Svarog said:


> Didn't touch the cache, and memory runs at it's default 2133 MHz.
> 
> Havn't tried 4.6 yet tho, might hit the cliff there.
> 
> I also been undervolting and only need 1.015 for stock speeds.



That DOES look like a jackpot 



springs113 said:


> Hey Dave I have since changed my case and added another rad to my h220 loop...and to all that say that h220 pump is weak, I say hell no it aint, i max out currently around mid 50s.  I may try and push my oc but I'm kind of satisfied with where I'm at.  I guess the next thing for me to do is to try and see if I can lower my voltage to the process meanwhile maintaining my stability.



Well, all I can say is that this comment of yours and a ton of others' have convinced me that Swiftech is good. I may end up with the H320 when I have the money ... will upgrade to six 'NF-F12's later.



Nattydraddy said:


> From the review:
> "Its biggest disadvantage is not only the temperature but also its low overclocking potential."
> 
> I can see from the graphs that the i5-4670K gets hotter than the i7-4770K under load, even if the i5-4670K is not overclocked. But i can see no reason for it other that the used i5-4670K is a bad sample. Different samples of the i7-4770K were used by the author of the test but maybe not of the i5-4670K. Is that the reason that the i5-4670K runs hotter than the i7-4770K?
> ...



I totally believe he received a crappy chip. Because "theoretically", the I5 should have more thermal headroom because of the lack of hyperthreading. I just hope the majority of the I5s aren't like that ... I got a 4670K too... haven't tested it yet because all I have got right now is that and the Asus Maximus 6 Hero.

If you "JUST" play music on your PC, then a Pentium 3 800MHz will be considered an overkill.



FreedomEclipse said:


> You dont need a i7 just to play music - even a cheap second, 3rd or 4th hand single core could do that too as well as browse the internet and watch HD content. even when it comes to casual games that require a half decent system to run single core isnt really a problem, I used to run L4D on a FX-55 or overclocked 3000+@2.8Ghz and never had a problem with it.
> 
> In fact, thats the last time i think i ever ran a single core system.... the board i used stopped working and i never replaced it


I think viewing HD videos PROPERLY with tweaked shaders and better renderers does require a better CPU and GPU.
(I'm talking a Core2Duo @1.86GHz and MSI GTS 250 1GB  and 2GB dual channel RAM @667MHz )


----------



## Zonengorg (Sep 24, 2013)

Thank you very much for this info!!!


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Sep 24, 2013)

Nabarun said:


> I think viewing HD videos PROPERLY with tweaked shaders and better renderers does require a better CPU and GPU.
> (I'm talking a Core2Duo @1.86GHz and MSI GTS 250 1GB  and 2GB dual channel RAM @667MHz )



Not really, even cheap LP HTPC cards can render HD content effectively. A single core CPU is plenty.

The only problem is retailers dont really sell single core chips anymore, a few retailers here in the UK have some AMD Semprons left in stock but its priced just slightly lower than an AMD A4 APU. The price difference is almost negligible


----------



## Nabarun (Sep 24, 2013)

FreedomEclipse said:


> Not really, even cheap LP HTPC cards can render HD content effectively. A single core CPU is plenty.
> 
> The only problem is retailers dont really sell single core chips anymore, a few retailers here in the UK have some AMD Semprons left in stock but its priced just slightly lower than an AMD A4 APU. The price difference is almost negligible



When I play a FULL HD video with HD Audio (like 8-channel DTS) in VMR9 with shaders applied, it does struggle. And mine is a dual core. I also have dedicated sound card. 720p and lower quality 1080p works fine.


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Sep 24, 2013)

what is your setup?

Cuz ive run AMD64 939 chips with a X850XTPE and not had any troubles with 1080p, I also had a Creative Xtreme Music sound card, If youre trying to use the GTS250 to output audio via HDMI  then thats the cause of your stuttering.

some older boards & GPUs just dont have the bandwidth available to do 1080p & stream audio at the same time and it has been known to cause some issues - However if youre running SLi or Crossfire using the secondary card to stream audio isnt a problem


----------



## Nabarun (Sep 24, 2013)

FreedomEclipse said:


> what is your setup?
> 
> Cuz ive run AMD64 939 chips with a X850XTPE and not had any troubles with 1080p, I also had a Creative Xtreme Music sound card, If youre trying to use the GTS250 to output audio via HDMI  then thats the cause of your stuttering.
> 
> some older boards & GPUs just dont have the bandwidth available to do 1080p & stream audio at the same time and it has been known to cause some issues - However if youre running SLi or Crossfire using the secondary card to stream audio isnt a problem



No SLI or HDMI. Just a single GPU. But it's a PCIe 2nd gen on a D946GZIS which is PCIe 1st gen. The sound card is Creative SB Live! 24 bit. But I think it's the CPU and not bandwidth. May be AMD chips are better at this... I mean compared to older Intel ones. Whatever be the case, it's a totally f*cked up config, and that's why I still don't have it on my sig/profile. Building a new one with meticulous planning now. Already got the 4670K and "Hero"...


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Sep 24, 2013)

Nabarun said:


> The sound card is Creative SB Live! 24 bit.



Bingo. the SB Live is a real old card and it probably struggles with proper HD audio

Ive managed to run 1080 on a laptop thats older and much slower then your PC and It still managed watching full 1080p blu-ray rips just fine with 2GB DDR2, Intel T2300 & X1600MR but the drivers for the X1600 were broken so windows wouldnt use it for hardware acceleration anymore and all the processing was dumped onto the CPU. It didnt 5.1 surround sound or a dedicated soundcard but it did all right. 

I purchased a Broadcom Crystal HD decoder card from ebay to offload some of the HD encoding off my CPU and it worked a treat till i eventually decided it was time to sell the laptop.

the Broadcom Crystal HD is a decoder card which helps decode HD video streams meaning you can watch full 1080p on even the weakest intel Atom powered netbook out of the bargain bucket. 

It dropped my CPU usage down from constant 70-80% usage on both cores to about 25-30% while watching blu-ray rips.


----------



## Nabarun (Sep 24, 2013)

FreedomEclipse said:


> Bingo. the SB Live is a real old card and it probably struggles with proper HD audio



Probably. Could be the bottlenecked gpu as well. But the thing is, 720p works just great.


----------



## Enterprise24 (Oct 17, 2013)

Still don't understand my delidded 4670K (with MX-4) with Asrock Z87 Extreme 4 cannot OC pass 4.9Ghz  regardless of how many voltage. (can boot to windows but not stable).

4.5Ghz 1.17V
4.6Ghz 1.23V
4.7Ghz 1.29V
4.8Ghz 1.36V
4.9Ghz ???V


----------



## TheGuruStud (Oct 17, 2013)

Enterprise24 said:


> Still don't understand my delidded 4670K (with MX-4) with Asrock Z87 Extreme 4 cannot OC pass 4.9Ghz  regardless of how many voltage. (can boot to windows but not stable).
> 
> 4.5Ghz 1.17V
> 4.6Ghz 1.23V
> ...



It's bulk finfet. You're lucky that you can get 4.8. Voltages and power consumption show you how crappy it is. CPU speed per core is done for the most part. And you have an excellent chip. There's a lot that can't even make it to 4.5 let alone use your voltages.


----------



## Nabarun (Oct 17, 2013)

Enterprise24 said:


> Still don't understand my delidded 4670K (with MX-4) with Asrock Z87 Extreme 4 cannot OC pass 4.9Ghz  regardless of how many voltage. (can boot to windows but not stable).
> 
> 4.5Ghz 1.17V
> 4.6Ghz 1.23V
> ...



You've got one of those better chips out there, mate! Most can't even get to 4.6. No matter the temp! I think most folks would be happy to run it at 4.6GHz/1.23V for everyday use.

From what I hear though, you may try lowering the "cpu cache ratio" and the memory divider, and try using only one DIMM. Then there's the "strap". Also, try using "per core" multipliers in baby steps. Try a single core in 4.9 and all others in 4.8.

But be warned, "temps don't kill - voltage does".


----------



## dj-electric (Oct 17, 2013)

Even 4.8Ghz is very very respectable, defo in margin of about 10-15% of total CPUs capability.


----------



## TheHunter (Nov 5, 2013)

Nabarun said:


> You've got one of those better chips out there, mate! Most can't even get to 4.6. No matter the temp! I think most folks would be happy to run it at 4.6GHz/1.23V for everyday use.
> 
> From what I hear though, you may try lowering the "cpu cache ratio" and the memory divider, and try using only one DIMM. Then there's the "strap". Also, try using "per core" multipliers in baby steps. Try a single core in 4.9 and all others in 4.8.
> 
> But be warned, "temps don't kill - voltage does".



If his is the better chip, then what is mine with HT 4770k at same volts, uber? ^^


4.4GHz 1.150v
4.5GHz 1.182v
4.6GHz 1.228v
4.7Ghz 1.279v
4.8GHz 1.31v (i didnt test much)

In all cases cache at 4.3GHz 1.143v


Wish I had a 4770k that could do 4.8-5.0GHz at 1.26v, that would be golden


----------



## Nabarun (Nov 6, 2013)

TheHunter said:


> If his is the better chip, then what is mine with HT 4770k at same volts, uber? ^^
> 
> 
> 4.4GHz 1.150v
> ...



I envy you guys. I haven't been able to get the chassis and coolers yet, so still don't know what cr@p I got in the lottery. Fingers crossed...


----------



## puma99dk| (Nov 6, 2013)

TheHunter said:


> If his is the better chip, then what is mine with HT 4770k at same volts, uber? ^^
> 
> 
> 4.4GHz 1.150v
> ...



is that manual voltage or with offset mode/passive mode?


----------



## TheHunter (Nov 10, 2013)

puma99dk| said:


> is that manual voltage or with offset mode/passive mode?



That's what I need at fixed voltage to pass all, 

Yes now I have it at adaptive for both cache and cpu - same voltages. 
But it can go berserk in IBT, Linx, Prime, etc (1.28 >> 1.367v), so I dont run those. Well I know its already stable at those volts mentioned before


----------



## l337g0g0 (Mar 2, 2014)

http://www.overclock.net/t/671977/hyperthreading-in-games

???


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Mar 2, 2014)

l337g0g0 said:


> http://www.overclock.net/t/671977/hyperthreading-in-games
> 
> ???



and?


----------



## l337g0g0 (Mar 2, 2014)

FreedomEclipse said:


> and?



"When it comes to games, one of the latest and most popular is Battlefield 3 by Electronic Arts. The Core i7-4770K's Hyper-Threading Technology allowed it to perform better than the Core i5-4670K without it."

Hyper threading doesn't effect games, all games use 2 to 4 threads.
How is the I7 outperforming the I5's?


----------



## dj-electric (Mar 2, 2014)

I thought that by now BF3\4 performance gain of an i7 over an i5 would be something widely known.

And the claim that "all games use 2 to 4 threads" isn't correct at all.


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Mar 2, 2014)

certain games handle hyper threading differently. some games it works perfectly, for others it creates microstutter issues


----------



## l337g0g0 (Mar 2, 2014)

http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf3/en/forum/threadview/2832654490219065016/

http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf3/forum/threadview/2832654625536990567/


----------



## l337g0g0 (Mar 2, 2014)

FreedomEclipse said:


> certain games handle hyper threading differently. some games it works perfectly, for others it creates microstutter issues










3D information starts at 3:03
Interesting part @ 3:49...


----------



## l337g0g0 (Mar 2, 2014)

Dj-ElectriC said:


> I thought that by now BF3\4 performance gain of an i7 over an i5 would be something widely known.
> 
> And the claim that "all games use 2 to 4 threads" isn't correct at all.


One last post for now.


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Mar 2, 2014)

l337g0g0 said:


> 3D information starts at 3:03
> Interesting part @ 3:49...



Doesnt mean that HT is 100% useless for gaming. Please.... they only used GRID 2 for testing HT in gaming, rest are 3D benchmarks. 

While HT may net only a few extra fps at best - thats still something, but like i said it depends on the game itself. every game engine will handle HT differently. 

At the end of the day it wont really make much difference for average usage. I could pull out a 2500k and clock it to the moon and it wont feel any 'slower' or 'less responsive' than an extreme series intel chip.


----------



## l337g0g0 (Mar 2, 2014)

FreedomEclipse said:


> Doesnt mean that HT is 100% useless for gaming. Please.... they only used GRID 2 for testing HT in gaming, rest are 3D benchmarks.
> 
> While HT may net only a few extra fps at best - thats still something, but like i said it depends on the game itself. every game engine will handle HT differently.
> 
> At the end of the day it wont really make much difference for average usage. I could pull out a 2500k and clock it to the moon and it wont feel any 'slower' or 'less responsive' than an extreme series intel chip.



It was 1-3 frame if i remember, and wouldn't that be in a margin of error?
and to that point it's definitely not worth the price differences of both equal MHZ CPU's for 1-3 frames...


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Mar 2, 2014)

l337g0g0 said:


> It was 1-3 frame if i remember, and wouldn't that be in a margin of error?
> and to that point it's definitely not worth the price differences of both equal MHZ CPU's for 1-3 frames...



Depends, Not everyone uses their PC for just gaming and nothing else which is the bigger picture here but i agree for a gaming machine HT makes very little difference, the Internet has never denied that.


----------



## l337g0g0 (Mar 2, 2014)

FreedomEclipse said:


> Depends, Not everyone uses their PC for just gaming and nothing else which is the bigger picture here but i agree for a gaming machine HT makes very little difference, the Internet has never denied that.



And to the one video about even an I3 is good, I don't know if he remembers that the I5 has Intel turbo boost and the I3 don't which is useful.
So i wouldn't go as far as to say an I3 will suffice...


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Mar 2, 2014)

Well, the i3 4130 does a lot better than some of AMDs quad & hexa core CPUs even when it comes to multitasking and single threaded tasks, the architecture is just so much more efficient, I have no quams about recommending an i3 (with HT) for gaming and everyday use if the persons on a budget or doesnt need the raw power of a quad. hexa or octa core CPUs.

Dont get me wrong, an i3 might not be a great idea to drive multi-GPu set ups but for a low/mid range set up with only one GPU they can still perform amazing well.

Heres BF4 on an i3 setup:










system specs:

i3 4130 @ 3.4GHz
Gigabyte GTX 660Ti 2GB
8GB Mixed Brand Ram @ 1333MHz CL9
Kingston V300 120GB SSD
Corsair CX 500


IMO ram could be boosted to 1600Mhz or higher but it still reflects a decent budget minded mid range system.

::EDIT::

Its all about perspectives.

One mans floor is another mans roof


----------



## TheHunter (Mar 2, 2014)

l337g0g0 and your point is, seriously?

All I see is you registered today to troll that i7, more precisely Hyper Threading, is apparently useless for what ever reason..

Ps it was in old games, but this isn't 2008-2010 anymore and it will only get more multi threaded from now on, mark my words.

If someone is on a tight budget he/she will definitely go for 4 threaded variant and hope for the best, if "money isn't a limit then 8 threaded cpu is a no brainer now.

Now go troll somewhere else


----------



## l337g0g0 (Mar 2, 2014)

TheHunter said:


> l337g0g0 and your point is, seriously?
> 
> All I see is you registered today to troll that i7, more precisely Hyper Threading, is apparently useless for what ever reason..
> 
> ...



I can't make an account to add my 2 cent or i'm trolling?
Please.

I was talking about most people that just don't like throwing money to the wind for 2 FPS bonus.
Most of the information i read is current beyond those videos, those are examples.


Multi-threading will be utilized more in games as time goes on, but for now it's not and that's my point.
And you don't have to be on a budget to not waste money on current tech that offers nothing for more money.


----------



## l337g0g0 (Mar 2, 2014)

FreedomEclipse said:


> Its all about perspectives.
> 
> One mans floor is another mans roof



That's really cool, Didn't know the I3 was that powerful.
I was talking about it overclocking on it's own, but this was interesting, thanks for linking that.


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Mar 2, 2014)

l337g0g0 said:


> I was talking about it overclocking on it's own, but this was interesting, thanks for linking that.



News to me, I thought you were talking about Hyper Threading since thats all i saw in your threads and what you originally linked to

You cant overclock i3's anymore, you might be able to bump up the BLCK Clock but youre fairly limited.

Clarkdale i3's had overclocking but not the newer SB, IB or Haswell iterations of i3.

--

You didnt know the i3 was that powerful? For a second there i thought you might of read my other posts where i recommend someone get an i3 4130 to replace their Q6600 because they were on a budget and didnt want to spend a lot of money on upgrades.


Youre either a troll or somebody who really didnt do their research before engaging in a debate, The article you originally linked to has some truth to it but it doesnt mean much at all. This is 2014, any sort of software these days are coded to take advantage of extra cores or threads a CPU might have (unless otherwise).

i3's are plenty powerful, a decent i3 can easily beat down a AMD Richland APU when it comes to raw processing, but the advantages of an APU is that it has better integrated graphics and its overclockable. but at stock speeds the i3 will be the faster one.

::EDIT::

If you read this Kaveri review - you can still see a i3 4330 performs better in quite a few of the productivity tests, Overall the Kaveri wins though, at least when it comes to gaming and its able to use its onboard GPU


----------



## l337g0g0 (Mar 2, 2014)

FreedomEclipse said:


> News to me, I thought you were talking about Hyper Threading since thats all i saw in your threads and what you originally linked to
> 
> You cant overclock i3's anymore, you might be able to bump up the BLCK Clock but youre fairly limited.
> 
> Clarkdale i3's had overclocking but not the newer SB, IB or Haswell iterations of i3.



My Quote...
"And to the one video about even an I3 is good, I don't know if he remembers that the I5 has Intel turbo boost and the I3 don't which is useful.
So i wouldn't go as far as to say an I3 will suffice... "

That was my stamente made after we made our points about I7 vs I5, I was originally talking about Hyper threading.
The subject can shift as you converse, Re-read how the thread progressed.


> --
> 
> You didnt know the i3 was that powerful? For a second there i thought you might of read my other posts where i recommend someone get an i3 4130 to replace their Q6600 because they were on a budget and didn't want to spend a lot of money on upgrades.



I read the OP first post and responded to His claim about I7 improving FPS from hyper threading, no i didn't read your post.



> Youre either a troll or somebody who really didnt do their research before engaging in a debate, The article you originally linked to has some truth to it but it doesnt mean much at all. This is 2014, any sort of software these days are coded to take advantage of extra cores or threads a CPU might have (unless otherwise).


Now I'm a troll and/or didn't do my research. LOL
SRSly you two are overly defensive, I'm not a troll for adding my 2 cents to a thread.
It is really ok for people to debate back to you without being a troll, it's not that hard to believe.
And I clearly did my research, your quoting my research...  are you SRS???



> i3's are plenty powerful, a decent i3 can easily beat down a AMD Richland APU when it comes to raw processing, but the advantages of an APU is that it has better integrated graphics and its overclockable. but at stock speeds the i3 will be the faster one.
> 
> ::EDIT::
> 
> If you read this Kaveri review - you can still see a i3 4330 performs better in quite a few of the productivity tests, Overall the Kaveri wins though, at least when it comes to gaming and its able to use its onboard GPU



TY again for this information, i really do appreciate it. minus the personal insults...


----------



## TheHunter (Mar 2, 2014)

l337g0g0 said:


> I can't make an account to add my 2 cent,,.



it was mostly a joke, sry no offense lol


ps People who buy i7 instead of idk i5 do other stuff too, where HT comes handy (audio, video production, encoding) and all recent games benefit 90% of the time.

an extreme example SeriusSam3
http://ht4u.net/reviews/2013/intel_core_i7_4770_4670_haswell_cpus_test/index37.php

or an extreme example of poor cpu code where only core performance counts,
http://ht4u.net/reviews/2013/intel_core_i7_4770_4670_haswell_cpus_test/index35.php

But then again someone with HT can turn it off  too.  What's 100-150$ difference in 3-4 years time, nothing.
I personally rather spend extra 130€ and have 8 threaded cpu then worry what's gonna be in next 1-2 years, where all goes 4-8threaded to the max..

Gpu's on the other hand are a different story.


----------



## Nabarun (Mar 6, 2014)

It's ALL about affordability, morons!


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Mar 6, 2014)

Nabarun said:


> It's ALL about affordability, morons!



actually its all about value for money.


----------



## Ja.KooLit (Mar 7, 2014)

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7189/choosing-a-gaming-cpu-september-2013

here is a nice article about CPU's.

I personally choose 4770k over 4670K. Reason? I would just say peace of mind. I do alot of gaming. But I do sometimes video and or photo editing.

I actually observed as well that HT helps with my trifire. I cant give you exact or I cannot present you a convincing pattern and or graph about it. But when HT is enabled, it feels more smoother for trifire. Thats only my personal experience and I dont know others.

This has been a debate since SB, IV and so on and it will be a debate again in the next CPU's coming out. 

It is mostly about budget. If you can afford a CPU with HT, why not? in the end, it will be you anyway and no one will complain about it. Its your money and its your rig not theirs....


----------



## Nabarun (Mar 7, 2014)

FreedomEclipse said:


> actually its all about value for money.


Well, to this I will quote yourself:



FreedomEclipse said:


> Its all about perspectives.
> 
> One mans floor is another mans roof



In my perspective, only the ones (_like me_) who don't have filthy amounts of it look for the "value" in their money-spending. People buy GTX Titans and Porsche and Rolce Royce not for the "value" they get out of their expenditure but because they can. I'm not saying 4770K is comparable to that, but hyperthreading does have it's uses, and it's a very nice thing to have if you don't mind spending 50%more than the 4670K. It's got extra 4 threads for extra 50%. The 4670K is not a steal in the first place. You buy what you can afford.


----------



## Ja.KooLit (Mar 7, 2014)

Nabarun said:


> Well, to this I will quote yourself:
> In my perspective, only the ones (_like me_) who don't have filthy amounts of it look for the "value" in their money-spending. People buy GTX Titans and Porsche and Rolce Royce not for the "value" they get out of their expenditure but because they can. I'm not saying 4770K is comparable to that, but hyperthreading does have it's uses, and it's a very nice thing to have if you don't mind spending *50%more than the 4670K*. It's got extra 4 threads for extra 50%. The 4670K is not a steal in the first place. You buy what you can afford.



pls give me a link where 4670k is 50% less than 4770k


----------



## Nabarun (Mar 7, 2014)

night.fox said:


> pls give me a link where 4670k is 50% less than 4770k


I did not say that 4670K is 50% cheaper than 4770K. I said 4770K is about 50% more than 4670K. It's not the same thing. You can check out any online retailer for the prices. In India the 4670K is around 16K INR and 4770K about 24K.


----------



## Ja.KooLit (Mar 7, 2014)

Nabarun said:


> I did not say that 4670K is 50% cheaper than 4770K. I said 4770K is about 50% more than 4670K. It's not the same thing. You can check out any online retailer for the prices. In India the 4670K is around 16K INR and 4770K about 24K.





Nabarun said:


> Well, to this I will quote yourself:
> 
> 
> 
> In my perspective, only the ones (_like me_) who don't have filthy amounts of it look for the "value" in their money-spending. People buy GTX Titans and Porsche and Rolce Royce not for the "value" they get out of their expenditure but because they can. I'm not saying 4770K is comparable to that, but hyperthreading does have it's uses, and it's a very nice thing to have if you don't mind* spending 50%more than the 4670K*. It's got extra 4 threads for extra 50%. The 4670K is not a steal in the first place. You buy what you can afford.



spending 50% more means 50% cheaper. am I right? 

Based from price in india, 16k ruppee agains 24k rupee is what? thats about 33% more only. its not 50% more

anyway, its up to people choices. If merely for gaming, 4670K is more than enough. HT is better if you use alot of video, photo editing.

As for me, price here is $100 more. I am glad I choose 4770K cause it really helps with trifire. Thats what I observed.


----------



## Nabarun (Mar 7, 2014)

night.fox said:


> spending 50% more means 50% cheaper. am I right?


No.
50% more of 100 equals 150, but 50% less of 150 equals 75.



> Based from price in india, 16k ruppee agains 24k rupee is what? thats about 33% more only. its not 50% more



if:   16 + 16x/100 = 24
then:   x=50


----------



## Vario (Mar 7, 2014)

50% more = 1.5*base value
and
50% more than that = 1.5*1.5*base value or 2.25*base value so not 100% more, which would be 2*base value, but rather 125%


----------



## Nabarun (Mar 7, 2014)

Vario said:


> 50% more = 1.5*base value
> and
> 50% more than that = 1.5*1.5*base value or 2.25*base value so not 100% more, which would be 2*base value, but rather 125%


Obviously.


----------



## tttony (Mar 24, 2014)

Why gives 9.5 to the 4770K? With that high temps and low oc, it deserves less than 8 points


----------



## Arjai (Mar 24, 2014)

Wow, Math?


Nabarun said:


> No.
> 50% more of 100 equals 150, but 50% less of 150 equals 75.
> 
> 
> ...





Vario said:


> 50% more = 1.5*base value
> and
> 50% more than that = 1.5*1.5*base value or 2.25*base value so not 100% more, which would be 2*base value, but rather 125%



?


----------



## Nabarun (Mar 24, 2014)

Arjai said:


> Wow, Math?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Point being?


----------



## Prima.Vera (Apr 14, 2014)

I wish more games were used for the test....


----------

