1240 V3 vs 4770K


I'm going to be building a computer for video editing and some 3d work, to later composite into videos. I'll also be playing some games but the performance of that doesn't really matter.

1240 V3 or 4770K opinions please?

In Australia the xeon is $50 cheaper and I will be using a GTX 760 2gb so the iGPU doesn't matter. I'll also be overclocking. As far as I know the two CPUs use the same platforms so motherboards shouldn't be a concern.


if you are going to overclock the 4770k is a lot better.

Despite an extra $50 for an unused GPU the 4770k will be better?

4770K, because it actually overclocks. If you aren't itching to overclock, then go Xeon. Better bang for the buck, and has respectable Turbo states.

The extra $50 is for an unlocked multiplier that allows for overclocking. You effectively can't overclock via bus speed (or Base Clock), because it is tied in with more sensitive buses that don't like being overclocked. You can maybe squeeze a few Mhz out of a Base Clock from the Xeon, which makes for an extra 102 - 114 MHz clock speed, depending on Turbo state.

With an i7, most people can get about 4.4 GHz out of the CPU, vs 3.9 GHz Max Turbo of the Xeon. You can squeeze a bit more if you have proper cooling, a bit of know-how, and lots of luck for a good bin. If you're crazy, you can delid the 4770k, pump ample voltage through it, and get about a 4.8 - 5 GHz OC

Thank you! I'll go for the 4770K, along with some benchmarks it seems to be the right choice.

Note: when going with the 4770k, your motherboard will be much more expensive for the Z78 chipset vs a B75 or H77... just saying... so it's not $50 more.... it's more in the $80-120 more... depending on your taste in motherboards...

i would go with the Xeon, because overclocking does not matter much, for video editing. Especialy if you do video editing on a pro base, the xeon uses less power. so will be cheaper, in daily use. i would look for the Xeon E3-1230V3, it turbo´s upto 3.7 ghz. thats fast enough for your needs, the 1230 is cheaper then the 1240, you could spend that extra money in a better GPU, to use for video editing, and to render on. a GTX760 sucks ass for video editing and rendering.

So my advice grab the Xeon E3-1230V3 + a GTX-770 or R9-280X

Or a FX8320 + GTX-780 or R9-290.

Grtz Angel ☺

If it were me, I would go for the xeon, reason being because I would want vtd, which the 4770 does not support, for reasons unknown to anyone other than Intel. I don't mind about the locked multiplier much, because I would rather have a near-silent rig that is 5-7% slower than a blowdryer or behemoth cooler that is 5-7% faster.

I would use the extra savings for a larger ssd or faster gpu or something.

Durasara don't spread misinformation.

I have a 4770, it has VTd, it's as good as the xeon, I can OC to 4.2 with a decent motherboard. It does a bit more than the xeon, but you can get a higher clockspeed. You can OC more than 100MHz changing just BCLK strap and voltages. I got lucky with this chip though, for most you probably won't break 4.1, I haven't seen others with one like this here. Keep in mind OCing a 4770 makes it heat more than a 4770k, so aftermarket cooling is required (I use a hyper 212 evo, got around 65 celsius max load @ 4.21Ghz)

For your stated uses a FX8350 or 4770 or the 1230v3 are better than the 4770k.

I've got a behemoth cooler in my rig... can't hear it at all... Noctua, Enermax, and Phanteks make excellent silent options for air cooling that are mere degrees less effective than water cooling and much quieter...

and to be fair... overclocking can increase performance by a LOT more than 5-7%... and I mean up to about 20% depending on the ASIC lottery... as GHz refers to cycles per second, if you max a stable overclock on a 3.4GHz processor to 4.5... that means at stock it's running at 75.6%... given that cycles per second doesn't mathematically transpose the physical performance increase... it IS relatively close to the math in real time... I've gotten a Haswell i7 to 4.8 before, and yes, it was MUCH more than 7% gain... 

that being said, it's certainly more cost effective to go the Xeon route... as the i7 requires better cooling, and a much better motherboard...  if you have the cash to drop, get the i7... if you want to save money or there's other things you'd rather put the money into (e.g. SSD, better GPU, etc)... get the Xeon...

  1. FX8350
  2. E3 1230v3
  3. 4770
  4. 4770K

My recommended order based on price/performance

I take a bit of an issue ranking a 4770 over a 4770k... for obvious reasons... in the US the k model is $5 more than 4770, and you can CERTAINLY crank more out of it than 5$ worth with an unlocked multiplier...

furthermore... I just don't recommend overclocking at all without an unlocked multiplier unless you have an actual degree in IT and understand what other areas you're affecting... I'm not saying you can't, I'm not saying you haven't... but you can significantly shorten the life of other components if you don't know exactly what you're doing... if you want to overclock, spend $5 more and you'll achieve double the overclock you'd be able to max at with an unlocked chip regardless... hell, I have an actual degree in IT from UTC and I don't try to overclock chips that weren't meant for it... 

Dead keen on overclocking - 4770k. You'll want some decent cooling though. = more $$$

For all practical purposes though the xeon fits the bill perfectly - spend that extra $50 on an upgrade to a gtx770 (going via pccg prices anyway), & it'll be a beast of a system.

You know Pentium III chips have a matte feel to them? I OC'd one from 933 to 1ghz and after 5 years of use it's now the PCB feels glossy. It works to this day as a home server (and another batch as retro games rig).

You don't need a degree in IT, they teach you to not mess around with anything, you only learn to OC with patience and experience (and forums or the now extinct pc magazines).

I would take my word back, 4770k is better in terms of price/performance ONLY if you oc it significantly, which we all know you might not get past 4.3 on air (low chance, but there have been reported unlucky cases), not much of an improvement. If it's only 5$ more, yeah, but over here it's 50$ more.

I'd say the only reason I got a 4770 over an fx 8350 was lower temperatures and power consumption, which mean a great deal to me since I'm a silent PC lover.

Of course I don't keep it overclocked, it was just a fortuitous experiment to prove non-k parts can oc; the rise in temperature compared to stock is steep and not worth the minimal performance increase in games, and unnoticeable in everyday use (I don't care for rendering times).