Hello!
Right now, thanks to some recent misfortune, I'm stuck with a weird system.
I'm running a FX 6100, 8GB DDR3 RAM, a R9 280X, 1TB WD Blue, and a XFX 650W bronze PSU.
Trying to game at 1080p, and doing some not-so-light PC tasks, the CPU struggles.
On some games (CPU bound, or CPU unoptimized) the GPU won't go over 50%.
I'm not in the US, and the prices are kind of weird and inflated here.
Currently I can get, for the same amount of money either:
i5 6500 + cheap MSI DDR4 H110 motherboard.
i5 4690K + Asrock Pro4 Z97.
I'm going to buy some new RAM anyway, because I still want to use the FX 6100 as an HTPC. And DDR3 and DDR4 cost the same. So the new-ram argument is invalid.
If I get the K part, I will overclock once I can get a decent cooler. Right now I have the money for just these components, and over here a basic 120mm tower CPU Cooler (like a Hyper 212 Evo) costs $75. Probably in 1-2 months once I have some spare cash would be the time to purchase the cooler.
From what I understand, both i5 perform about the same at stock speeds, being the Skylake CPU slightly bit ahead on a few scenarios. Yet an average stable OC on air on the 4690k is 4.2Ghz, which should be ahead of the 6500 by noticeable margin (8-10% or so on most benchmarks I saw).
So, is the older platform, with it's higher temps, DDR3, and the need to OC (plus the cooler investment down the line) worth it over the mainstream h110+ddr4+6500 skylake components? Or should I just don't bother, get the locked chip and call it a day?
TL;DR: Should I buy: i5 6500 + H110 mobo + DDR4 vs. i5 4690k + Z97 + DDR3 (and THEN save up $75 for a cooler) ?
Thanks for your answers.
Are you sure the cpu is maxed out? What are its temps and is it overclocked? A FX6100 shouldnt be an issue gaming at 1080p - perhaps there is something else going on?
If not, and youre dead set on a new cpu, grab the 4690K and overclock it - if cpu power is what you really need, dont waste cash on a non K part, but to better advise you plz explain in detail what CPU tasks you are doing and where you think you need the extra compute power.
Also - where are you located? Might be able to dig up a few deals depending on location
What do you mean by "not-so-light" PC tasks? Rendering? Livestreaming?
Something like a Intel Xeon E3-1231 V3 would be good, providing you can afford it.
But out of the two options you posted, i'd go for the i5 4690k + Asrock Pro4.
Using MSI Afterburner I monitored my system load.
Playing World of Warcraft (pretty much depends on Single Threated performance), I get low-fps-spikes into the 20-30 fps on environments with lots of players and stuff happening. CPU goes to the 100% on one of the cores. GPU doesn't get much load. I tried with different settings, removing addons (mods), changing drivers and reinstalling. It's the CPU which will hold it back.
Playing FTB (which are Minecraft modpacks, currently playing with a 160+ mods pack) I get low fps spikes that go down to 15fps sometimes while interacting with complex structures. While the CPU load can be spread among the cores, there are a couple that reach 100%; after that the FPS drops. I did lots of fiddling with settings, mod configuration, java settings, adding performance mods, but it still performs about the same. I tried the same world-save on a i5 dual core haswell notebook, without dedicated graphics, and It doesn't go under 50fps at any moment. So even if the game is finicky as hell regarding performance, as there are just TONS of mods, the CPU still struggles.
Total War Rome II and Sid Meier's Civ Beyond Earth also showed poor min-fps and GPU underutilization.
As for non-gaming related process go, the CPU gets taxed a lot with highly multitasked used, like watching a high quality 60fps youtube video plus doing some stuff at the background. It doesn't lags the video or anything (using also GPU acceleration BTW), but If alt+tab to another program, which can be a not-so-demanding game, there is some lag until it kind of adjust to the load. Mind you hard drive use doesn't seem to be affecting this, as it's still on a pretty low %.
I've been getting into android developing lately, I've been using Eclipse as my IDE and it goes well, but when I want to test apps on virtual environments (even bluestacks) it can get pretty tiring to wait for the system all the time to get to the action. (again, I've been trying to differentiate Hard Drive bottlenecks from CPU ones, the examples I'm giving are all when the HDD is at low load).
Yeah OK from that its def a cpu issue. Have you thought about just shoving an FX8350 in there and then overclocking the crap out of it? That would be the cheapest solution.
Going with intel - again I would suggest a K part. The IPC increase from gen to gen is =<5% so an overclocked 4690 will be better than a non k 6500. The ram isnt as much of an issue so I wouldnt waste money on high speed ram at teh expense of quantity.
If you are happy to - what country are you in? Will help with finding the best bang for buck.
I'm in Argentina, and there is very few availability of Server hardware, or used parts.
Most of the hardware available to consumers is just consumer hardware. And while there some sellers that import workstation/server components, they are usually %20-40 more expensive that the consumer products that should be at about the same price (example: i5 6500 costs usd $280, Xeon E3 1230 V3 $460).
As for used parts go, 75% of all what's available is very low end stuff, and the rest of the components which aren't bad are priced at pretty much the same price as an equivalent current generation new product. (example, people selling their 4670ks and 3570ks at only $10-25 less than what the 4690k, brand new, is going for).
This happens because there is no price standardization here, each seller has it's own "market" and buys the products from importers, People are very used to buy things at retail shops which charge what they can. I have to travel about 2hs to get to the places I know have the cheapest components, most people go to places closer to them or buy online; so they get charged more of what I'm paying.
True. But, is it enough of a difference to justify having to spend $75 for just a 212 so you can get a decent overclock to beat out the 6500 by a few percentage points? I'm not saying it's wrong or anything but it's certainly something OP should think about.
Also, with the skylake part you get DDR4 which will be able to be carried forward to the next upgrade so it saves a couple more bucks there in addition to not having to buy an aftermarket cooler (though I do advocate getting an aftermarket cooler whenever possible).
1 Like
I'm currently in Buenos Aires, Argentina, which is a country that has high import taxes, and It's up to people working as both importers and retailers (which have to constantly wrestle with the local mismanaged customs, and the lack of a defined government fee for electronics that go into the country) to offer the best price available.
I thought about the FX 8350, but I don't trust the motherboard I'm currently using, as the manual says it's only meant for 95W CPUs.
I'm leaning towards the 4690k ATM. It's a shame Intel took those measurements against non-k base clock OC.
I think that if you don't have any special needs that can be satisfied with the new Skylake platform I would go for the i5 4690K. If you can pick up an Hyper 212 for cheap I suggest you to go for it even more. And even if buy an aftermarked CPU cooler for now is not an option surely if you buy it later on you'll still be able to overclock the CPU and get more performance out of it.
P.S. How many threads is taking WoW? I play GW2 and my 4790K @4.4GHz goes up to a few more points over 70% CPU utilization with just the game running and TS3 in the background.
I only spent around $30 for a Hyper 212 EVO, a huge pain in the neck to set up it was.
having setup a 212 evo and a NH-D14 both in and out of case's the evo is a slightly more of a pain to install.
but not to bad took me 10 min to install.
as far as the cpu selection goes id get the 4690k. wish x99 was a choice for you as it is my current platform of choice, that is until we see what AM4 brings to the table ( i love my PCI lanes the more the better and currently x99 has all the lanes)
One thing to consider is if you get a 2 or 3 year protection plan on the MB. My cheap MB came with a 3 yr protection plan that cost 5 bucks. It would have been 20 or 30 on a more expensive board.
Also if you plan on the new Rx 480 it draws allot of power through the Pcie slot and can play havoc with a cheap board.
Numerous youtube vids attest to this
The 8320e was made for you. The whole reason for the 8320e was to drop into older 95watt boards no problem. I have one with the stock cooler and it works great. It is the cheap aluminum one but is much quiter then the screamer that came with my Phenom X3. However you alone can weigh the pros and cons of which way to go. I won't recomend it cause frankly MB's fail. In my experience it's usually the Lan that goes first. Just switching cpu's causes flexing.
When I was riding on merchant ships I was surprised how protectionist some countries were in South America. Some guys had a thriving lil black market going on.:)
IMO with your question
I would buy the i5 non k with ddr4. DDR4 is the new standard. This would be minor Future proofing. i5 will do whatever you want gaming wise. i7 would be preferred if you do media creation.
Basicly as far as the i5-6500 vs the 4690K is concerned.
If you cannot afford a 6600K + Z170 board, then i would say go with the Haswell option in this particular scenario.
The 4690K can be overclocked to gain a bit extra performance out of it.