So hey, I've been thinking about upgrading my motherboard, CPU and RAM some time soon, because my 5 years old C2D setup is starting to show its age. I'm honestly more annoyed by my 4GB RAM running out and my shitty unbalanced sound card than the actual speed though, haha.
The Haswell platform seems like a nice upgrade, but I'm not in a rush (as you plainly can see from my current setup). I've heard rumors about Intel focusing solely on mobile with the next generation, that they won't release any desktop CPUs with the Broadwell shrink and skip to Skylake. How likely is that and would it simply take too long to wait for the next generation?
Edit: Is there any truth to the statement that Asus' PCIe controller has some problems? (reduced framerates in games mainly) It was made by the guy spreading the rumor on Nvidia's "Redemption".
Parts I'd probably get if I'm going with the current gen Haswell: i5 4670K, 16GB 1600MHz RAM and a motherboard with good onboard sound (possibly the Asus ROG Hero), alternatively a good separate soundcard with a cheaper motherboard.
Feel free to recommend some parts here if you'd like, BUT please provide reasoning as to why this part is better than competing parts. Fanboys can just get the fuck out <3
Budget is of less importance. Price/performance is of utmost importance.
16GB has about the same price/performance(GB) as 8GB, so I might as well go for it seeing as I generally have a lot of addons and a LOT of taps open in Firefox (hundreds) which tends to eat up RAM in the gigabytes.
The thing is that the ROG Hero is like 20-30$ more expensive than than normal motherboards in the mid-range, and considering the the higher-quality parts the ROG board is using I don't see why I shouldn't buy it.
I'm not sure why, but the ROG Hero and Gene dropped like 40$ recently here in Sweden O.o (yay)
Is there any truth to the statement that Asus' PCIe controller has some problems? (reduced framerates in games mainly) It was made by the guy spreading the rumor on Nvidia's Redemption.
Also, which is best, getting a ~170-210$ Mobo with good integrated sound (like the Hero) or getting a cheaper motherboard and a separate sound card like Asus Xonar DGX? (the Xonar DGX goes for like 30$)
If you are talking about price/performance and you are doing lots of multitasking just grab an 8350. Its a lot faster in productivity type stuff and a tad bit slower than the 4670k in gaming if that's what you are doing. AMD platforms generally benefit more from more ram. Then just grab a sabertooth and a xonar card. It'll save you a few bucks and give you better overall performance. Since games are soon to be optimized for more cores soon (like bf4 works on 8 cores).
I dont wanna come off as an amd fan boy. I'm grabbing a 4670k for my next mini build/gaming rig, but generally the 8350 is the way to go at a 200$ price point.
PLEASE DON'T RECOMMEND CPUs. Please recommend motherboards and soundcards, whether I should pick a good integrated solution or a separate one.
Now, as for why the 8350 is a worse choice for me:
1. It draws a LOT more power. (almost double)
2. 4670 has about 50% better performance in singlethreaded applications.
3. The 8350 only has about 10% better performance than the 4670 in multithreaded applications.
4. The 8350 doesn't overclock as well as the 4670K.
So even though, yes, the performance is about 10% better in multithreaded applications AND it is cheaper, I can probably overclock the 4670K to a level where I get better performance while still keeping it relatively cool and having a quiet case. I doubt I could keep my case as quiet with an 8350 because of how much more power it draws (more powerdraw = higher temps = louder fans).
whatever, I won't recommend anything but if OC is a thing the FX actually does a better job according to these guys. That's because the i5 actually runs much hotter than the FX. According to Nicolas11x12 who reviewed both CPUs he had hard times keeping the i5 under 70°C on liquid cooling at stock clock, but he could keep the FX under 55°C on air at 4.8GHz. Power consumption is still a major bitch though.
That site seems like garbage. I quite literally can't find any specifics. The site I'm looking at has a much more in-depth review on such tech and always shows the specifics like actual frequency achieved, CPU voltage for said frequency and a bunch more.
They got the 8350 to 4.6GHz without tweaking the voltage too much and 5.0GHz maximum, but at 5GHz it draws like 400 freaking watts and requires INSANE cooling.
They got the 4670K to 4.6GHz. It didn't even draw more than 200W and while it got really hot, it wasn't nearly as bad as the 8350 at 5GHz.
So if I take the reasonable 24/7 scenarios I get:
4.0 to 4.6GHz is an increase of 15%. 3.4 to 4.4GHz is an increase of 30%.
So yeah, according to more trusted sites the 4670K overclocks better.
Post some links please, I wish to know better too. Updated my previous post with the review by Nicolas and the time at which he talks about the temps (that's a pretty long video otherwise).
So here he talks about the [email protected] instead charts at 3:28, considerations at 4:55. As for the power consumptions, yes. That's well established that AMD got their shit wrong. Also, since Haswell does more instructions per clock, overclocking an i Core brings more than overclocking an FX by the same amount. But how much can you possibly overclock, if a corsair liquid cooler won't prevent the CPU from reaching 80°C? (Sorry for my single-chunk posts, I am having troubles with the browser).
There is one very important thing that many don't seem to understand or talk about with the Haswell CPUs. I think this was something Logan pointed out in one of his videos. It's that sure, the Haswell CPUs run considerably hotter, but they're also a lot more stable at hot temperatures. So the acceptable temperature spectrum is completely different with the Haswell CPUs, thus making it kinda hard to compare with older CPUs and AMD CPUs.
Anyway, thanks for the concern, but I don't want an AMD CPU. The 4670K and Z87 chipset simply fits me better.