Any Real Advantage of 5930K over 4790K for Gaming?

I

idmanotic

n00b
Joined
Mar 3, 2015
Messages
43
Hi folks, is it worth investing in 5930K over 4790K for gaming (assuming both are overclocked). Cause I am currently using 4790K oc to 4.6GHz, I wonder is t really worth the money to swap to 5930K.

Currently using 290 CF. Going for 390X CF when its released. So wondering if it will really help or just a waste of money.
 
the e-platform is only really useful for multi gpu beyond two cards. the non e-systems are often hamstrung by fewer available pci-e lanes once you start adding a third or fourth video card. a 5930k and 4790k are still haswell chips so clock per clock and core per core they perform the same. as video cards become more powerful there is also the matter of pci-e slot bandwidth saturation. the z97 boards offer at best 8/8 speed pci-e 3.0 slots in cf or sli. the e-platforms offer the full 16/16 speed slots.
 
Not unless you're doing something else in the background like encoding video.
 
To rennyf77's point, the extra PCIe lanes on an X99 will make a difference in multi GPU configurations. Also, The higher max RAM (64gb vs. 32gb) is nice if you need it.
 
You won't see an ounce of speed-up replacing a 4.6ghz 4790k with a (most likely) lower-clocked 5930k. You may even see a slight reduction in fps. Games still love a couple fast high IPC cores for the most part.
 
As a owner of a Z97 4790K that lives at 4.8ghz and can be fun to run at 5.2ghz. And a 5930K that lives it's life at 4.5ghz and will go 4.9ghz. I really prefer the X99 rig. Using the same card in both rigs. A EVGA 980 Classified in OEM config. And both with the same water cooling. And this is not fair,,, the 4790K is delided. The X99 is like a breath of fresh air. While the 4790K benchs great in single core because it will run faster. ( duh ). it's nothing compared to the neutered xeon when all cores fire up. Learn something about affinity and how to manages cores,,, yes even in winblows and you see the x99 walk away in everything but single core. Be it work flow, gaming, or sci work. Or I want to be a work station. If your going to go X99 it's beauty is the possible pcie lanes. One pays to much to go 5930/5960K for what you get. be it more cores and pci lanes. But the 582oK baby really is the waste of money. Having a fist full of pcie lanes and a overclockable baby xeon is nice. Then there is the memory. Yeah it's a bet slower on the take up. But throughput is twice or better. And you can get rid of most of the latency issues if you don't push for raw speed to much. If you have the money and don't want to look back go x99, 5930K min. If your struggling to get new then 4790K and look forward.
 
psyshack said:
As a owner of a Z97 4790K that lives at 4.8ghz and can be fun to run at 5.2ghz. And a 5930K that lives it's life at 4.5ghz and will go 4.9ghz. I really prefer the X99 rig. Using the same card in both rigs. A EVGA 980 Classified in OEM config. And both with the same water cooling. And this is not fair,,, the 4790K is delided. The X99 is like a breath of fresh air. While the 4790K benchs great in single core because it will run faster. ( duh ). it's nothing compared to the neutered xeon when all cores fire up. Learn something about affinity and how to manages cores,,, yes even in winblows and you see the x99 walk away in everything but single core. Be it work flow, gaming, or sci work. Or I want to be a work station. If your going to go X99 it's beauty is the possible pcie lanes. One pays to much to go 5930/5960K for what you get. be it more cores and pci lanes. But the 582oK baby really is the waste of money. Having a fist full of pcie lanes and a overclockable baby xeon is nice. Then there is the memory. Yeah it's a bet slower on the take up. But throughput is twice or better. And you can get rid of most of the latency issues if you don't push for raw speed to much. If you have the money and don't want to look back go x99, 5930K min. If your struggling to get new then 4790K and look forward.
Click to expand...

You really like your x99 rig... but most of what you said is misinformation. For gaming, having more pcie lanes only helps 3 or 4 card setups. Benchmarks show virtually no difference between gen3 x8/x8 and x16/x16. Same thing goes for RAM, no difference between dual or quad channel for gaming, or between ddr3 vs ddr4.

Hopefully soon more games will support more then 4 cores, but for now the 4790k is the best there is for gaming. When games start to take advantage of more cores, there will be a better upgrade option.
 
4790k is definitely the best for gaming... I ditched my 6 core setup ^^
 
psyshack said:
As a owner of a Z97 4790K that lives at 4.8ghz and can be fun to run at 5.2ghz. And a 5930K that lives it's life at 4.5ghz and will go 4.9ghz. I really prefer the X99 rig. Using the same card in both rigs. A EVGA 980 Classified in OEM config. And both with the same water cooling. And this is not fair,,, the 4790K is delided. The X99 is like a breath of fresh air. While the 4790K benchs great in single core because it will run faster. ( duh ). it's nothing compared to the neutered xeon when all cores fire up. Learn something about affinity and how to manages cores,,, yes even in winblows and you see the x99 walk away in everything but single core. Be it work flow, gaming, or sci work. Or I want to be a work station. If your going to go X99 it's beauty is the possible pcie lanes. One pays to much to go 5930/5960K for what you get. be it more cores and pci lanes. But the 582oK baby really is the waste of money. Having a fist full of pcie lanes and a overclockable baby xeon is nice. Then there is the memory. Yeah it's a bet slower on the take up. But throughput is twice or better. And you can get rid of most of the latency issues if you don't push for raw speed to much. If you have the money and don't want to look back go x99, 5930K min. If your struggling to get new then 4790K and look forward.
Click to expand...

I got a serious headache reading this.
 
psyshack said:
But the 582oK baby really is the waste of money. Having a fist full of pcie lanes and a overclockable baby xeon is nice.
Click to expand...

i beg to differ.

i have a single card machine, and intend to use a PCIe 3.0 4x NVME SSD and add an expansion card for Type C USB.

all this without running my £400 GPU at less than 16x.

for me s1150 is a broken platform for ~£280 cpu's, 5820k is the cheapest sensible solution.
 
sitting with a 4670k there isnt any advantage with such cpu as they cost at least twice what I paid offering no advantage for gaming and since dx12 is about to hit us there is even less a choice to go into such solutions. sadly the cpu race has stagnated and once amd has there zen arc out I change to them.
Its what I wait for as Intel havent offered any upgrade path viable yet.
 
I think we will see the difference between real cores E editions and mainstream Ks in DX12 games. Benchmarks show real difference between 8core and HT. That's why I'm saving for Skylake-E. Because if Vulkan and DX12 will finally bring real multicore gaming, then mainstream CPUs will be at large disadvantage.
 
R3MF said:
i beg to differ.

i have a single card machine, and intend to use a PCIe 3.0 4x NVME SSD and add an expansion card for Type C USB.

all this without running my £400 GPU at less than 16x.

for me s1150 is a broken platform for ~£280 cpu's, 5820k is the cheapest sensible solution.
Click to expand...

This.
4x NVME and still being able to give my 390X 16 lanes with a few left over is why I chose to upgrade to X99.

AND... if you do it right and look for deals or use the FS/FT section here, you don't spend that much money over an 1150 system.

I got my motherboard for 150 off of FS/FT, I'll get the 5820K for the same price as a 4790K and I found Corsair 2666 DDR 4 for 189. Only fly in that ointment is the ram. Your basically forced into 16 GB but hey, it's 16 GB.
 
wrangler said:
This.
4x NVME and still being able to give my 390X 16 lanes with a few left over is why I chose to upgrade to X99.

AND... if you do it right and look for deals or use the FS/FT section here, you don't spend that much money over an 1150 system.

I got my motherboard for 150 off of FS/FT, I'll get the 5820K for the same price as a 4790K and I found Corsair 2666 DDR 4 for 189. Only fly in that ointment is the ram. Your basically forced into 16 GB but hey, it's 16 GB.
Click to expand...

Not that maximizing your hardware isn't a worthy pursuit, but last I checked, single-card setups don't really suffer from being run on x8 PCIe 3.0 (lose, what, ~1% performance, at least for a GTX980 and below; perhaps the 390X will prove otherwise). X99 seems worth it if you actually have use for the cores, or you're going to SLI, or you really need >32GB of RAM. Also doesn't hurt from a "future-proofing" perspective, if you want to hold onto a single setup for a longer period of time without feeling too pinched by the bandwidth constraints of the Z97.
 
Geoffrey4283 said:
Not that maximizing your hardware isn't a worthy pursuit, but last I checked, single-card setups don't really suffer from being run on x8 PCIe 3.0 (lose, what, ~1% performance, at least for a GTX980 and below; perhaps the 390X will prove otherwise). X99 seems worth it if you actually have use for the cores, or you're going to SLI, or you really need >32GB of RAM. Also doesn't hurt from a "future-proofing" perspective, if you want to hold onto a single setup for a longer period of time without feeling too pinched by the bandwidth constraints of the Z97.
Click to expand...

Probably is just an OCD thing but I do believe the class of cards that is about to hit will make the 8 vs 16 lane argument a little more interesting especially with the resolution that I plan to run but a major point of my post is that for similar money, why not go with X99 and get the extra lanes. It is very possible now, especially if you live within driving distance of a MicroCenter to be able to get within 50-100 bucks of a comparable Z97 system and if you go full retard on a Z97 system you could easily outspend the X99 system.
My bias towards the enthusiast platform also extends from how viable my X58 system has remained. I like that kind of staying power.
 
The things that catch my eye about 5930k are the memory bandwidth and 15MB cache. At 4GHz oc that's got to be a monster even compared to a typical 4.5 GHz 4790k oc. Don't underestimate the memory subsystem.
 
I could see going with an X99 system vs a Z97 setup due to the much smaller price differential these days. The ram is definitely down in price, and quite a few X99 boards are under $200 as well.
 
Z97 for sure, but I do enjoy the hard on I get from a LGA 2011 platform!
 
If you don't have either z97 or x99 then I can see the argument for going with the x99 for future proofing, but upgrading from the z97 to x99 is pointless for gaming. Of coarse we are all enthusiasts here so if you got the cash and feel the itch then go for it, just don't expect to see a gaming performance improvement.
 
idmanotic said:
Hi folks, is it worth investing in 5930K over 4790K for gaming (assuming both are overclocked). Cause I am currently using 4790K oc to 4.6GHz, I wonder is t really worth the money to swap to 5930K.

Currently using 290 CF. Going for 390X CF when its released. So wondering if it will really help or just a waste of money.
Click to expand...

All upgrades are a waste of money if your current setup isn't having performance issues. Never upgrade proactively. Always wait until you need an upgrade because at that point the same hardware will be cheaper and/or there will be newer and better hardware out.
 
I would stick with the 4790K for gaming. If you are doing video encoding and heavily multi-threaded tasks the 5930k would be the better choice.
 
with some mb 5820k can run tri sli x8x8x8 while 5930k can managed x16x16x8
now what i would like to know is there any performance difference or is the performance dragged down to the level of the slowest pci-e lane anyway
if so the only advantage to the 5930k is a wider range of mb that will work with tri-sli
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top