Time to upgrade from AMD to Intel. (Prefer not to wait for Zen.)

ManofGod

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
12,864
Ok, lets first start out that I am very pleased with my FX8350 and have been so for the last 2.5 years. However, it will not overclock worth a dam and I want to upgrade my home computer. With Zen a ways off, I am considering the 4790K, 6700K or 5820K.

Now, I have 16GB off DDR3 1600 memory that I could easily transfer into a 4790K build. Also, I am considering the MSI Z97 Gaming board since I replaced my board at work with a MSI 970 gaming board and it works great. (FX 8320) Now, I also could go with the 6700K or 5820K but, I would then need to purchase new memory.

What do you guys think. I have $500 to now spend but, I can add a bit more in if I go to the 5820k direction. Also, I will not go with anything less than the processors I listed because I also need to do virtualization at home and I would like to overclock at bit if I get a good chip.

I run SSD's for boot drives and I have an R9 290 so I do not want to upgrade those at this time. I am tempted to just do the 4790k but, I require at least 3 years of time out of it.
 
Wow, I did not realize the Intel subforum was almost as dead as the AMD one. :D It looks like if I want a 6700k, I would have to wait since they are seemingly not available. Therefore, a 5820k or 4790k would be the selections if I want to upgrade now.

Question is, which one?
 
the_servicer said:
How long will it be before Zen comes out?
Click to expand...

Looks like at least 12 to 16 months. I now have $500 to spend and have the upgrade itch for home. I did replace my mainboard at work since it was flaky and upgraded to a 480GB SSD since it was cheap.
 
Going in the cheap way as you said I would simply go with the 4790k amd reuse the ram that you actually have. But I will not use never a MSI intel board in my life. The LLC works horrible and by flaw in design doesn't support adaptive voltage which is just crap because you are limited to fixed voltage or auto. My vote go to save money and go with a 4790K and a ROG Asus board. Or if you like a TUF.. if you are planing on gaming actually no other processor will bring more performance for the money.

Going In other way instead of the cheap, and coming from a FX platform the choice would be the 5820K, but as said above it will not offer any better gaming experience than a 4790K or 6700K.l but more versatility at the moment of work and other stuff.. So my vote go 4790K.
 
if you want something now then reuse your ram and go with a i7-4790K Devil’s Canyon, if you are willing to wait a while go with 6700k
 
I will probably go with the 4790k. At work, next year, I will probably upgrade to a 5820k. However, I am considering taking a couple of days off next month and taking a day trip to the Micro Center in Northeast Ohio. It is just 180 miles one way and I might get a good deal even with gas and sales tax.

Edit: What is your take on the Asrock Z97 Pro4?
 
a cousin is using his 4790K with that Z97 Pro4 never a single issue, the fact that haswell have the VRM integrated on die help a lot the mobos and Asrock was one of those that had certain issues with voltage regulation. I think that's a green light with the Z97 Pro4 the only thing i don't like about asrock boards is the BIOS but that's just nit picking. you will be mostly fine with any board, except MSI for the mentioned issues with the supported voltage modes.
 
Araxie said:
a cousin is using his 4790K with that Z97 Pro4 never a single issue, the fact that haswell have the VRM integrated on die help a lot the mobos and Asrock was one of those that had certain issues with voltage regulation. I think that's a green light with the Z97 Pro4 the only thing i don't like about asrock boards is the BIOS but that's just nit picking. you will be mostly fine with any board, except MSI for the mentioned issues with the supported voltage modes.
Click to expand...

Cool, thank you. I think a day trip to Micro Center would be in order soon.
 
Araxie said:
what's the purpose of the machine? if purely gaming then go with Z170 and 6700K.
Click to expand...

Gaming and media use. It's part time gaming full time HTPC/torrent box. 6700 and 5820 are overkill but I build a computer and that mobo and chip are it for the next 4-6 years so I like to go some what high end.

The difficult thing is that I can get a new 5820 cheaper than a 6700, but it's the damn X99 Mobos that are crazy expensive. But I can also get some some slightly used high end x99 hardware for about the same price as a new Z170 cpu/mobo combo.

And to top it off you can get away with using cheaper/slower DDR4 mem on the x99 platform so that helps even the cost difference.

I guess the big thing I liek about Z170 is that raving reviews that [H] has given it
 
TMCM said:
And to top it off you can get away with using cheaper/slower DDR4 mem on the x99 platform so that helps even the cost difference.
Click to expand...

no idea what you mean by this, same DDR4 works for each especially as the slower speeds.

X99 has issues with the higher speeds, but both run the lower speeds without issues. All the made for Gen6 intel stuff is nonsense marketing

DDR4 is DDR4
 
zaniix said:
no idea what you mean by this, same DDR4 works for each especially as the slower speeds.

X99 has issues with the higher speeds, but both run the lower speeds without issues. All the made for Gen6 intel stuff is nonsense marketing

DDR4 is DDR4
Click to expand...


IF I was going to go with x99 I'd get the slower mem which is cheaper. If Z170 I'd buy 3200mem = more $$$
 
TMCM said:
IF I was going to go with x99 I'd get the slower mem which is cheaper. If Z170 I'd buy 3200mem = more $$$
Click to expand...

That is not the fault of the board, that is your personal choice

Both chipsets can run DDR4 2133 and potentially also run 32000MHZ, the issue is that many people have had issues with high speed ram on x99, but some have been successful.

Again its your choice, but you called it out like somehow choosing a z170 forces you to run faster RAM.

It is like me saying I would get an X99 board instead of z170 if the Intel Core i7-5960X wasn't so expensive.

I am sure I make some crazy choices others wouldn't understand, don't mean to seem like I am being hard on you, just trying to explain my confusion. Good luck with your build!
 
Nasgul said:
And DDR3 1600 is weak for an Intel CPU, DDR3 2400 for 4790K or DDR4 3000 for 6700K. Intel benefits from bandwidth and clocks. From all the years that I've built Intel systems, that's what I always go for and recommend.
Click to expand...

This isn't true at all, higher RAM speed will only help using iGPU for the 4790K, you can use a 4790K with 1600mhz and 2133mhz and you will gain 0 real world performance unless you want to benchmark some specific bandwidth constrained test, in the real world it will just a waste of money.. now in the case of the 6700K is true, skylake really see benefit from higher bandwidth, but also hardly to be noticeable in real world usage specially in gaming.
 
ManofGod said:
I will not go with anything less than the processors I listed because I also need to do virtualization at home and I would like to overclock at bit if I get a good chip.

I run SSD's for boot drives .
Click to expand...

Do you also run your virtual machines from SSD? I suspect moving your virtual machines to solid state storage will have a bigger impact than upgrading your processor.
 
Nasgul said:
And DDR3 1600 is weak for an Intel CPU, DDR3 2400 for 4790K or DDR4 3000 for 6700K. Intel benefits from bandwidth and clocks. From all the years that I've built Intel systems, that's what I always go for and recommend.
Click to expand...

Any benchmarks to back that?
 
I don't think you understand what I'm saying. I could run the slowest memory on both systems if I wanted. It's that faster memory will be better utilized on Z170 than on X99. Hence on X99 I'd get 2400 - 2600 speed while on Z170 I'd spend more and get 3000± speed memory


zaniix said:
That is not the fault of the board, that is your personal choice

Both chipsets can run DDR4 2133 and potentially also run 32000MHZ, the issue is that many people have had issues with high speed ram on x99, but some have been successful.

Again its your choice, but you called it out like somehow choosing a z170 forces you to run faster RAM.

It is like me saying I would get an X99 board instead of z170 if the Intel Core i7-5960X wasn't so expensive.

I am sure I make some crazy choices others wouldn't understand, don't mean to seem like I am being hard on you, just trying to explain my confusion. Good luck with your build!
Click to expand...
 
zaniix said:
That is not the fault of the board, that is your personal choice

Both chipsets can run DDR4 2133 and potentially also run 32000MHZ, the issue is that many people have had issues with high speed ram on x99, but some have been successful.
Click to expand...

What he is saying is X99 has far more bandwidth and isn't as affected by the latency of the slower DDR4 kits as Z170 is. People have already come across problems running DDR4 kits designed for X99 on Z170 because the timings are very loose and the IMC on Skylake doesn't particularly like that.
 
Nasgul said:
Excellent.

Isn't true "at all", in the case of, "true", really "benefit", but hardly noticeable.

I'm definitely going to have to take a 2nd mortgage on my house, my kid is going to private school and I don't care how much it will cost.
Click to expand...

Well, I guess that means your advice is out the door, thanks for playing. :rolleyes:
 
ManofGod said:
Well, I guess that means your advice is out the door, thanks for playing. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I think you'd be fine with the 4790k and carry your DDR3 over. Unless you really need some of the features of Z170 or X99 the CPU is generally just as fast as a 6700k. I've also had the 5820k and it was a great chip, used the cheap MSI X99S SLI board, I sold it when they took away my offset voltage control with a BIOS update though.
 
LigTasm said:
I think you'd be fine with the 4790k and carry your DDR3 over. Unless you really need some of the features of Z170 or X99 the CPU is generally just as fast as a 6700k. I've also had the 5820k and it was a great chip, used the cheap MSI X99S SLI board, I sold it when they took away my offset voltage control with a BIOS update though.
Click to expand...

Thanks. :) I am going to request a couple of days off in the first week of October and make a day trip to a Northeast Ohio Microcenter. It is 180 miles aways but, it will still be a little cheaper and a lot more fun.
 
Heres how to look at it from my perspective:

Require lots of I/O?
Consider z170 and X99

Need lots of cores?
Consider X99

Only want fast gaming performance?
Consider z97 and z170

Its not very complicated, a lot of posters here will over think this process and start a lot of confusion. When looking at the above, I myself, I'd chose what ever I can get the cheapest (z97) and maintain a long outlook on my computers life. That doesn't mean the other platforms are bad choices, I'm just cheap and realistic with my money :D.
 
Trimlock said:
Heres how to look at it from my perspective:

Require lots of I/O?
Consider z170 and X99

Need lots of cores?
Consider X99

Only want fast gaming performance?
Consider z97 and z170

Its not very complicated, a lot of posters here will over think this process and start a lot of confusion. When looking at the above, I myself, I'd chose what ever I can get the cheapest (z97) and maintain a long outlook on my computers life. That doesn't mean the other platforms are bad choices, I'm just cheap and realistic with my money :D.
Click to expand...

At home, the Z97 and the 4790k should double my performance in some instances from my stock clocked FX 8350. (At the FX 8350 is pretty quick overall as it is.) At work, next year, the 5820k would be the best bet because of what I do at work with it. Oh, and before I forget, I do run my VHD's off of SSD's only because, hard drives are just to painfully slow for that unless I am running only one from it.

Waiting for a response from Dam Dirty Ape to see if he has sold his 4790k and Asus Maximus VII Gene motherboard yet.
 
just go x99 and be done with changing motherboards for the next 8 years. drop a cheap 12 core xeon in it 5 years from now and your cpu will probably out live you before it becomes a bottleneck again. If its not x99, its not a real upgrade for me:D Regarding spending limits, that's what credit cards are made for.;)
 
primetime said:
just go x99 and be done with changing motherboards for the next 8 years. drop a cheap 12 core xeon in it 5 years from now and your cpu will probably out live you before it becomes a bottleneck again. If its not x99, its not a real upgrade for me:D Regarding spending limits, that's what credit cards are made for.;)
Click to expand...

At work, I will do that but, at home, I do not want to spend as much. However, I am wanting to build a linux box at work with the FX 8350 eventually.
 
the_servicer said:
How long will it be before Zen comes out?
Click to expand...

Zen was originally a 2017 release, then they reportedly shifted the emphasis, delaying the ARM/K12 stuff, and bringing Zen in, and it was a late 2066 release.

Now the rumors are saying it's delayed to 2017 again, but those are only rumors, and they may be fueled by the fact that Keller left AMD, and not by reality.
 
primetime said:
just go x99 and be done with changing motherboards for the next 8 years. drop a cheap 12 core xeon in it 5 years from now and your cpu will probably out live you before it becomes a bottleneck again. If its not x99, its not a real upgrade for me:D Regarding spending limits, that's what credit cards are made for.;)
Click to expand...

That was a good approach for LGA1366. There are still many running Xeons in their 1366 boardson the desktop.

The problem with LGA2011 Xeons is that they are multiplier locked, so if you plan on doing this, you'd be stuck with stock clocks, which on the more affordable Xeons tend to be pretty low to begin with.
 
OP:

If you plan on carrying forward your DDR3 RAM, just make sure it is compatible.

While many of the newer DDR4 supporting boards DO support DDR3 as well, they only support ultra low voltage DDR3, not the 1.65 or 1.5v stuff most of us use.
 
@ManofGod. I'd spring for the x99 build. DDR4 prices have come down significantly. Toss the DDR3 into another PC for the kids. Don't cheap out and then wonder "What if?" :)
 
If you are going to use your machine for virtualization you will NOT want a K series, as Intel fuses off VT-d and ECC support in addition to other workstation important features. Get a 4790 non K and live without overclocking or save hardcore and invest in a 1 or 2P LGA2011 Xeon system with ECC. The Xeon system WILL blow your budget to hell and back, but I'm a believer in the right tool for the job and you get what you pay for.
 
Mr. Bluntman said:
If you are going to use your machine for virtualization you will NOT want a K series, as Intel fuses off VT-d and ECC support in addition to other workstation important features. Get a 4790 non K and live without overclocking or save hardcore and invest in a 1 or 2P LGA2011 Xeon system with ECC. The Xeon system WILL blow your budget to hell and back, but I'm a believer in the right tool for the job and you get what you pay for.
Click to expand...

Sounds like I will have to do what Cageymaru said and go with the 5820k. That processor at least supports VT-d, right? Personally, not supporting hardware virtualization support in the top mainstream processor is just greedy. At least all of AMD's processors support it but alas, there is nothing to upgrade to for them until this time next year at the soonest.
 
Mr. Bluntman said:
If you are going to use your machine for virtualization you will NOT want a K series, as Intel fuses off VT-d and ECC support in addition to other workstation important features. Get a 4790 non K and live without overclocking or save hardcore and invest in a 1 or 2P LGA2011 Xeon system with ECC. The Xeon system WILL blow your budget to hell and back, but I'm a believer in the right tool for the job and you get what you pay for.
Click to expand...

That's no longer apply from Haswell onwards. so even K version of mainstream chips support VT-d..

it can be rapidly confirmed in the intel page:

i7 4790K

i7 6700K

And as a side note VT-D isn't also fully needed for VMs, vt-d will only help to Hardware/PCIe passthrough. even vt-x isn't a hard restriction and even that all chips support VT-x and a VT-x can operate without VT-d and/or without VT-d configured or enabled.

ECC it's still a feature exclusive for Xeons and ECC isn't needed for VMs.

ManofGod said:
Sounds like I will have to do what Cageymaru said and go with the 5820k. That processor at least supports VT-d, right? Personally, not supporting hardware virtualization support in the top mainstream processor is just greedy. At least all of AMD's processors support it but alas, there is nothing to upgrade to for them until this time next year at the soonest.
Click to expand...

:) read above.
 
Araxie said:
That's no longer apply from Haswell onwards. so even K version of mainstream chips support VT-d..

it can be rapidly confirmed in the intel page:

i7 4790K

i7 6700K

And as a side note VT-D isn't also fully needed for VMs, vt-d will only help to Hardware/PCIe passthrough. even vt-x isn't a hard restriction and even that all chips support VT-x and a VT-x can operate without VT-d and/or without VT-d configured or enabled.

ECC it's still a feature exclusive for Xeons and ECC isn't needed for VMs.



:) read above.
Click to expand...

Thank you. I was kind of looking around after I saw this and noticed what you said as well. However, I figured I would wait and see what others such as yourself have said. I figure there is probably some mainboard limitations such as H97 not supported but Z97 supported, right?
 
ManofGod said:
I figure there is probably some mainboard limitations such as H97 not supported but Z97 supported, right?
Click to expand...

Not that I can think right now. Chipset variations and limitations between same generation are generally mostly related to Overclocking, amount PCI-E and graphics support.
 
Well, I bit and did this: I bought the 6700K, and Gigabyte GA-Z170X-Gaming 7 combo. I also bought 16GB of G Skill Ripjaws DDR 2400 Ram. This combination should last me at least 4 years or so with only a ram and video card upgrade along the way. $673 with rush processing and 3 business day shipping. This works out to about $165 a year or so over a 4 year period.

This way, I can transfer my FX 8350 and Asrock 990FX Extreme 9 to a Linux build or gift build to a family member.
 
Great choice, gratz... don't forget the before and after benchies =D..
 
Araxie said:
Great choice, gratz... don't forget the before and after benchies =D..
Click to expand...

Cool, thanks. Yeah, I figured I can wait a few days since my home computer still works without issues. But, this is a significant upgrade, probably double the performance in many scenarios and I like to keep things a lot longer now. :)
 
Nice,

Sounds like a decent build.

I was looking into an upgrade recently (m,ore just because I was curious, than because I actually NEED it, my 3930k is still chugging along as it has since I got it on launch in 2011) but what turned out to be the killer for me was the RAM.

I didn't want to go with Haswell-E as according to my linear interplolation, it would - at best - not be a performance upgrade at my overclock level and at worst actually be a downgrade.

I did look at the Z170 platform, and the i7-6700k, and they looked nice, but the RAM was the killer here. I use a lot more RAM than most (I have a large-ish RAM-disk for a very specific purpose) and thus I would need in the 48-64GB range, meaning with the 4 slots on a z170 board, I'd need 16GB modules, which either do not exist or cost more than their weight in gold as we speak...

I really wish they would have stayed with 1.5v DDR3 for this generation, as it looks like unless you are gaming on the internal GPU (in which case you should lose your H card) DDR4 makes no difference, and I don't want to buy all my RAM again. That, and it wouldn't work either, as unregistered 16GB DDR3 sticks are ever rarer than 16GB DDR4 sticks...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top