4690K still worth using?

E

Endurance-vm

n00b
Joined
Apr 2, 2017
Messages
20
Hi everyone,

I am currently running a 4690K OCed to 4.3 @ 1.23v along with a GTX1080 on an ultra wide 1440p monitor.

Some games I see 100% cpu (assassin’s creed origins for example) and some games are only using 60% CPU.

My question to you is whether you think there is any more OC headroom and/or should I spring for a full upgrade to i7 8700k or Ryzen 7.
 
Endurance-vm said:
Hi everyone,

I am currently running a 4690K OCed to 4.3 @ 1.23v along with a GTX1080 on an ultra wide 1440p monitor.

Some games I see 100% cpu (assassin’s creed origins for example) and some games are only using 60% CPU.

My question to you is whether you think there is any more OC headroom and/or should I spring for a full upgrade to i7 8700k or Ryzen 7.
Click to expand...
With all in one cheap water cooling you might be able to get another few hundred MHz, or if you have heat/cooling headroom on your current heat sink you could up the voltage a bit and try to hit up to 5ghz. Here’s settings you can try.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/180...hz-4790k-reviewed.html#/topics/1534875?page=1

However at 1440p you aren’t CPU limited too much even with your 4790 at 4.3ghz. You’re going to be more Video card limited. Your CPU is already fairly strong.
 
Last edited:
Endurance-vm said:
Hi everyone,

I am currently running a 4690K OCed to 4.3 @ 1.23v along with a GTX1080 on an ultra wide 1440p monitor.

Some games I see 100% cpu (assassin’s creed origins for example) and some games are only using 60% CPU.

My question to you is whether you think there is any more OC headroom and/or should I spring for a full upgrade to i7 8700k or Ryzen 7.
Click to expand...

Should still be fine for a while, I'm surprised that CPU would be struggling at all.

if it makes you feel any better I'm running a 1st Gen i7 based Xeon. Haha

I haven't played much that sends the CPU to 100% but I'm mostly a casual gamer.
 
You won't see any real gaming improvement unless you happen to be streaming or running background processes. So it depends on use case.

If you feel a need for upgrade, just wait a bit for Ryzen 2 or new Z390 CPUs.
 
I am in the same boat as you. I have a 4690k overclocked and honestly from looking at benches it's all meh.
 
My 4690k was a massive bottleneck in games at a high refresh rate. Moving to a 4c8t really helped in some games.
 
Oh for some reason I thought that was an i7. maybe see if you can find the i7 used? Seems like more threads has become much more necessary than they were a few years ago.
 
I think, based on what you guys are saying, I’ll hold off until the new CPUs come out next year and pick up some used 8700k or Ryzen 2s. Thanks!
 
Endurance-vm said:
I think, based on what you guys are saying, I’ll hold off until the new CPUs come out next year and pick up some used 8700k or Ryzen 2s. Thanks!
Click to expand...

or wait for the 9xxx intels that "should" have soldered cores and not need delidded.
 
nightanole said:
or wait for the 9xxx intels that "should" have soldered cores and not need delidded.
Click to expand...

I agree but I don't see anything wrong with trying to find a compatible i7 in the event these new CPUs aren't soldered. It's also kind of disappointing that the entry i7 doesn't appear to have hyperthreading like pretty much every i7 has.
 
Hyper threading traditionally doesn’t benefit games very much.
 
This is where there is conflicting info on HT. Some say that it doesn’t do much, while others say that it benefits a whole heap of a lot. I always thought that games typically favor per core performance rather than HT.
 
yeah but it certainly seems like games are utilizing more cores, so wouldn't hyper threading help this situation?
 
IdentityCrisis said:
yeah but it certainly seems like games are utilizing more cores, so wouldn't hyper threading help this situation?
Click to expand...

If they dont code for hyper, it doesnt get used. For video encoding, if they codec is hyper aware, yes it can increase performance 25-33%. However if its just written for "infinite cores" and not for hyper, you will see very little speed increase, and in some applications, performance goes down.

If you think about it, are you going to optimize your engine(PC/Xbone/PS4) for multi core, or focus on that (lets assume less than 10% of buyers) group that has hyper?
 
Endurance-vm said:
This is where there is conflicting info on HT. Some say that it doesn’t do much, while others say that it benefits a whole heap of a lot. I always thought that games typically favor per core performance rather than HT.
Click to expand...

Most gaming benchmarks I've seen show anywhere from 10% to 20% higher FPS with hyperthreading (with most falling at around a 13% increase). So, a 6-core i7 will perform like a 6.75-core non-HT CPU.
 
nightanole said:
If they dont code for hyper, it doesnt get used. For video encoding, if they codec is hyper aware, yes it can increase performance 25-33%. However if its just written for "infinite cores" and not for hyper, you will see very little speed increase, and in some applications, performance goes down.

If you think about it, are you going to optimize your engine(PC/Xbone/PS4) for multi core, or focus on that (lets assume less than 10% of buyers) group that has hyper?
Click to expand...

Fair enough, that must bode well for the i7 9700k being just an 8 core cpu with no HT. I just figured the games could take advantage of it as cores. thanks for the information.
 
Sure they are still plenty of processor.

You can only run Microsoft word so fast man ....
 
I got the upgrade itch and just recently upgraded two systems, one running a 4770k and another running a 4790k. Went with a 8700k for one system and a 2700x for the other. Honestly I can't tell any difference between the old systems and the new ones in every day usage at all. Don't think it's really worth the upgrade if you're mainly just gaming on it.
 
Endurance-vm said:
This is where there is conflicting info on HT. Some say that it doesn’t do much, while others say that it benefits a whole heap of a lot. I always thought that games typically favor per core performance rather than HT.
Click to expand...

I can tell you, from a folding perspective, HT doesn't help much. It does increase output, but not nearly to what you might expect.
 
For the most part yes. You will see some boosts in some games that utilize more cores but the 4690k is no slouch.
I'm running a 4670k at stock with a 1080 and i'm very happy with it still.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hulk
like this
Endurance-vm said:
This is where there is conflicting info on HT. Some say that it doesn’t do much, while others say that it benefits a whole heap of a lot. I always thought that games typically favor per core performance rather than HT.
Click to expand...

A lot of games are made with old CPU's in mind i.e. 4C/4T or 4C/8T where you might get some substantial gains from HT modern CPU's with 6 or 8 cores can go without HT since they have more real cores . An 8C/8T should outperform an 4C/8T quite easily.

But that does not mean that your old CPU needs to be replaced, only replace something if your current machines performance is subpar for your usage or the machine is defective.
 
Archaea said:
However at 1440p you aren’t CPU limited too much even with your 4790 at 4.3ghz. You’re going to be more Video card limited. Your CPU is already fairly strong.
Click to expand...
This....for the most part.
 
HT doesn't help all that much for gaming wise.

Though... you can pick up a used i7-4770K for $120-140 off of eBay. Maybe less if you eyeball ebay it for a while.

The i5-4690K can fetch $100-120.

Best case scenario, you hardly pay anything at all to step up to an i7.

(Damn... missed an i7-4770K for $100 today).
 
As an eBay Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
$100 or less for a step up to an i7 is a heck of a lot cheaper than buying a whole new PC. I'd try that and overclock it to help extend the life of your system.
 
Archaea said:
Hyper threading traditionally doesn’t benefit games very much.
Click to expand...
Absolute nonsense and shows you have no clue what you were talking about. How much hyper-threading benefits obviously depends on how many cores are being used in the first place. If you have hyper-threading on top of a dual-core then it makes a complete night and day difference as a dual-core without hyper-threading would be pretty much useless in most modern games. Even on a 4-core CPU hyper-threading makes an absolutely massive difference in most modern games as you will be fully CPU pegged with any halfway decent GPU and using only 4 Cores. If I disable hyper-threading on my 4770k then most modern games will take a massive hit in performance such as Mafia 3 and Watch Dogs 2 and Assassin's Creed Odyssey. And in really CPU limited games are parts of games will be a stuttering mess and the mouse will feel sluggish just turning as the CPU is pegged at 100% with only 4 cores. Hell several games will even Peg all eight threads of my 4770k and in some cases even drop me below 60 frames per second being so CPU bottlenecked. It's ridiculous to even have this argument or debate at the end of 2018.
 
DTN107 said:
HT doesn't help all that much for gaming wise.
Click to expand...
Yet another person with absolutely no clue about hyper-threading in games. Again it depends on the CPU that has hyper threading but it absolutely makes a massive difference on 4 Cores and especially 2 cores. Now sure when you're talking about an 8600k to an 8700k then in most cases you are looking at no performance increase.
 
DTN107 said:
HT doesn't help all that much for gaming wise.
Click to expand...

giphy.gif


This might've been true 3-4 years ago....

Now, plenty of games are taking advantage of hyper-threading: Witcher 3, Assassin's Creed ______, Monster Hunter World, etc etc.

(currently awaiting an x3470 from AliExpress for $25.... mainly just to increase my 0.1%'s)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hulk
like this
Archaea said:
Hyper threading traditionally doesn’t benefit games very much.
Click to expand...


No, you're wrong.

The "Not built for HT" thing hasn't been a problem for years. If a game can handle 4+ cores, then it will also scale for hyperthreading. All modern compilers can do this automatically.

The problem is, if your GAME have only 4 major threads, you will see zero speedup going from 4c/4t to 4c/8t. But in games with better scaling, you could see up to %30 higher average performance (and significantly higher minimums):

hitman_1280_720.png


Yeah, that's right - you just saw a 6700k register 30% higher performance than an i5 7600. This game has eight major threads.

sniperelite4_1280_720.png


The above is an example of a game with six major threads, so the performance increase is only 15% (AMD 1300x ->1500x)

assassins-creed-origins_1280_720.png


And this is an example of another game with 8 major threads. see how you get 30% performance increase going form both AMD x1300x to 1500x, and the same performance increase going from core i3 8350 to the 7700k.

This is the same reason the Pentium with 4 threads has been selling like hotcakes: because the performance increase over 2x/2t is simply staggering, because most games have four major threads now, and are moving on to 6 major threads or more.

The consoles using 8 core processors have forced developers to learn how to multi-thread, if they want to compete. And the PC is ready to run with this new talent.

The reason hyperthreading got a bad rap is because it DOUBLES your available thread count, so to get full performance on that i7 6700k your game has to scale to 8 major threads. But 6 major threads are pretty common now, and it won't be long till things get bigger, now that AMD has launched the core wars.

I could definitely see the next-generation consoles having 8c/16t Zen 2.
 
Last edited:
I won't disregard that the i5 is still plenty for current games, if you don't care about 120 Hz. Just making it clear that 4 cores is as many threads as games will use is no-longer true.

When people post that Hyperthreading does nothing for games, you know that's shit that needs to be struck down.

Those 720p tests are just to show how well game engines can perform when you take the GPU out of the equation. It's pretty clear that most people will game at higher resolutions, BUT IT IS NICE TO KNOW YOU HAVE THE EXTRA LIFETIME BUILT-IN TO YOUR CPU PURCHASE.

Archaea, you don't fucking buy "just enough CPU to play your game of choice this week." You buy for the future, and those 720p tests tell you just how much future you've bought (or how much time your old CPU has left). The one with the highest score is the one with the longest lifetime in CURRENT games, PERIOD.

It's up to YOU to determine just how high a maximum framerate you want to invest in, or when you think it's necessary to upgrade.

The OP can answer this whole damn thread for themselves by just running ACO at 720p. If their performance does not increase, then they are CPU-limited.
 
Last edited:
Archaea said:
*SNIP*
Click to expand...

lol let me counter that with a test from a truly reliable site (probably one of the best CPU benchmarker out there: digitalfoundry/eurogamer) and not from some random guy...

anyone who believe Hyperthreading doesn't make a difference in game have no single clue of what the hell are talking about... and shouldn't be taking serious.

 
The I5-7400 is similar performance to your i5-4690k in these CPU gaming benchmarks from TechPowerup. Your i5-4690k is actually likely a little faster - but they are both four cores, no hyperthreading, and both in the same ballpark. (https://versus.com/en/intel-core-i5-4690k-vs-intel-core-i5-7400).

Each game benchmarked has a 1440p resolution chart. Take a look at how the I5-7400 compares to all the processors listed for gaming at 1440p. The graphics card used in the testing is the same you have - Nvidia 1080.
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i7_8700K/12.html
 
Last edited:
I jumped from an i5 3330 to an i7 4470. I really didn't notice a big difference in performance with a GTX 1070Ti.
 
Stoly said:
I jumped from an i5 3330 to an i7 4470. I really didn't notice a big difference in performance with a GTX 1070Ti.
Click to expand...
And 3 years ago my mother said she couldn't tell the difference when she got a V6 Accord to replace her 4 cylinder Accord. Just as in your case that doesn't change the facts about there being a huge performance difference.
 
My i5 4690K / GTX 1070 @ 1440p is holding up pretty well in 2018. Watch Dogs 2 choked a bit in certain areas, so reducing some eye candy mostly fixed it. Same goes for AC Origins, but that game seemed better optimized and there were very few hiccups.
 
Archaea said:
The I5-7400 is similar performance to your i5-4690k in these CPU gaming benchmarks from TechPowerup. Your i5-4690k is actually likely a little faster - but they are both four cores, no hyperthreading, and both in the same ballpark. (https://versus.com/en/intel-core-i5-4690k-vs-intel-core-i5-7400).

Each game benchmarked has a 1440p resolution chart. Take a look at how the I5-7400 compares to all the processors listed for gaming at 1440p. The graphics card used in the testing is the same you have - Nvidia 1080.
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i7_8700K/12.html
Click to expand...

Based on these benchmarks, it seems I am going to really gain in a few fringe games. Otherwise, my i5 is still strong. Thanks!
 
So...
My brother in law is a mortgage broker.
He gave me 3 choked up dusty Lenovo office computers when he moved offices.
They are H61 with PCI-e X16 slot and 2 rams slots.
I got cheap 3770s chips off of Ebay and upgraded the ram to 8gb ddr-3 1600 memory also for very cheap.
Then I bought a dirty miners used up 4Gb RX-580 for very cheap.

I am so surprised a how well this thing games, at least at 1080, that I cant quit using it. I keep trying game after game after game.... I am fucking mesmerized. Look at my sig. I have X99 out of my ears but I am playing constantly with a 3770/H61 setup.

If I had a 46 anything, I'm sure I would be even more amazed
 
wrangler said:
So...
My brother in law is a mortgage broker.
He gave me 3 choked up dusty Lenovo office computers when he moved offices.
They are H61 with PCI-e X16 slot and 2 rams slots.
I got cheap 3770s chips off of Ebay and upgraded the ram to 8gb ddr-3 1600 memory also for very cheap.
Then I bought a dirty miners used up 4Gb RX-580 for very cheap.

I am so surprised a how well this thing games, at least at 1080, that I cant quit using it. I keep trying game after game after game.... I am fucking mesmerized. Look at my sig. I have X99 out of my ears but I am playing constantly with a 3770/H61 setup.

If I had a 46 anything, I'm sure I would be even more amazed
Click to expand...

LOL, components haven't really progressed an insane amount. I run an i5 4690k like the OP, it is paired to 16gb of some corsair ram and a fucking 760gtx 4gb card and I can play 1080p just fine. I think people really underestimate hardware sometimes. The 4gb on my card really helps me, most of the 760's are 2gb.

I always consider upgrading and end up asking why? My monitor is only 1080p as it is, so my hands are tied at that resolution anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top