4820k vs 4770k

C

celwin

[H]ard|Gawd
2FA
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
1,593
I noticed the 4820K is cheaper than the 4770K. curious why it's cheaper. spec wise it seems to be a slightly better processor.
 
4770k is actually a newer architecture with slightly better performance and a fairly significant reduction in power consumption.

Ivy Bridge E chips like the 4820 support more memory and have a quad channel memory controller.
 
4820K would be better than 4770K for multi GPU- multi monitor setups.. Due to more PCI-E lanes and better RAM, but also have lid soldered and not glued.. Wich its better for cooling purposes, and it suposse to allow better OC ability than 4770K..
 
It will be interesting to see as more info comes out on the overclocking (only saw one, I think hardware canucks had their 4820k at 4.85). At default, the 4770k pretty much edged the 4820k out on all most every test.
 
Araxie said:
4820K would be better than 4770K for multi GPU- multi monitor setups.. Due to more PCI-E lanes and better RAM, but also have lid soldered and not glued.. Wich its better for cooling purposes, and it suposse to allow better OC ability than 4770K..
Click to expand...

You do get more PCI-E lanes, though realistically that doesn't matter to most gamers. Current single and dual GPU configurations don't max out PCI-E 8x bandwith. If you're building some sort of super-workstation with dual/triple GPU's and a PCI-E disk controller you'd need the extra lanes.

The solder presumably helps with temps compared to the crappy TIM on regular Ivy Bridge parts, but Ivy Bridge E also generates a lot more heat because of the advanced memory controller. 4.5GHz seems like the sweet spot for both IB and IB-E.
 
lilstevo said:
It will be interesting to see as more info comes out on the overclocking (only saw one, I think hardware canucks had their 4820k at 4.85). At default, the 4770k pretty much edged the 4820k out on all most every test.
Click to expand...

It seems like the 4770k beats out the 4930k on a lot of tests as well.
 
Araxie said:
but also have lid soldered and not glued.. Wich its better for cooling purposes, and it suposse to allow better OC ability than 4770K..
Click to expand...


Who has tried to delid 4820k?
 
celwin said:
I noticed the 4820K is cheaper than the 4770K. curious why it's cheaper. spec wise it seems to be a slightly better processor.
Click to expand...
I'd quote someone:
Do you folks pay 400 $ for a motherboard? You gotta be kidding.
Click to expand...
Now imagine Intel wouldn't give us discount for CPUs. In addition Ivy-E is between 4670K and 4770K, and for its full potential needs quad channel RAM. Well Intel increased MSRP for Ivy-E, even when Ivy-E is (obviously) not as great overclocker as Sandy-E. So for overclocking they are about the same, for nonoverclocking user, HW is faster. (and 1050 has great CHEAP boards with a lot of USB3.0 and SATA III ports) There is no reason why would Intel price older architecture with less ports higher than newer one.

I wanna quad core Ivy-E because the 2011 socket is more robust and heavy air coolers would cause less strain for the motherboard.
 
Araxie said:
4820K would be better than 4770K for multi GPU- multi monitor setups.. Due to more PCI-E lanes and better RAM, but also have lid soldered and not glued.. Wich its better for cooling purposes, and it suposse to allow better OC ability than 4770K..
Click to expand...

It does not have better RAM. Quad channel may net your more bandwidth but it comes at a price in latency. If you are the sort of (non power user) who just games, than it's a downgrade for you. If you are an actual power user than you wouldn't be caught dead playing games on your box and wouldn't need to ask about this.

The server and workstation improvements aren't for people who post on hardocp, they're for actual power users. You might as well be telling people to buy quadro cards.
 
acerbic said:
It does not have better RAM. Quad channel may net your more bandwidth but it comes at a price in latency. If you are the sort of (non power user) who just games, than it's a downgrade for you. If you are an actual power user than you wouldn't be caught dead playing games on your box and wouldn't need to ask about this.

The server and workstation improvements aren't for people who post on hardocp, they're for actual power users. You might as well be telling people to buy quadro cards.
Click to expand...

So in your generalization, no one that posts here is a power user :)?

I had plenty of uses for my x79 setup, from VMs to video editing. Plenty of people here probably do too.

and the 4820k would be an upgrade if he wants to use 2+ gpus since it has more pcie lanes.

additionally, it will probably OC slightly better since it IVB and Haswell chips seem to be hitting lower numbers.

on top of that, it's an unlocked chip with VT-x VT-d etc, so you can have your main gaming rig and run your VMs
 
Last edited:
Raghar said:
I'd quote someone:
Now imagine Intel wouldn't give us discount for CPUs. In addition Ivy-E is between 4670K and 4770K, and for its full potential needs quad channel RAM. Well Intel increased MSRP for Ivy-E, even when Ivy-E is (obviously) not as great overclocker as Sandy-E. So for overclocking they are about the same, for nonoverclocking user, HW is faster. (and 1050 has great CHEAP boards with a lot of USB3.0 and SATA III ports) There is no reason why would Intel price older architecture with less ports higher than newer one.

I wanna quad core Ivy-E because the 2011 socket is more robust and heavy air coolers would cause less strain for the motherboard.
Click to expand...

First off, x79 boards start around $200, and you can get used ones in the $150-175 range. $400 is a huge over-exaggeration.

The 4820k is practically identical to the 3770k, so it would be far more accurate to say it's just a few percentages slower than the 4770k overall. It will be slower than the 4670k in single threaded tasks at the same clock speed, and faster at multithreaded that can use hyperthreading.
 
Used board is worn out board. Worn out board is a board that explodes few years later.
XtXLbM1.jpg

Bounced from the roof and continued somewhere where it was found day later. Words of owner were: I didn't know polymer capacitors can explode violently.

Asus 2011 boards allow BIOS upgrade without CPU. And reasonable boards starts with $ 269.99 Gene, and $ 300 X79-PRO.
On the other hand reasonable Asus boards for 1050 are: Gryphon for 179.99, and Hero for 194.99.
So it's 100 $ less only for not using socket 2011. Now overclocker boards like RIVE, or EVGA dark, are in the realm I talked about.
 
/facepalm

That is the only thing I can think of.

Boards can fail after 2 years or 10 years. You just got unlucky that it died sooner rather than later, but if it failed "after several years," how is that the seller's fault? Faulty logic is extremely faulty.

Asus isn't the only board manufacturer out there. And just because it isn't a premier overclocking board DOES NOT MEAN IT CAN'T OVERCLOCK. Intel's CPUs are limited by luck of the draw on the CPU rather than the motherboard nowadays anyways.
 
I just went through deciding which to get, and got a 4820K and X79-UD3 under $400 total.

The budget X79 boards are more robust then a lot of the middle level Z87 boards.

I needed 10 SATA ports, and have 8+ TB of Blu-Ray rips to compress, and need to stream to multiple TVs while still being able to do day to day stuff. So 2011 fit the bill, and I can upgrade to a 4930K in a year or two when I can get a cheap used one.

In the reviews I read, the 4820K runs 20C cooler under load then the 4770K at stock. After the experience I have had with Sandy, Ivy, and Haswell, the 4820K is a much better choice for overclockers then Haswell. Not only did they use solder for the IHS, one of the reviews mentioned a new IHS design that better spreads the heat. Combined with the massive size of the 2011 CPUs, cooling is no problem for them. Im fully expecting 4.8+ around 70C from my combo vs the 4.4 around 85C that a 4770K would do. After delidding the 4770K 4.5Ghz would still reach 80C+.

Haswell was about 5% faster clock for clock in single threaded then Ivy stuff, but Ivy-E should clock 8% or more higher.
 
Cecil said:
I just went through deciding which to get, and got a 4820K and X79-UD3 under $400 total.
Click to expand...


For $400 that is a great deal. Did you get the newer 1.1v mb? Where did you score such a hot deal?

I have 2 HD7950s and I was thinking about getting the same CPU+MB combo yesterday. Seems like a good set up for Xfire.
 
SonDa5 said:
For $400 that is a great deal. Did you get the newer 1.1v mb? Where did you score such a hot deal?

I have 2 HD7950s and I was thinking about getting the same CPU+MB combo yesterday. Seems like a good set up for Xfire.
Click to expand...

The FS forums.
Mothman has bundles like that (new CPU/mobo) quite often that are basically new.


Rev 1.1V board with a couple hours of use.


Bunch of nice cheap X79s in the forums these days, $125-180 for boards $200-300+ retail.
 
Too much voltage... but 80c after 6 hours prime high stress load isn't bad on a Water Pro 2.0. Core 4 is killing me. Better than 3820 Sandy @ 4.6 Ghz tho. I would say this one is a weak to average OC'er. Would I buy another 4820k? Yup. Not interested in Haswell.

On a Rampage Formula.

316wvaw.jpg
 
Just got mine in, about to piece it together. Have a NH-D14.
 
idk..i can afford either x79 setup or kaveri..i might hold out..if i have the willpower..probly not and do both :(
over the haswell thing..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top