Would 3930k at 4.5ghz to 6900k be a worthy upgrade?

Joined
Jun 29, 2016
Messages
10
It amazes me how little CPU progress there has been in the past 5 years.

Anyways, I have a 3930k that does 4.5ghz no problem, or even more with voltage/temps higher than I'd like. Every time I thought I'd upgrade, it turned out that the next generation of chips would be bad overclockers and the top potential would not be much better than what I already had.

I'm wondering if now the accumulation of several generations of performance gains has made it worth it. The problem is that it's hard to tell from reviews how my much older chip at that clock speed performs against an OCed 6900k.

Right now I have a Rampage IV Extreme still in my build, and two GTX 1080s incoming. Obviously I'd go to new memory/motherboard also.

This will be a pure gaming rig running games at 4K minimum, sometimes also at 7860x1600 which has even more pixels.

I am not necessarily in a rush to get rid of the guts of my current build (other than the incoming GPU upgrade) because this motherboard and CPU have been so stable and reliable and trouble free.

Is it finally time to switch to something newer though? PCIE 3.0 support is not necessarily a major selling point because I have been using the hack to enable it on the Rampage IV for years already with my previous 3 Titan build.
 

KazeoHin

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
8,373
It amazes me how little CPU progress there has been in the past 5 years.

Anyways, I have a 3930k that does 4.5ghz no problem, or even more with voltage/temps higher than I'd like. Every time I thought I'd upgrade, it turned out that the next generation of chips would be bad overclockers and the top potential would not be much better than what I already had.

I'm wondering if now the accumulation of several generations of performance gains has made it worth it. The problem is that it's hard to tell from reviews how my much older chip at that clock speed performs against an OCed 6900k.

Right now I have a Rampage IV Extreme still in my build, and two GTX 1080s incoming. Obviously I'd go to new memory/motherboard also.

This will be a pure gaming rig running games at 4K minimum, sometimes also at 7860x1600 which has even more pixels.

I am not necessarily in a rush to get rid of the guts of my current build (other than the incoming GPU upgrade) because this motherboard and CPU have been so stable and reliable and trouble free.

Is it finally time to switch to something newer though? PCIE 3.0 support is not necessarily a major selling point because I have been using the hack to enable it on the Rampage IV for years already with my previous 3 Titan build.

Personally, for JUST gaming, the 6900K is a waste. The 6850K would be a much better use of funds, as you would see a 20-35% boost per clock, as well as newer I/O standards and faster RAM speeds (like that matters).

You would see a boost in games, but not as much as spending the same money on a new video setup.
 
Joined
Jun 29, 2016
Messages
10
Personally, for JUST gaming, the 6900K is a waste. The 6850K would be a much better use of funds, as you would see a 20-35% boost per clock, as well as newer I/O standards and faster RAM speeds (like that matters).

You would see a boost in games, but not as much as spending the same money on a new video setup.


Oh, yeah, you're 100% right. The 6850k is the one I had my eye on and meant to make this thread about. Whats the typical overclock on a 6850k? Having trouble finding that information. If it only clocks to like 4.2ghz and my chip can hit 4.7-4.8 if really pushed, it doesn't seem like a good idea to get 20% better performance per clock at 10-15% lower clocks.

I already have two ROG Strix 1080s incoming as well as a new 65 inch LG OLED in shipping, so it's not like I can go any harder on video. I'm more just trying to decide if upgrading the rest of the rig along with the cards is worth the time and effort. I don't really care about the money, it's more the risk of buying all new parts and having to troubleshoot if I get a bad one and learning a whole new bios/overclocking routine and all the time stability testing vs having a rock solid system you know that may not be bleeding edge but is still pretty fast.
 

arestavo

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 25, 2013
Messages
1,672
4.2 GHz is what Broadwell-E typically overclocks to without getting too high in voltage and temps.

At least, the 3 or 4 reviews that I've read show as much.
 

lee0539

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 17, 2001
Messages
1,804
Average is 4.3 if you have water at 1.35 v. Good one hit 4.4 ghz even around 1.35 v like mine and I have h110I gtx and never hit 80 degrees but gets noisy when at max load. Have yet to see 4.5 ghz under 1.4 v stable. Once you hit 1.4 v you are touching above 80 degree temperature unless you have amazing cooling setup.

The ipc upgrade and physics upgrade I think is worth it for you. Make sure to get four 3200+ mhz ddr 4. You can use Siliconlottery to get a 4.4 chip. Went from 2600k at 4.8 ghz to 6800k at 4.4 ghz and saw major difference with 980 ti sli. It all adds up from ram speed, gen 3 with proper lane support, ipc, physics score, etc
 
Last edited:

GothamsReckoning

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 22, 2015
Messages
243
You would be getting an IPC Upgrade, DDR4, Quad-Channel memory, M.2 support and all the other features offered by X99 including Native USB3 and additional Sata 6Gbps (native) along with Sata Express and countless other features. I would say it's a worthwhile upgrade and you can reuse the same cooler as LGA2011/LGA2011-3 is interchangeable for coolers.
 

morningreis

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
1,574
If you can keep temperatures under control at 4.5GHz, then I would say no. Especially if all you're doing is gaming.

Stick with the 3930k, get your new 1080s, and then revisit the question when Skylake-E comes out as it will be a new platform and bring a host of new features with it.
 

GothamsReckoning

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 22, 2015
Messages
243
Stick with the 3930k, get your new 1080s, and then revisit the question when Skylake-E comes out as it will be a new platform and bring a host of new features with it.

Skylake-E will also be a much more expensive platform (LGA3647) and judging by the hexacore memory channel configuration and pcb it will also be E-ATX at the minimum unless they only include 6 memory slots instead of the full 12 (like Gigabyte X79 motherboards usually did aside from a few models).
 

UnrealCpu

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 20, 2003
Messages
2,763
They say skylake-e might not be out for another 9 months by that time skylake successor will be out which will be a better choice for gaming
 

tunatime

Well...OK
Joined
Sep 15, 2011
Messages
4,867
No its not worth it i just jumped to 6850 form 3930k at 4.9 and its a wash as my 6850 only hits 4.3 all cores at1.35 and if i push 1.4v i can run 2 at 4.5 3 at 4.4 and 1 at 4.3. Chip does hit uper 60s at 1.4v through. Only reason i upgraded was one of my pice slots went bad and i had to move my 1070 sli set up form 2 spaces apart to sandwiched and my card was melting
 

Tsumi

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Mar 18, 2010
Messages
13,508
For purely gaming purposes? I wouldn't say so. As for the features, that entirely depends on how much the new features are worth to you, and that is a subjective matter, not objective.
 

lutjens

Gawd
Joined
Feb 18, 2013
Messages
792
If you really want to upgrade to scratch the itch until next year, consider picking up a Xeon E5-1680V2. 8-cores, will drop right into your board and overclocks very well (4.5GHz was effortless for me). And you get to keep the rest of your rig intact...;)
 

UnrealCpu

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 20, 2003
Messages
2,763
Just curious do you guys
feel any difference in windows using a 6-10 core processor vs an i7 4790k or 6700k?

I am just talking running defrag, browsing, opening simple programs etc. Besides adobe premier, encoding, etc whats so great about the multi core processors
 

alxlwson

You Know Where I Live
Joined
Aug 25, 2013
Messages
8,222
Just curious do you guys
feel any difference in windows using a 6-10 core processor vs an i7 4790k or 6700k?

I am just talking running defrag, browsing, opening simple programs etc. Besides adobe premier, encoding, etc whats so great about the multi core processors


People still defrag? ;)
 

chameleoneel

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
5,191

Monkey God

Mangina Full of Sand
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
6,723
3930K 4.6ghz -> 6700k 4.7ghz noticed no real difference. Even went to an M2 SSD - no noticeable difference. But then again I dont game much anymore and I doubt my 970gpu is waiting on the CPU ever.
 

UnrealCpu

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 20, 2003
Messages
2,763
3930K 4.6ghz -> 6700k 4.7ghz noticed no real difference. Even went to an M2 SSD - no noticeable difference. But then again I dont game much anymore and I doubt my 970gpu is waiting on the CPU ever.

The 6700k is a much better overall processor for gaming in fact the 3930k won't even keep up with a 4790k at 4.8ghz
This thread is funny
 

Monkey God

Mangina Full of Sand
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
6,723
The 6700k is a much better overall processor for gaming in fact the 3930k won't even keep up with a 4790k at 4.8ghz
This thread is funny

If you say so. I noticed no difference in CPU's when playing Alien Isolation for example which is about the only demanding thing I play anymore.
 

lutjens

Gawd
Joined
Feb 18, 2013
Messages
792
I definitely hear you in terms of the reliability of the platform...it's why I couldn't bear to tear my system apart and am instead doing a totally new build for my i7-6950X. A Xeon E5-1680V2 would be a great upgrade for your RIVE. Drop in compatible and an awesome chip. Mine clocks to 4.5 GHz easily with 1.28V and has been ironclad reliable for 18 months now.
 

lutjens

Gawd
Joined
Feb 18, 2013
Messages
792
6950x will get you to 4.3 ghz max and expect quick degration

You really hate the i7-6950X, don't you? You seem to have made it your personal mission to crap on every mention of it, incidental or otherwise, probably due to your inability to afford it. Don't you have anything better to do? Don't worry, one day when you're all grown up and have a good job, you too can afford nice computer parts...;)

BTW, what the hell does the i7-6950X have to do with this thread? Your assessment of the i7-6950X and degradation is a judgement that obviously came from your reading one person's experience with it and now you're preaching it as if it were gospel.
 

UnrealCpu

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 20, 2003
Messages
2,763
delete

why is your sig say gamer in progress 6950x

I would say kaby lake or cannon lake is the next gaming processor lol. Do you play 2 games at once because unless the 6950x makes you money then its a waste of money for gaming.
 
Last edited:

lutjens

Gawd
Joined
Feb 18, 2013
Messages
792
delete

why is your sig say gamer in progress 6950x

I would say kaby lake or cannon lake is the next gaming processor lol. Do you play 2 games at once because unless the 6950x makes you money then its a waste of money for gaming.
It says Gamer in progress because I'm building a new rig with the i7-6950X in it (rather than tear down my existing system) and still need to buy the video cards on August 2, as well as the case and power supply. I don't just game with my systems, I encode a lot of video as well. The new system will encode much faster than the old one and still game very well while encoding.
 

UnrealCpu

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 20, 2003
Messages
2,763
anyone know if civilization 6 or star citizen is going to utilize all cores? Also anyone have a complete list of games beside ashes of singularity that will take advantage of a braodwell-e?
 

alxlwson

You Know Where I Live
Joined
Aug 25, 2013
Messages
8,222
anyone know if civilization 6 or star citizen is going to utilize all cores? Also anyone have a complete list of games beside ashes of singularity that will take advantage of a braodwell-e?


Not sure of the two games listed. BF1 will, and the current title does as well. GTA5 does, so does TW3 and Crysis 3.
 

chameleoneel

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
5,191
Modern online games tend to utilize more cores. BF4 single player will run just as well on a dual core, as it does on a quad or hex core or whatever. But BF4 multiplayer scales pretty nicely, with more cores. It takes a lot more CPU power, to keep track of all that real time data. I haven't played the alpha/beta, but I Imagine that Star Citizen will crush CPU, in certain scenarios.
 

thesmokingman

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
6,617
Just curious do you guys
feel any difference in windows using a 6-10 core processor vs an i7 4790k or 6700k?

I am just talking running defrag, browsing, opening simple programs etc. Besides adobe premier, encoding, etc whats so great about the multi core processors

No difference in use, but you see it in the power draw. Though in some apps that can capitalize on the newer cpu's quicksync, it makes a freaking huge difference. Like for ex. handbrake, with a 6700k at 4.5ghz vs my 3930K at 4.6ghz, with skylake my encode times have been cut by a crazy amount. It used to roughly take 3 hours to encode a 14gb file but now I'm looking at under 2 hours. I still have to play with handbrake to maximize time saved or up ql, but with the time saved I have options now to run various options that would just stretch encode times on the 3930k making it a moot decision.
 
Top