4960X@4.5G vs 3970X@4.5G

[csbin]

Source: http://www.coolaler.com/showthread.php/307620

4960X@4.5G DDR3 3000
3970X@4.5G DDR3 2400

 

[Pheesh]

no temperature info? I think that's what a lot of people are interested in with the IVB-E OC

 

[AdamK47]

I want that memory.

 

[tweakboy]

Hey Adam, is there reason why your OCing only to 4.5Ghz ? With that monster CPU.

 

[tweakboy]

You payed 1k for it, might as well throw the chair at it.. Go for 4.8Ghz ,,,, or is that not possible with that cpu or your rig station. ?

 

[moonbogg]

no temperature info? I think that's what a lot of people are interested in with the IVB-E OC

That would be too convenient and make way too much sense.

 

[NTMBK]

Argh too many identical looking images

 

[crashtech]

The two scores I sampled showed an average of 1% improvement. Wake me up when it's over.

 

[tweakboy]

For gaming all you need is a 1600Mhz kit and I promise your framerates will be the same as someone with higher frequency.

Oh and 4930k Im gonna jump on that OC it to 4.8Ghz and call it a life, until 2020. I just upgrade video cards until then........... 6c12t does it for me.

 

[Makaveli]

The two scores I sampled showed an average of 1% improvement. Wake me up when it's over.

yup pretty much no point looking at IVY-E if your on SB-E.

unless you need 6 cores new build should be haswell.

If you picked up a 3820 this maybe a good option to move up to six 6 cores.

If they were releasing new chipset with this processor I think alot more people would be excited right now all you get is the IPC improvements from SB to IVY which wasn't alot to begin with.

 

[BrightCandle]

Maximum overclock and temperature is what we need. Although this guy is running 4.5Ghz at 1.27V, that is one hell of a good SB-E chip.

But is the 1.27 V for 4.5Ghz on the IB-E typical or also a golden chip? Because if it does that I'll be pushing more like 4.7Ghz through an IB-E compared to the 4.4Ghz my fairly typical SB-E gets today. That 300Mhz +1% performance probably still isn't worth it, but its not nothing.

 

[tweakboy]

Wow only 1.27v for 4.5Ghz. Im running 1.440 .. what would that get me 4.8Ghz @ 1.35v ?

 

[aigomorla]

I want that memory.

LAST ONE IS HAX!!!

1500mhz memory however its 2T timings...

 

[SunnyD]

unless you need 6 cores new build should be haswell.

So much wrong with this statement I don't even know where to start.

 

[T_Yamamoto]

I want that memory.

oh Adam, I'm sure you can buy it.

 

[Makaveli]

So much wrong with this statement I don't even know where to start.

i'm listening....

care to expand on why you think someone who is doing a new build and does not need 6 cores shouldn't be going haswell?

 

[crashtech]

So much wrong with this statement I don't even know where to start.

I'm sure you could find a place if you wanted. 2011 has quad channel memory and 16 extra PCIe lanes, but these will benefit a very few. What am I missing here? I like the idea of a 2011 system, but so far it's just doesn't seem compelling enough to bother.

 

[Makaveli]

I'm sure you could find a place if you wanted. 2011 has quad channel memory and 16 extra PCIe lanes, but these will benefit a very few. What am I missing here? I like the idea of a 2011 system, but so far it's just doesn't seem compelling enough to bother.

I guess I could have rephrased it to add the extra memory and pci E lanes but that should be obvious for members on this site.

Still waiting for a response from sunny

 

[Piklar]

i'm listening....

care to expand on why you think someone who is doing a new build and does not need 6 cores shouldn't be going haswell?

After completing 6 Haswell builds in the last month I totally agree, Haswell is a no brainer for a new build over Ivy if 6 cores is not a requirement.

You would think that the benefit to buying a 1155 board is that they have had time to tweak and modify the platform to perfection but 1050 takes all the best attributes of 1155 then adds all Sata 3.0 ports and onboard audio on par with aftermarket soundcards with around 4-6% overall boost in performance. So why go backwards?

This is why I recommend 1150 builds to customers unless they have very specific requirements.

 

[JimmiG]

It's a frustrating situation. When you spend that much money on a LGA2011 build, you shouldn't have to compromise with an older architecture with lower IPC or an outdated chipset with fewer features. It should be the "everything but the kitchen sink" platform. That the $999 4960X has a lower IPC than the $239 4670K is inexcusable.

It looks like Haswell-E will allow the high-end platform to finally catch up with the mainstream platform. If the mainstream only gets Haswell Refresh rather than Broadwell, the generational gap with be closed.

 

[Yuriman]

It's a frustrating situation. When you spend that much money on a LGA2011 build, you shouldn't have to compromise with an older architecture with lower IPC or an outdated chipset with fewer features. It should be the "everything but the kitchen sink" platform. That the $999 4960X has a lower IPC than the $239 4670K is inexcusable.

It looks like Haswell-E will allow the high-end platform to finally catch up with the mainstream platform. If the mainstream only gets Haswell Refresh rather than Broadwell, the generational gap with be closed.

On the flip side, you can spend money on an LGA2011 build which is more mature and predictable than 1050, and less likely to cause you interruptions in the time-is-money operations you might be running - which is probably one of the main reasons behind the delay between 2011 and cutting-edge (read: not yet publicly tested) CPUs and chipsets. 2011 is also capable of taking Xeons which have ECC support.

I'm actually somewhat surprised Intel even has i7's on 2011. It seems more of an afterthought.

 

[SunnyD]

I guess I could have rephrased it to add the extra memory and pci E lanes but that should be obvious for members on this site.

Still waiting for a response from sunny

For starters, find me a mainstream Haswell board that supports over 32GB of ram. Don't ask why. Just do it.

Here's a hint: You won't because the platform doesn't support it.

People are always thinking mom'n'pop or "mainstream" box when they say crap like you said. It may be "obvious to the members on this site", but your generalization is still ridiculously invalid. At least you're owning up to your mistake somewhat.

 

[Gillbot]

MOAR COARS AND MOAR RAM for me PLz, K THX!

 

[Makaveli]

For starters, find me a mainstream Haswell board that supports over 32GB of ram. Don't ask why. Just do it.

Here's a hint: You won't because the platform doesn't support it.

People are always thinking mom'n'pop or "mainstream" box when they say crap like you said. It may be "obvious to the members on this site", but your generalization is still ridiculously invalid. At least you're owning up to your mistake somewhat.

Ok so my assumption that haswell is a good choice for a new build "mainstream" box is invalid

But your assumption that someone needs 32GB of ram is?

And is it necessary to say what I said was "crap" or "i'm owning up to my mistake" is any of that necessary in your rebuttal that stuff just leads to flame wars and I would expect someone with 29k post to know better.

We are allowed to have a difference in opinion on a public forum without the baiting. How do you think someone reading that is going to respond??

So other than 32GB of ram why do I need to skip over haswell?

If we are now talking about workstation builds then we are gonna have to start talking about the need for ECC memory because I don't think I would put that much memory into a build to do real work without that thought crossing my mind.

And even if you look at the members on this forum that have builds with that much memory, what is the percentage of them that only went that high up because memory was cheap and they wanted to fill all the slots vs those that actually need all that memory. No one in here can say they need 32GB of ram in a gaming box with a straight face.

I still stand by my post and I don't see any mistakes in it.

 

[crashtech]

Making general statements will always bring someone out of the woodwork to point out the exceptions, but it's very safe to say that the people that need the features LGA2011 offers are tiny outliers that can be safely ignored, much like Intel itself is doing right now with this lackluster IB-E release.