Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Is the i5-4670k worth it?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
July 7, 2013 11:40:03 AM

Hey, is the i5-4670k worth then extra money over say a FX-6350? I would like to get an Asus Z87 board over an Asus AM3+ board because of all the extra features and the Automatic OC, but I'm not sure it's worth the money. Especially because I would get a 7970 is I don't get the i5. But I play a lot of Arma II and will be playing Arma III soon and they're very CPU intensive. Thanks for any advice.

More about : 4670k worth

a b à CPUs
July 7, 2013 11:48:06 AM

Intel is faster & my 7970 just loves my 4770k.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
July 7, 2013 11:50:48 AM

I would get something like an FX-8320 and then the Radeon 7970. That, or you could get the 4670k with a GTX 760. Both will do very well in CPU-intensive and GPU-intensive games. The 4670k will perform a bit better now, but soon enough the eight cores in the AMD will be utilized in gaming, and that is when the 8320 will start to shine.
m
0
l
Related resources
a b à CPUs
July 7, 2013 11:53:49 AM

well if we look at the frequency at which you may need to upgrade a gpu as compared to how frequently you would need to change your CPU it would seem like the most prudent thing to do is spend it on the CPU. You can still game on an old quad core but if we looked at a GPU from that same generation you would not be able to play any recent games.

or look at system requirements for games.
the i5 2500k was released jan 2011
that same month the gtx 560 ti came out.

which is a better component for gaming today. i would start a build out with a 2500k before i started with a gtx 560ti

the above is the system i built at the end of 2011 and I recently had to upgrade to a tahiti LE which i find is just behind the new gtx 760; furthermore, i think the two listed GPU's are at or near the top of what 1080p gaming is needing. If you are running a 120 hz monitor or playing at a 1440P resolution that may change the thought proccess a little but even then you are going to want CPU power.

I would go intel.
m
0
l
July 7, 2013 11:59:37 AM

ur6beersaway said:
Intel is faster & my 7970 just loves my 4770k.


I know that the i5 is faster but is it £180 faster? + Going from 7970 to 7950.

@dannyboy2233
Hmm, I do really like the features that are offered with the Hawsell boards, and as @fkr said the i5 will still be a good CPU this time in 2 years but no matter what in 2 years time I will need to upgrade my GPU so it doesn't make much sense spending all that money on something that's not going to be any good in 2 years when I can get something that's cheaper that will work very well now and will still need upgrading in 2 years.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
July 7, 2013 12:00:20 PM

fkr said:
well if we look at the frequency at which you may need to upgrade a gpu as compared to how frequently you would need to change your CPU it would seem like the most prudent thing to do is spend it on the CPU. You can still game on an old quad core but if we looked at a GPU from that same generation you would not be able to play any recent games.

or look at system requirements for games.
the i5 2500k was released jan 2011
that same month the gtx 560 ti came out.

which is a better component for gaming today. i would start a build out with a 2500k before i started with a gtx 560ti

the above is the system i built at the end of 2011 and I recently had to upgrade to a tahiti LE which i find is just behind the new gtx 760; furthermore, i think the two listed GPU's are at or near the top of what 1080p gaming is needing. If you are running a 120 hz monitor or playing at a 1440P resolution I would go for the CPU


The last thing you said makes no sense. If 120 Hz/1440p, why would one spend the money on the CPU compared to the GPU? The 4670k will be more than enough for any gaming for a long time to come, as will the FX-8320. It is simply the matter of more, less-powerful cores, or less, more-powerful cores. Both will perform very well in anything with a GPU like the Radeon 7950 or the GTX 760.
And as to your first point? I guarantee you that the 2500k is still not being completely utilized in games. SB processors to IB processors has been a very small leap, and even smaller from IB to Haswell. You'd be best off, of course, getting the 4670k and a 7950, but either choice will be fine. The 4670k will be especially good, since, if Intel keeps up their same way of processor progression, it will take twenty years before you can tell a difference between the 4670k and that generation of processor.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
July 7, 2013 12:18:47 PM

two things
1. you are right I never come anywhere near maxing out my cpu and I could probably run a quad sli titan setup. maybe the fx chip will also. but the point is my cpu is good and will continue to be good prabaly till i have to change to a pci 4.0 or the new ram that is on the way might bottleneck things but it does not seem likely for me since i am not running a server over here.

2. about the 120Hz or 1440p resolution. all i meant is if you spent a $1,000 on your monitor then yes i would buy the cheapest CPU i could and buy all the graphics i could muster just to maximize that screen(the most expensive component on this hypothetical build).

but if you are gaming at 1080p then the extra graphics power is almost negligible for todays gaming. my tahiti LE plays everything at max and right around 60 fps. I do turn down some of the most extreme post proccessing in some games like metro but if he is looking at a 7950 then he is inline for a 760 also and with that extra little bump in power I am pretty sure he would be fine gaming at 1080p.

here is toms article with brand new drivers for a just released card. the 7950 should be a mature driver platform by now.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-760-rev...

50 fps at most all games and this is without an overclock. after an overclock and some driver optimizations you should be right at 60 fps. this seems ideal and a great place to upgrade from.

hell you can go for the 4 gig version of the 760 and sli them in a year.
m
0
l
July 7, 2013 12:22:20 PM

Oh, there's something I've totally forgot to say, my monitor is 1600x900, so I highly doubt FPS is going to be a problem in any game even at Ultra.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
July 7, 2013 12:24:46 PM

maybe you should go to a 650 ti boost and get a 24 inch 1080p monitor.
m
0
l
July 7, 2013 12:28:42 PM

fkr said:
maybe you should go to a 650 ti boost and get a 24 inch 1080p monitor.


I like my 1600x900 screen, I can hardly tell the difference between it and 1080p, and it produces a lot higher FPS.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
July 7, 2013 12:35:22 PM

i would go with the CPU all the way then. you will never max out either the 7950 of the 760.
m
0
l
!