Ivy Bridge vs. Haswell vs. Ivy Bridge E

Right now the cost is practically equal for all the following mobo + cpu combinations:

1. Z77 mobo + 3770k CPU
2. Z87 mobo + 4770k CPU
3. X79 mobo + 4820k CPU

...the price differences are actually zero where I live, but of course depend on which actual mobo you are going for. Furthermore, the price difference, at the lowest, is only about 80 euros compared to a Z87 + 4670k combo.

So which one of those options would be the wisest buy? How does that go with different uses that you might have for your PC?
8 answers Last reply
More about ivy bridge haswell ivy bridge
  1. X79 has a lot more PCIe lanes, better for multiple GPUs. If you're planning on gaming,
    that's a definite advantage. If not, and a single GPU will suffice, then Z77/Z87 does
    have a greater number of built-in Intel-based SATA3 ports.

    If the pricing is the same though, I'd buy X79, as then you'd at least have the option
    in the future of upgrading to a 6-core should the need or desire arise, eg. for video,
    or more demanding games that can benefit.

    The 4820K also supports higher RAM speeds by default, and it has a higher TDP,
    which means oc'ing it should be easier (more headroom to cope with the heat),
    doubly so given it has a 200MHz higher base clock than the 4770K. And of course
    with X79 the max RAM and max memory bandwidth are 2X more. It's a power house
    for sure.

    Having said all that, the one thing I would not recommend is buying a cheap X79
    board. If you're going to buy X79, then get something decent (eg. Rampage IV
    Extreme), as then you'll be better able to make best use of what the CPU/platform
    is capable of, especially any future upgrades such as a 6-core, though I suppose
    buying a good mbd might negate your price equivalence axiom. :D

    Btw, the GSkill TridentX 32GB DDR3/2400 kit is an excellent option for X79. My 3930K
    setup has two of them.

    Ian.
  2. I will be gaming and also doing some 3D modelling.
    I am very tempted by the new Ivy-E, but I still need more information on the different mobo options.
    The Asus Extreme is nice, but it's ATX-E, and I can only use regular ATX. Besides, it's almost the most expensive board out there (albeit the same price as an equivalent Z87 version) - so what would you guys suggest - something regular ATX and with the price in the 200-300 eur range?

    EDIT: This is the shop I'm most likely to buy so can you please give me suggestions regarding this listing:
    http://www.mindfactory.de/Hardware/Mainboards/Desktop+Mainboards/INTEL+Sockel+2011.html/page/1

    ...main goals are: gaming, good overclocking potential and overall build/component quality of mobo.

    EDIT2: do the X79 boards offer any advantage vs. 87 ones when you run just 2 GPUs? I mightgo with two GPUs to start, but would possible be adding a third in the future.
  3. Turbo3 writes:
    > I will be gaming and also doing some 3D modelling.

    Do you think you'd ever use more than one GPU for SLI/CF?


    > I am very tempted by the new Ivy-E, but I still need more information on
    > the different mobo options.

    Personally I'd just buy the 3930K, assuming it has a price advantage.


    > The Asus Extreme is nice, but it's ATX-E, and I can only use regular ATX. ...

    Oh! Hmm, that does limit things a bit.


    > ... Besides, it's almost the most expensive board out there ...

    More than my P9X79 WS? :D (oddly enough I notice that's on the list aswell,
    right on the 300E mark, which is surprisingly good IMO; just a pity it's EATX)


    > ... so what would you guys suggest - something regular ATX and with the
    > price in the 200-300 eur range?

    Hmm, at the lower budget range, I'd say the ASRock X79 Extreme6 or the
    Asus P9X79 (I like the tri-slot spacing of these boards). Higher up, there's
    the Asus P9X79 Pro in the middle of your price range. Closer to the 300E
    level there's the Asus Rampage IV Formula (note it has a lower max RAM
    of 32GB) and the ASRock X79 Extreme9; the Asrock has nicer slot spacing,
    but I notice the ASUS has better 3-way SLI/CF PCIe speed assignments.

    If I had to choose? That's a tough one; before making a decision I'd read
    a bunch of reviews of each board, see what people say about them.

    Note that if you ever planned to have more than 1 GPU and wanted to oc
    them, then the Asrock 3-slot layout would certainly help.


    > EDIT2: do the X79 boards offer any advantage vs. 87 ones when you run just 2 GPUs?

    In theory, yes, because CPUs for Z87 only provide 16 lanes from the chip, whereas X79
    has enough lanes to feed two separate x16 links, and still have plenty left over for I/O,
    networking, etc.

    If you're pondering a 3rd GPU, then definitely X79.

    Personally I don't understand why current designs have slipped into offering so few
    PCIe lanes. Somehow Z87 seems like a step backwards from X58.

    Ian.
  4. Thanks for all your input.. Much appreciated!
    3930k is over my budget, but I think a good 4820k system would take me quite far into the future.
    And even though the 4770k is somewhat quicker in straight comparison, the 4820k should overclock better so the max performance should be about the same..
  5. TurboJ said:
    Thanks for all your input.. Much appreciated!
    3930k is over my budget, but I think a good 4820k system would take me quite far into the future.
    And even though the 4770k is somewhat quicker in straight comparison, the 4820k should overclock better so the max performance should be about the same..



    Yup! Good luck with your build! And at least you'll have 6-core options in the future.

    Ian.
  6. Still weighing my different options here.. I just noticed that if I get the equivalent mother boards from Asus for example, going with a 4670k would save about 120 euros compared to the 4820k. Then I'd get no hyper threading though. Comparing the 4820k and 4770k with an equivalent mobo would mean approx. 40 euros difference in favor of the 4770k.

    The big difference is, then, that the 2011 platform would support 6-core CPUs while the 1150 would not. Hyper threading would be available on both.
    If my goal is to get the best possible gaming performance for the next three years (updating the GPUs once or twice in that time), what would be the wisest choice? If it happens that I never use more than two GPUs, will the 2011 still have a benefit?

    Using 3-way SLI does seem like a good bang-for-buck deal, but at 1080p I suppose I won't need more than two GTX 770s. Three 760s would theoretically be faster (and cheaper), but only on 1440p + and sometimes turn even worse performance.

    So, 2-way SLI - which mobo/CPU combo is the winner?
  7. TurboJ writes:
    > ... going with a 4670k would save about 120 euros compared to the 4820k.
    > Then I'd get no hyper threading though. ...

    I don't see the point of the 4670K. If I was going to get a quad-core with no HT,
    I'd just bag a used 2500K which costs much less and oc's far more easily (5GHz
    is the norm with a decent board, and those are easy to come by).


    > Comparing the 4820k and 4770k with an equivalent mobo would mean approx.
    > 40 euros difference in favor of the 4770k.

    But then the 4820K has a higher base clock, higher TDP and should oc both
    easier & better as a result.


    > The big difference is, then, that the 2011 platform would support 6-core CPUs ...

    That and much better PCIe bandwidth for multiple GPUs.


    > If my goal is to get the best possible gaming performance for the next three
    > years (updating the GPUs once or twice in that time), what would be the
    > wisest choice? ...

    Three years? Definitely X79. Remember: the CPUs for Z87 only have 16 PCIe
    lanes coming off the chip, so even using 2-way SLI/CF means splitting that
    in half for each GPU. I shudder to think of the bandwidth requirements that'll
    be the norm in 3 years time, but at least by then a current X79 system with 40
    PCIe lanes will still be able to handle it, and with a 6-core option also able to offer
    a CPU upgrade to match (assuming games & apps continue the trend towards
    supporting ever greater threading).


    > If it happens that I never use more than two GPUs, will the 2011 still have a benefit?

    Even with two, yes. It can run them x16/x16,whereas Z87 would be x8/x8, unless
    there are boards which use bridge chips, etc. Also leaves plenty of spare lanes for
    anything else you might want to add. I've fiddled about with SAS RAID, etc. for video.


    > Using 3-way SLI does seem like a good bang-for-buck deal, ...

    Very much depends on the game how well 3-way works.


    > but at 1080p I suppose I won't need more than two GTX 770s. ...

    At that res probably not, though you could future-proof yourself somewhat
    better just by fitting a 780, ie. even a single 780 is (some would argue) kinda
    overkill for one 1080 display, but it means whatever you're playing can
    have the detail cranked up with such a card (I like that way of doing things)
    and in the future adding a 2nd 780, or a 3rd if it's X79, gives plenty of
    headroom.

    Also, if you fitted a single 780 just now, you'll save on power consumption
    until you decide to get a 2nd, vs. running two 770s.


    > Three 760s would theoretically be faster (and cheaper), but only on 1440p
    > + and sometimes turn even worse performance.

    Hmph, I wouldn't bother with the 760. If I was skimping to that degree I'd
    just get two 3GB 580s instead. :D (beats a 780; or find 4GB 760s) But yes,
    performance would vary, and then you'd be chewing power from 3 cards
    instead of 2.


    > So, 2-way SLI - which mobo/CPU combo is the winner?

    X79 IMO, much better future proofing given the 3-year time scale.

    Honestly, Z87 and recent trends feel like backwards moves to me. I was so
    impressed with X58 when it first came out; the glorious number of PCIe lanes
    available, 6-core option, lots of RAM, loads of PCIe slots, boards with excellent
    slot spacing such as the Asrock X58 Extreme6.

    Since then it seems like, in basic concept of 'degree' of 'power' (if I can put it
    that way), Z77/Z87 are a step downwards while X79 is a step upwards (with
    just the low no. of native Intel SATA3 ports being a small fly in the ointment).

    Indeed, some of the old P55 boards feel better to me than many of the current
    Z87 options, eg. the ASUS P7P55 WS Supercomputer, with its PCIe bridge
    chips offering x8/x8/x8/x8 for 4-way CF/SLI, though the design was aimed
    more at GPU/compute users than gamers. Other board makers did this with
    P67/Z68, using bridge chips to get round the limited PCIe lanes available, with
    varying degrees of efficacy. X79 just does it raw though, and then there are
    uber boards like the Asrock X79 Extreme11 which uses two bridge chips to
    offer full 4-way x16/x16/x16/x16, though the board is costly and aimed more
    at pro users who'd benefit from the onboard SAS (gamers would normally go
    with the R4E).


    I think I'd be a lot more impressed with Z87 if the chip had 32 lanes of PCIe,
    that would be more like it. But 16? Bit boring. Feels like Z87 is more akin to
    the lesser-end of P55 in concept, while X79 is way up there. Where is the
    sensible X58 middle-ground? Remember X58 had plenty of sensible 4-core
    options while 6-core was available aswell; until now, X79 focused on the
    6-core with only rather limited and somewhat pointless 4-core options (the
    4820K changes all that).

    It's a pity a lot of the X79 boards are EATX, but there are good ATX models too.
    Just check mbd reviews before buying, though as I say, these days I'd tend
    to favour ASUS or good Asrock most of the time.

    Actually, if you've not bought a case yet, you could always get a case that can
    handle EATX and then... ;D

    Ian.
  8. Man, that is some great informaton. I am thankful for all your input!
    I think I have to go with X79 as that would give so many useful options for the future.
    Also as far as gaming goes, the majority of games are still GPU-limited so that should allow
    'aging room' for the X79 platform, as it it the one that allows most room for GPU development.

    Now I just have to settle on GPUs.... The twin 760s sound awfully tempting, because on the combo
    SLI works great and two 760s basically kick 690 ass. They are also so cheap that they might rather
    easily be replaced by something quicker, 1-way or 2-way, when 690 speed no longer is enough.

    Around here 2x760 cost 450 € with shipping, 1x770 is 380 € while two 770s cost 750 € and a single 780 costs 570 €...

    Also I see that the EATX form factor for Asus at least is not a true EATX, but shorter. Meaning it could still fit.
    Otherwise, there are many alternatives from both Asus and Asrock (I also have good experience of both) so
    could you tell me what are the main benefits of each version? I'm always trying to watch the budget so I don't
    want to pay 100 euros for features that I will not need.

    Again, my sincerest thanks for all your help!
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs Motherboards