Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Any CPUs better than 4770k for gaming?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
April 5, 2014 12:40:53 PM

I've been looking at a lot of benchmarks, and it seems like 4770k beats everything at gaming and single core stuff. Even the 4960x seems to get beaten by the 4770k in terms of gaming. (Why do they call it 4960x when it isn't even haswell based? Seems misleading...) Will Haswell-E CPUs (59xx) be better for gaming when they come out?

More about : cpus 4770k gaming

a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 5, 2014 12:42:07 PM

For gaming only, save your money and get an i5 4670k
m
0
l
April 5, 2014 12:44:15 PM

Who knows? I would expect the 5xxx to be better. And no, the 4770K is pretty much the benchmark. The AMD FX 9590 can just about hold it's own against the 4770K, but that CPU has so any caveats it's only worth it if you really want something different to the typical i5/i7 stuff.
m
0
l
Related resources
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 5, 2014 2:36:53 PM

The CPU isn't that important for gaming. So you shouldn't overspend on it. I recommend at least a Core 2 Quad Q6600 for gaming and a Core i5 4670K at most. Anything lower or higher than those 2 CPUs is a waste of time for gaming purposes. Of course I'd never recommend buying a core 2 quad but it's ok to do some light gaming on if you happen to have one already.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 5, 2014 3:39:37 PM

If you were to play a game on the lowest settings possbible, with a good gpu, then there would be a good ammount of framerate difference between say a 4670k and a 4770, (this is just a hypothetical test since there's no point to doing this)
However, pretty much all high end cpu's nowadays will be bottlenecked by even the best graphics cards when it comes to gaming, so that's why atm it doesn't really matter if you get one or the other.
m
0
l
April 7, 2014 5:59:08 PM

theonerm2 said:
The CPU isn't that important for gaming. So you shouldn't overspend on it. I recommend at least a Core 2 Quad Q6600 for gaming

I'm pretty sure that would bottleneck my GPU and do horrible with any type of physics.

sunder25 said:
However, pretty much all high end cpu's nowadays will be bottlenecked by even the best graphics cards when it comes to gaming, so that's why atm it doesn't really matter if you get one or the other.

WILL be bottlenecked? or wont?
Pretty sure you meant wont... but uber highend graphics cards are bottlenecked by even the best CPU's.
Also, you have the best name/avatar ever. I'm a warrior myself.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 7, 2014 7:32:29 PM

Stardust342 said:
theonerm2 said:
The CPU isn't that important for gaming. So you shouldn't overspend on it. I recommend at least a Core 2 Quad Q6600 for gaming

I'm pretty sure that would bottleneck my GPU and do horrible with any type of physics.

sunder25 said:
However, pretty much all high end cpu's nowadays will be bottlenecked by even the best graphics cards when it comes to gaming, so that's why atm it doesn't really matter if you get one or the other.

WILL be bottlenecked? or wont?
Pretty sure you meant wont... but uber highend graphics cards are bottlenecked by even the best CPU's.
Also, you have the best name/avatar ever. I'm a warrior myself.


What i said was, cpus will be bottlenecked by the GPU's when playing games, that means graphics cards need to be a whole lot better in order to use the cpus at their full potential. that means you don't really need the best cpu to play games at ultra, you need the best graphics card.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 7, 2014 7:43:55 PM

depends entirely on what your GPU is. Pointless getting a decent CPU if your GPU is rubbish.

However, assuming you have a good GPU, GTX780 or similar, I'd be tempted to go with an I7. I've found an 8 threaded CPU performs significantly better in BF4 and expect it to do so for heavy physics games such as watch dogs.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 7, 2014 7:53:52 PM

Stardust342 said:
theonerm2 said:
The CPU isn't that important for gaming. So you shouldn't overspend on it. I recommend at least a Core 2 Quad Q6600 for gaming

I'm pretty sure that would bottleneck my GPU and do horrible with any type of physics.

sunder25 said:
However, pretty much all high end cpu's nowadays will be bottlenecked by even the best graphics cards when it comes to gaming, so that's why atm it doesn't really matter if you get one or the other.

WILL be bottlenecked? or wont?
Pretty sure you meant wont... but uber highend graphics cards are bottlenecked by even the best CPU's.
Also, you have the best name/avatar ever. I'm a warrior myself.


An Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 will give you a bottleneck. I didn't mean that you should get a Core 2 Quad I was just giving you a range of CPUs that are ok for gaming and the Q6600 is at the bottom of the range. I absolutely do not recommend getting a Core 2 Quad but if you already have one it's still viable for a lot of games. And on the top of the range I put the Core i5 4670K meaning that that's the best CPU you should get for gaming and anything higher than that is a bit of a waste.
m
0
l
April 7, 2014 8:39:46 PM

sunder25 said:
What i said was, cpus will be bottlenecked by the GPU's when playing games,

Ok, I just read it wrong. But a Titan Z or dual 780s for example will bottleneck any CPU out there.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 7, 2014 8:57:25 PM

Stardust342 said:
sunder25 said:
What i said was, cpus will be bottlenecked by the GPU's when playing games,

Ok, I just read it wrong. But a Titan Z or dual 780s for example will bottleneck any CPU out there.


No:p 
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 7, 2014 9:15:46 PM

it also depends on the game. BF4 is hard on the CPU, my I5 at stock clocks would be nearly at 90-100% whilst the 7950 crossfire GPUs were at 50% each. So you could say the I5 was bottlenecking dual 7950s!

Conversely Titanfall bare wakes my Xeon, whilst a single R9-290 is nearly 100% (on 3 monitors).
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 7, 2014 9:25:07 PM

It's all relative, imagine there's a game with 8bit graphics, but that stresses the cpu to the absolute limit,in that case the cpu will bottleneck most graphics cards, but right now, with most of the games out there, the minimum framerate is most likely to be determined by the gpu-this is why it is not worth it to buy a 4770k just for gaming, you will be better off buying an i5 and investing the difference into a graphics card.
There's no real way to compare a cpu and a graphics card with eachother, they do different things, but when a game demands x ammount of calculations from the gpu and y ammount of calculations from the cpu, the one that reaches the limit of the calculations required first bottlenecks the other.
/silly explanation
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 7, 2014 10:13:32 PM

or compromise and get a Xeon for the same price as the i5. Hyperthreading, without overclocking. I believe we'll see more and more games utilising 8 threads. Bf4 does and it looks like Watchdogs will too

http://www.gamepur.com/news/14223-watch-dogs-pc-specs-r...
m
0
l
April 8, 2014 2:41:15 PM

sunder25 said:
but right now, with most of the games out there, the minimum framerate is most likely to be determined by the gpu.
That doesn't make sense to me... if you have a bad CPU, how would upgrading your graphics card increase the minimum FPS? If the CPU is bottlenecking at certain points, that will drop the FPS to the minimum, but when it's a CPU stressless moment, the graphics will go to a high.

m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 8, 2014 2:58:46 PM

You linked a situation where it seems a good cpu is bottlenecked by the two most expensive cards you can get in sli-in a particularly cpu intensive game-at high fps.
As i said.
In MOST games, this will not happen.
So, after you get a titan, you can get a better cpu than 4670k for gaming.
m
0
l
April 9, 2014 2:49:41 PM

sunder25 said:
You linked a situation where it seems a good cpu is bottlenecked by the two most expensive cards you can get in sli-in a particularly cpu intensive game-at high fps.
As i said.
In MOST games, this will not happen.
So, after you get a titan, you can get a better cpu than 4670k for gaming.


I accidentally clicked "select as best answer".. oh well enjoy it.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 9, 2014 2:56:26 PM

Stardust342 said:
sunder25 said:
You linked a situation where it seems a good cpu is bottlenecked by the two most expensive cards you can get in sli-in a particularly cpu intensive game-at high fps.
As i said.
In MOST games, this will not happen.
So, after you get a titan, you can get a better cpu than 4670k for gaming.


I accidentally clicked "select as best answer".. oh well enjoy it.


You can unselect it if another answer helps you with your problem.

m
0
l
April 9, 2014 3:56:50 PM

sunder25 said:
You can unselect it if another answer helps you with your problem.


No, that's alright.

m
0
l
April 9, 2014 4:25:35 PM

Go the 4770k. Im not sure why people recommend basic tech over futre proof tech. It is now confirmed that watch dogs recommened is 8 core 4 core min. More games will be 8 core. Battlefield 4 is a game that takes a large advantage of 8 cores. There are ben hmarks showing a 15 plus frame increase using i7 over i5. Crysis and farcry 3 also benifit from hyperthreading.

Also its pieace of mind. Spend an extra 80$ and then ull never wonder if u made right desiin and when watch dogs. Omes out and ur runninv physics and waether effects perfectly ull smile
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 9, 2014 4:53:42 PM

Matt Bull said:
Go the 4770k. Im not sure why people recommend basic tech over futre proof tech. It is now confirmed that watch dogs recommened is 8 core 4 core min. More games will be 8 core. Battlefield 4 is a game that takes a large advantage of 8 cores. There are ben hmarks showing a 15 plus frame increase using i7 over i5. Crysis and farcry 3 also benifit from hyperthreading.

Also its pieace of mind. Spend an extra 80$ and then ull never wonder if u made right desiin and when watch dogs. Omes out and ur runninv physics and waether effects perfectly ull smile


Hum, hum, cool story bro.

http://www.ocaholic.ch/modules/smartsection/item.php?it...
http://www.ocaholic.ch/modules/smartsection/item.php?it...

And even if Watch Dogs runs better on i7s than i5s (which will, no doubt about that), the difference will be minimal and the bottleneck will probably still be the GPU.
And the difference between and i5 4670k and an i7 4770k is $90-100, never $80.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 9, 2014 5:12:35 PM

Matt Bull said:
Go the 4770k. Im not sure why people recommend basic tech over futre proof tech.

Also its pieace of mind. Spend an extra 80$ and then ull never wonder if u made right desiin and when watch dogs. Omes out and ur runninv physics and waether effects perfectly ull smile


Because money isn't infinite, and for most gamers a 4770K is a waste.

The whole term "future proof" is wrong. A bunch of people bought 2x 580s for SLI when those released thinking they'd be future proof, only for VRAM to jump up to 3GB the next generation and 1.5GB became terrible for high-end GPUs.

People stocked up on 32GB of DDR3 RAM, only for DDR4 to be announced a few months later, so that 32GB will be obsolete before it's ever used.

You could get an i7-4770K, but now that DX12 and Mantle are set to just turn this into a cores game, chances are 4-core CPUs will be obsolete in a couple years anyway, which would mean all the people who bought the absolute best CPUs for "future proofing" just wasted their money.

Future proofing is pretty much a crock.
m
0
l
April 9, 2014 9:41:31 PM

thank god I work then I guess. Im spending 310 on a 4570k or 390 here in Australia. Ill pay the little extra.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 9, 2014 9:56:06 PM

Matt Bull said:
thank god I work then I guess. Im spending 310 on a 4570k or 390 here in Australia. Ill pay the little extra.


$80 isn't "a little extra", it's about 30%.
I work as well, fyi. Most people do.
m
0
l
April 9, 2014 11:41:54 PM

then wtf are you trolling for. I recommened the 4770k. You feel the need to troll over 80$ who cares.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 9, 2014 11:47:41 PM

Matt Bull said:
then wtf are you trolling for. I recommened the 4770k. You feel the need to troll over 80$ who cares.


You really don't get the point of this forum do you?
m
0
l
April 10, 2014 12:19:48 AM

Are you planning on doing any CPU overclocking? If not, get the Xeon 1230v3, basically on pair with 4770K (according to benchmarks) and spend the extra money on a better GPU(s). GPU overclocking is not bound to any specific chipset, so you can still overclock your GPU(s) with a H87 chipset.

And the monitor you are using plays a big part on why you want as much fps in games as possible. It's a waste of money if you get around 120 fps in games when you only have a 60hz monitor (but I guess you already knew that).
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 10, 2014 5:44:01 AM

Matt Bull said:
then wtf are you trolling for. I recommened the 4770k. You feel the need to troll over 80$ who cares.


I'm trolling? Really? Because I don't think it's a good idea to spend 30% more on a CPU for no noticeable difference in performance, that means I'm trolling?

Since when did someone giving advice that doesn't match yours become trolling?
It's a fact that future proofing doesn't work about 75% of the time, because it's impossible to accurately predict which direction game optimization will go until it's too late.
m
0
l
April 10, 2014 6:32:23 AM

yep just buy the shitter cpu, in fact jsut spend 100 on the worst i3 cpu. its only 70% cheaper and comes with 2 cores. 2 is half of 4 so its awsome.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 10, 2014 6:41:01 AM

Matt Bull said:
yep just buy the shitter cpu, in fact jsut spend 100 on the worst i3 cpu. its only 70% cheaper and comes with 2 cores. 2 is half of 4 so its awsome.


I see, you're one of the entitled douches who make the rest of PC gamers look bad. It all makes sense now.

And by the way, a dual core i3-4130 would still hit 45-60 fps in most games, exceptions being games meant exclusively for 4 cores or above like Battlefield 4 or Crysis 3.

It's impossible that people like you are this venomous under normal circumstances or we're all doomed, so I'm guessing you just spent $300 on an i7, only to hear that, due to the PS4 and X1, and DX12/OpenGL/Mantle, 8 slower cores will perform better in a couple years. So much for future proofing.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 10, 2014 6:47:27 AM

Matt Bull said:
yep just buy the shitter cpu, in fact jsut spend 100 on the worst i3 cpu. its only 70% cheaper and comes with 2 cores. 2 is half of 4 so its awsome.


In fact, I think you should buy the i7 4960X, it's only, like 5x more the shitty i5 4670K, but it will future-proof you like hell. Everyone that has less than an i7 is a poor peasant, not worthy of being called a true PC gamer, isn't that right?
Seriously, you drive me mad.
m
2
l
April 10, 2014 6:48:37 AM

im rich i dont care, when dx12 comes out ill buy the best card i can. and if something better comes out in only 1 month. ill buy it even if its only 2 frames faster.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 10, 2014 7:15:53 AM

Matt Bull said:
im rich i dont care, when dx12 comes out ill buy the best card i can. and if something better comes out in only 1 month. ill buy it even if its only 2 frames faster.


This is beyond pathetic. I suppose you don't donate any of that to starving people, while I donate what I can spare from my near-minimum-wage job.
If you think having so much money you waste it is commendable, you're dead wrong.
m
2
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 10, 2014 1:21:32 PM

Matt Bull said:

If you think having so much money you waste it is commendable, you're dead wrong.


Well said :) 

m
0
l
April 10, 2014 6:13:07 PM

I dont care about starving people,
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 10, 2014 6:17:33 PM

mods close this thread please.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 10, 2014 7:31:59 PM

Matt Bull said:
I dont care about starving people,


You're really calling me a troll? This is getting silly.
m
0
l
April 10, 2014 7:58:42 PM

and yet you bite and bite.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 10, 2014 8:25:07 PM

Matt Bull said:
and yet you bite and bite.


Because this is so fun, of course. It only takes a couple seconds for me to reply, and then I get to see what amusing thing you say next.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 10, 2014 8:41:26 PM

Since most monitors top out at 60 fps, its kinda pointless to pay for an extra 15 fps if the cpu/gpu put out consistant framerates over that. If you think your settings will put you under that magic number, better off with the i5 and invest the extra $100+ in a better gpu.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 11, 2014 5:06:17 AM

sunder25 said:
mods close this thread please.


Don't please... This is so fuuny!
m
1
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 11, 2014 5:06:55 AM

Matt Bull said:
and yet you bite and bite.


So tell me... what is your system?
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 12, 2014 2:34:03 AM

Matt Bull said:
and yet you bite and bite.


I bet he only has a Pentium II 300PE @0.3GHz hahahaha :p 
m
0
l
April 13, 2014 10:33:19 AM

Holy crap where did this thread even go?

Update: Matt Bull is a retard.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 13, 2014 10:38:29 AM

Hey now, I have a Genuine PII 350MHz on a Asus 440BX P2B with 1Gb Ram pushing Win98SE that still runs... don't knock 'old school'.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 13, 2014 10:52:07 PM

Stardust342 said:
Holy crap where did this thread even go?

Update: Matt Bull is a retard.


Clearly he made his money from a compensation payout for his brain damage.
m
0
l
April 14, 2014 8:20:14 PM

leeb2013 said:
Clearly he made his money from a compensation payout for his brain damage.


He probably worked at McDonald's and snorted some chemicals used to make chicken nuggets.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 14, 2014 9:41:49 PM

Time to close this thread plz mods.....
m
0
l
April 15, 2014 6:04:49 PM

It got off topic about 20 posts ago.
m
0
l
!