i7 4770k vs i7 4820k... Opinions?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
R

Randi Poling

Distinguished
Feb 19, 2014
226
21
18,715
I am looking to build a new system soon, so I am inquiring as to what everyone thinks of the 4770k vs the 4820k. All opinions and insight is greatly appreciated!
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
maurelie

maurelie

Honorable
Oct 26, 2013
2,086
0
12,960


They are essentially the same Processor, although the i7 4770k is LGA 1150 while the i7 4820k is LGA 2011. The LGA 2011 is considered as enthusiast level socket , while the LGA 1150 is more of a consumer grade socket. The better choice is i7 4770k, because the motherboards for LGA 1150 are more cheaper than LGA 2011, which is required for i7 4820k. Also the i7 4770k comes with Integrated graphics and lower TDP. LGA 2011 Motherboards start form $200, while for the i7 4770k, you can get one for $120
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
A

Au_equus

Distinguished
Mar 31, 2011
812
0
19,060
When comparing CPUs using different sockets, the platforms need to be compared as well.

LGA2011 motherboards are more expensive than their LGA1150 counterparts, but if you're starting with a 4820/3820, you have room to upgrade, whereas the 4770k is as high as it gets on the LGA1150 platform. The 4820/LGA2011 supports 64GB of DDR3 RAM and 40 PCIe lanes. The 4770k/LGA1150 supports 32GB and 16GB PCIe lanes.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
dgingeri

dgingeri

Distinguished
Dec 4, 2009
2,123
1
20,460
It seems nobody here understands the major differences between the 4820 and the 4770, so I'll explain:

First, the similarities:
1. they're both about the same default speed (the 4770 is a bit lower in clock rate but more efficient)
2. they're both quad core

Differences:
1. 4820k has no integrated GPU, so no QuickSync
2. 4820k has quad channel memory and double the capacity. if you need >32GB of memory, or want to use 4 older stick, the 4820 is more useful
3. 4820k has 40 PCIe lanes while the 4770k has only 16. If you want to use multiple large lane PCIe devices, triple or quad SLI, dual SLi with a raid controller or 10Gbe, etc, the 4820 is better
4. The 4820k had VT-d where the 4770k does not. If you want to run a VM host, the 4820 is far better, but this doesn't work very well with gaming since installing Hyper-V in Windows 8 locks the clock speed at the chip's default, non-turbo mode.
5. the 4770k is lower power and more efficient at the same clock rate. If you want to save power or overclock, the 4770 will do better. The 4820 is still quite capable, though. At idle, the 4820 and motherboard uses only about 20W more power.

As for my opinion, I would go with the 4820, but I'm using dual SLi with an enterprise level raid controller. So, I need the more PCIe lanes. In the end, to each their own.

So, stop badmouting the 4820k as being overkill for gaming. There are good reasons for using it in a gaming machine.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
vmN

vmN

Honorable
Oct 27, 2013
1,666
0
12,160
badmouthing? Who did that?

First thing first, you will need to understand the difference between haswell and IB.

Haswell was a huge architectural improvement.

There were basically improvements in every stage of the pipeline, not even kidding.

My point still stands; The 4820k IS the cheap solution for a 2011 build.

4770k is now supporting VT-d, they just suddenly updated it. Not because it have any effect on the general user.


4770k also have support for AVX2.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
vmN

vmN

Honorable
Oct 27, 2013
1,666
0
12,160
No, haswell was a great improvement.
Wider frontend, especially om the fetch to effeciently support AVX2.

Adding an extra ALU and improving the SIMD by quite a lot.

FMA3 support, also great improvement. I wont cover this, as it is rather complicated and Om om my phone.

BMI.

Improved branchen predictor over SB.

Improved decoder queue for single threads. Actually doubling it.
And generally a wider decoder.

The store/commit section was also improved, doubling the bandwidth og L1 cache.


 
Upvote 0 Downvote
dgingeri

dgingeri

Distinguished
Dec 4, 2009
2,123
1
20,460
Did you guys not read the article I linked? It showed, repeatedly, that there was less than 1% difference between the 3700k and the 4770k on everything unless AVX2 was used, which was on only one piece of software. Looking through all the Haswell reviews shows the same thing. All those changes lead to nearly no difference in performance. How can you say Haswell was this huge improvement?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
ronduth

ronduth

Honorable
Dec 30, 2013
84
0
10,660
You guys forgot to mention the ability to overclock the 4820k far more then 4770 and keeping it cool in the process. I have a 4820k and I bought it not researching enough. I bought a rig that is far more of an overkill when it comes to gaming then necessary. This processor though made me research overclocking. What i find is getting to 4.7ghz from stock 3.7ghz is quite impressive. If I am not mistaken the 4770 will overclock if its unlocked but cpu temps are quite a bit higher. Again I am an amateur here. I am 4820k all the way. They are both awesome chips its just what you use them for
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
logainofhades

logainofhades

Titan
Moderator
Apr 27, 2009
37,552
3,221
143,290


Yes, the socket has been confirmed to be 1150, there is no confirmation that current 8 series chipsets will run them. So far I have only seen 9 series support for DC and rumors that Broadwell will be the same. If so, it is LGA 775 all over again.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
logainofhades

logainofhades

Titan
Moderator
Apr 27, 2009
37,552
3,221
143,290
That I am not sure, but there were Pentium 4's in 775, then the Pentium's with HT, then Pentium D's, then a couple different gens of Core 2/C2Q that were also 775. The problem was while the socket remained the same, the chipset constantly changed. Chipsets that supported the early core 2's wouldn't work with the Wolfdale and Yorkfield chips that came out later. Some P4 chipsets wouldn't work with newer chips either.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom