i5 vs Zeon

ykki · Apr 2, 2015

I am one of the forum members on Tom's who recommends people builds based on their requirements. I've come across a dilema regarding whether to recommend i5 4690k+heatsink+z97 or the 8 thread zeon 1231+h97(or cheap z97 for SLI) for gaming. Doesn't the zeon have advantage due to hyperthreading? Will an overclocked i5 be able to beat or even catch up to the zeon? Also wouldn't a zeon beat an OC'ed i5 in streaming, recording and rendering?
Thank you in advance.

mrmez · Apr 2, 2015

Firstly, It's "Xeon" not Zeon.
If you are recommending systems to people, may as well start by getting the names right

Games don't seem to benefit at all from HT, even for dual core CPUs. If you know how HT works, doesn't make anything faster, just enables extra simultaneous thread, but at half the speed.

Ie: Non HT: Thread 1 for 5 sec, then Thread 2 for 5 sec = both threads finish in 10sec.
HT: Thread 1&2 simultaneous for 10 sec.

Games don't have tons of threads, so not an issue. The 4690k is clocked a little faster, and can OC easily.

ykki · Apr 2, 2015

Thanks for correcting me on the name- I feel so embarrassed :lol:
I know that games don't have that many threads but isn't the Xeon more future resistant than the i5 - and cheaper too (once you factor in the cost of the mobo and the mandatory heatsink for OC'ing the i5)?

Damn_Rookie · Apr 2, 2015

mrmez :

I'm afraid I have to disagree with you, mrmez, on that part; games most certainly benefit from the hyperthreading of the i3. The initial review of the G3258 on Tom's Hardware (link) showed that even overclocked to 4.5 GHz, the dual core Haswell Pentium was normally slower than the 3.5 GHz Haswell i3 they compared it to (at best it drew even). This was the case when comparing minimum, average, and maximum FPS results.

It doesn't make it as powerful as a true quad core of course, but these days the hyperthreading of the i3 does set it apart from simple dual core CPUs.

rhysiam · Apr 2, 2015

Actually hyper-threading makes a very significant difference for dual core gaming, that's why the i3 is a relatively capable gaming CPU, but Pentiums are increasingly struggling: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-3.html
Also, HT is much more complicated than mrmez's example. If that example was true, there would be no benefit from HT which benchmarks clearly debunk.

Still, you're right that there's not many games that benefit from hyperthreading on quad core CPUs as 4 threads is usually enough.

However, when it comes to rendering, recording and streaming - all tasks that scale well with additional threads - HT starts to make a big difference.

Here's some benchmarks of a 4690K vs a 4770K -> the 4770K at stock clocks is almost identical to a 1231 (0.1Ghz higher base & boost clocks and Xeon has no onboard GPU, but otherwise they're identical): http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1261?vs=836

You can see it's neck and neck until you run into certain multi-threaded benchmarks, where the i7's HT really pulls away.

If you can get an i5 to 4.4Ghz, which is pretty standard, then you'd be looking at about 25% faster, which will obviously beat the Xeon in poorly threaded tasks (like gaming) and will help close the gap or even catch the Xeon in SOME threaded tasks, while it won't be enough to close the gap for others (check out the 3D particle movement bechmark, for example, where the i7 holds a 75% advantage).

The thing to remember is that an i5 even non-overclocked, will rarely be the bottleneck in gaming, the GPU will be in almost all cases. If you're aiming for 144hz gaming, then OCing will probably make a difference, but at 60hz, it won't make any difference whatsoever, your GPU will be determining how many frames your PC can spit out per second. If that's the case and you're looking to stream/record/edit, then the Xeons start to make a lot of sense. They're more than capable of making sure the GPU is working as hard as it possibly can, and they offer a little more in your editing/rendering tasks.

If you're looking for a pure gaming computer, or your target is 144fps, then the OC'd i5 gets my vote. But if you're looking for a streaming/editing build with a 60fps target, then the Xeon is the better choice IMHO.

mrmez · Apr 2, 2015

Might be a little misleading comparing a Pentium to an i3, but yeah, that should be the case for slower cpus.
My answer is for this specific example, and I can pretty much guarantee you can bench the Xeon with, and without HT and not see any difference in todays games. Thats the only accurate way to do it. Use the same cpu and disable HT. Comparing clock speed with different chips is highly misleading. My old Q6600 quad at 4.2Ghz is lightyears slower than my 4.4Ghz 4790k, which also happens to use 1/3rd less power.

The two chips the OP is comparing were launched at the same time for about the same price. For games, a higher clock is a plus, the fact you can OC is a massive plus. The 10% higher power draw on the 4690k also suggests its more powerful.

rhysiam · Apr 2, 2015

mrmez :

Sorry, but the comparison between a Haswell i3 and a Haswell Pentium is valid. They are basically the same with the exception of hyperthreading and some (deliberately) disabled features on the Pentium (AVX, etc). Both are Haswell chips and to suggest it's anything like comparing a Q6600 with a modern Haswell... which are completely different chips... is misleading.

The 10% higher power draw on the i5 is due to the integrated graphics and does not impact on power.

See my response above. I agree that the Xeon offers little for 60fps gaming, but the bottom line is that any modern Intel quad core is more than enough for 60fps gaming. OP is talking about streaming/rendering, that's where HT starts to shine.

Damn_Rookie · Apr 2, 2015

EDITED: to remove a repeat of that posted above.

Hah, you beat me to it, rhysiam, and said it better than I'd managed to

Thanks for that

rhysiam · Apr 2, 2015

Yeah, I think we're on the same page here. You should have left your response though!

damric · Apr 2, 2015

If Haswell i5s could overclock worth a damn (like the i5-2500K), it might be worth arguing the merits of faster cores on the overclocked i5. But since Haswell is already fine tuned with little headroom, the Haswell Xeon is a much better choice. Especially with gamers recording/streaming, the extra logical cores (even with the 10-15% HT penalty at full bore) will make the difference between high quality and low quality videos. rhysiam gave an outstanding explanation.

Damn_Rookie · Apr 2, 2015

rhysiam :

You'll have to trust me on this, but you definitely phrased it better; my writing skills seem to desert me a little at this time of night :lol:

EDIT: I heartily agree with the sharply dressed cat above me.

ykki · Apr 2, 2015

Thanks guys for the quality responses. I'd like to ask another question= Which one of the two processors is a better investment (more future resistant) (Refresh Rate = 60, like most people have nowadays)? No need to explain, jut tell me which one you would go for.

damric · Apr 2, 2015

Xeon, by far.

Montblanchill · Apr 2, 2015

Must agree. The Xeon will outperform the i5 in rendering and tasks requiring more threads.

You can lower this gap by overclocking the i5, however once you add the cost for an aftermarket cooler, you're effectively spending more than just buying a Xeon - and no amount of overclocking will account for the extra threads the Xeon offers.

With the advent of the new API's, your requirement for rendering etc and futureproofing - the Xeon is the best option.

Pinhedd · Apr 2, 2015

mrmez :

That's not how HT works at all

ykki · Apr 2, 2015

Doesn't Tom's let you conduct a poll?
Also since the topic is grttin long I promise this is my last question.

damric · Apr 2, 2015

ykki :

I don't think the current format supports polls. I think it might have been in past versions of the forum though, but really I can't remember. At least we have the stupid up-vote/down-vote thing, because that isn't useless or anything

rhysiam · Apr 2, 2015

I don't think you need a poll on this one. Almost everyone seems in agreement to me that the Xeon is the best way to go for a budget streaming build. By the time you factor in a better motherboard to support OCing and a cooler, the Xeon is actually cheaper and for that use-case HT is more useful than higher clocks. Of course, the i7 4790K is the best of both worlds as you get HT and overclocking, but it's considerably more expensive and in most cases (unless you have a very healthy budget) you'd be best sticking with Xeon and using the money on a better graphics card.

I think there's a consensus here.

ykki · Apr 2, 2015

Thanks guys.

LookItsRain · Apr 2, 2015

Xeon, thats my next upgrade on the list, my i3 cant record and cities skylines really does hammer it.

i5 vs Zeon

Honorable

Splendid

Honorable

Reputable

Splendid

Splendid

Splendid

Reputable

Splendid

Illustrious

Reputable

Honorable

Illustrious

Reputable

Champion

Honorable

Illustrious

Splendid

Honorable

Distinguished

Share this page