Intel i5 4690 VS 4690k

First of the one with K can be overclocked. if the price diffrence is just $25. Go for the unlocked version (k). You may not take advantage of its oc feature right now, but sooner or later you will.

PS: OVERCLOCKING (oc) is adding more speed on your cpu.

No not really. Overclocking is more of a hobby now. In most situations, the higher CPU clock on an Intel CPU doesn't provide an improvement. If you can afford the K and the Z97 motherboard, it does provide more options. But if your budget is strapped, save money and get the 4590 or even the 4460 paired with a H97. There won't be a performance loss.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8227/devils-canyon-review-intel-core-i7-4790k-and-i5-4690k/5

TheMiG - K only for Z97 motherboard. And K goes always faster, by few %, than non-K. Never figured out why, not really, it's just the way it is. [at the very same clock].

barto - hobby? Hmm, well, I can't fully agree here. When I built some rendering proxies, and OCed them by 30%, it wasn't a hobby for the client. It was lowering the render time by 1/3rd, which was like tons of extra euros for the client. It raised up his overall income by 20-25%, depending on the project. [not 30%, due to higher electric power demand of OCed systems].

I didn't say anything about rendering/compression. I specifically said gaming (which is what the OP asked about) and with that respect, it is a hobby. I don't doubt that the K aids in rendering files. That's a fact and is even proved in the link to my post.

barto - tons of my clients harbor 2500k in their machines, with P67 chipset. And they wanna go SLi, from single GTX 970, to two GTX 970, or from single GTX 960, to two GTX 960. OCing 2500k to 4,3-4,7 GHz will move this beast nearly to the level of 4770k @ default, thus making it a solution for their headache. No need to upgrade to new motherboard/cpu.

Just sayin'...

bicycle_repair_man - good thinking man. Thumbs up!

TheMiG - in case You're planing the 4690 as a final processor, or You don't plan to overclock some K/C processor in the future, H97 is a good choice for You, though, it's not very wise from my point of view.

We're at age, where nearly every K and most likely C chip will be overclockable by 10-15%, and 20% some of them. Which is a generation/two generation increase in power + saving money for another generation, or two.

the z97 board will allow you to overclock the i5-4690k, the h97 will not. So if you buy this CPU you should also go with an z97 board.

But any i5 4440 or better will not bottleneck any modern GPU, so for gaming it will make no difference if you go with i5 "k" or i5 "non k". Maybe in a few years, if you get a new GPU you might have some bottleneck, but this will probably happen only in 4 or more years. But you should not buy an i5 "k" with an h97 board, it will be a waist of money.

Which CPU should you buy? That will depend on your budget, I would go with the E3 1231 (not the 1230) which is a bit faster and have better cooling system. I think in the long run the extra virtual cores will be more important than the ability to increase the clock speed (at least that is my experience with the phenom x2 550, when I unlock one or two extra cores the overall performance increase in very noticeable).

Tell us your budget and what system you have and what do you want to buy so we can give you a more thoughtful advice.

TheMiG - I'm missing there SSD and Z97 motherboard.

TheMig, I do not recommend you bother with overclocking at your budget. It is not worth the money for gaming, and you would have to cut costs elsewhere in your build to accommodate the necessary components to do so. I recommend an i5 4460, 4570, or 4590 and a H97 motherboard for best bang for buck. What country are you in?

Overclocking is a perk and of course right now the need isn't there for gaming. Not as a requirement. Older unlocked cpu's didn't need oc'd when they were current either. It can be a nice option to have to extend the life of a machine down the road. Unless games stop at this point in time and never require any more performance than they do right now, which I doubt. Games continually want more horsepower as time goes on. It won't be 2015 forever though so as always, time marches on. Most i5 rigs are kept and used for several years so if using a locked cpu and several years later rolls around - if more performance is needed, you're stuck with what you have. To improve it at all if/when the need arises an upgrade won't be an option it will be mandatory.

Just my personal experience in the past, overclocking was enjoyable and helpful for other tasks but as games became more intensive and complex the small investment in an unlocked system allowed me a better experience far longer than if it'd been a locked cpu. It allowed me an additional gpu upgrade that would've been horribly bottlenecked had I not been able to squeeze 20% more performance from it. In some cases 20% speed increase is on par with 2 cpu generations.

If someone doesn't enjoy overclocking, views it as a 'chore' or is hesitant/scared by the process then of course a locked cpu would be a better option. Just like tires, of course they're all suitable when brand new. Just like cpu's, the cheaper tires have a shorter expected life span. It's all relative. Spend more now, replace further down the road. Spend less now, replace sooner. An i3 is even less money, performs less than an i5 and will need upgraded sooner.

I think z series motherboards and k series cpu's are an investment in options. You certainly don't have to oc them but it gives someone the option should they want to down the road. A year or two from now if you want more performance and you have a locked i5 on an h97, you've guaranteed yourself a mandatory $300+ upgrade penalty for a newer/better motherboard to handle the cpu you also want to upgrade. Being on the cusp of changing from ddr3 to ddr4, that 'upgrade' would be a platform based on ddr4. Now you're buying new ram because you can't bring your old ram with you. A new motherboard means an os reinstall. It's not even as if you're simply upgrading just a mobo/cpu combo, now you're replacing almost half your system which means you may as well just build a new one or deal with what you have until a new build can't be put off any longer.

@Synphul - you are right in almost everything you said, but I think you are been too pessimist when foreseeing a need to upgrade in two years or less if he goes with a non K version. The i5-3570 is 3 years old and it still have very good gaming performance.

@TheMig For the prices of you build I guess you are in Australia, correct me if I'm wrong:

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i5-4690K 3.5GHz Quad-Core Processor ($319.00 @ PCCaseGear)
Motherboard: ASRock Fatal1ty Z97 Killer ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($179.00 @ CPL Online)
Memory: G.Skill Ripjaws X Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1333 Memory ($83.00 @ IJK)
Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($70.00 @ Centre Com)
Case: Inwin GT1 Black ATX Mid Tower Case ($58.00 @ Umart)
Power Supply: EVGA 750W 80+ Gold Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply ($139.00 @ Umart)
Total: $848.00
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-05-23 22:13 AEST+1000

AS for GPU you could get this one: http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/PowerColor-Radeon-R9-290-4GB-GDDR5-/261895019128?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_15&hash=item3cfa28da78
http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/4076764/fs/4824376

If you want motherboard SLI capable (probably not since you're going with AMD, but maybe in the future) you can go with: http://au.pcpartpicker.com/part/asrock-motherboard-fatal1tyz97xkiller

If you want to save 10$ you can go with this PSU: http://au.pcpartpicker.com/part/evga-power-supply-110b20750vr (but for the price difference you should go with the G2). The quality of the PSU you picked is questionable (no reviews about it)

Here's two more articles showing what I'm talking about. There is little difference between Sandy Bridge and Haswell when gaming. That also applies to overclocking. That's not my opinion, that's a conclusion drawn by many people based on professional reviews over the past four years.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7003/the-haswell-review-intel-core-i74770k-i54560k-tested/6
http://www.ocaholic.ch/modules/smartsection/item.php?itemid=1158

If the new architecture and overclocking was a big deal, people would be advised to upgrade from a i5 2400 and 2500k on every post. Yet that's not the recommendation. I have yet to read a post here that tell a user to upgrade from a Sandy Bridge CPU because of poor performance in any situation that being a single GPU or multiple.

If the budget permits an unlocked CPU, it's not a bad idea but it's not necessary in gaming. I don't mind being wrong. It's an opportunity to learn. But I have yet to find or read a review that shows benefits in gaming from overclocking across multiple generations. You're welcome to find a review showing improvements from overclocking or aids in system longevity. I don't count personal experience nor care to hear about it because there aren't tangible results.

This is an example of how to maximize your budget.


The locked i5 + H97 option.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i5-4590 3.3GHz Quad-Core Processor ($179.95 @ SuperBiiz)
Motherboard: ASRock H97 Anniversary ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($63.00 @ SuperBiiz)
Video Card: Asus GeForce GTX 970 4GB STRIX Video Card ($309.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Total: $552.94



And then this is what happens when you choose to go down the overclocking road.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i5-4690K 3.5GHz Quad-Core Processor ($219.99 @ SuperBiiz)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler ($26.98 @ OutletPC)
Motherboard: ASRock Z97 Extreme3 ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($97.98 @ Newegg)
Video Card: XFX Radeon R9 280X 3GB Double Dissipation Video Card ($189.99 @ Newegg)
Total: $534.94


As you can see, the extra investment in overclocking means that you're dropping from a GTX970 down to a 280x. The 290 is +$50.

I promise you that an i5 4590 + GTX970 would be far and away faster than a heavily overclocked i5 4690k + 280x and it's really not even close.

Yep,you can fit on your budget a GTX 970 if you dont go for overclock: http://au.pcpartpicker.com/p/8nsYYJ

But if you want to leave SLI option open you can go with one of this boards:
http://au.pcpartpicker.com/part/asrock-motherboard-z87mocformula
http://au.pcpartpicker.com/part/asus-motherboard-z87a
http://au.pcpartpicker.com/part/gigabyte-motherboard-gaz97xsoc

It's true overclocking can cost more. If someone wants to sli, that pretty well kills h97 since it doesn't. Why would someone be able to get better performance or more features at the same price? Then again as people have mentioned, they use their i5's for years so the price difference spread across that time frame is really pretty minimal.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i5-4690K 3.5GHz Quad-Core Processor ($219.99 @ SuperBiiz)
CPU Cooler: CRYORIG H7 49.0 CFM CPU Cooler ($34.50 @ Newegg)
Motherboard: Asus Z97-E ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($89.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Video Card: PowerColor Radeon R9 290 4GB PCS+ Video Card ($229.99 @ Newegg)
Total: $574.47
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-05-23 14:24 EDT-0400

Not too terribly much more than a locked i5 with a very similarly performing gpu with the same 4gb of vram. If looking to go with a cheapy motherboard like the h97 anniversary..

$1 price difference.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i5-4690K 3.5GHz Quad-Core Processor ($219.99 @ SuperBiiz)
CPU Cooler: CRYORIG H7 49.0 CFM CPU Cooler ($34.50 @ Newegg)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-Z97-HD3 ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($69.10 @ SuperBiiz)
Video Card: PowerColor Radeon R9 290 4GB PCS+ Video Card ($229.99 @ Newegg)
Total: $553.58
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-05-23 14:27 EDT-0400

without rebates your builds cost 624$ and 604$, not 574 and 553. so the difference to a non "k" is pretty high specially when you remove GPU.

It depends on the individual, but if there are sales, do you deliberately walk past them and say no thank, I'd like to pay full price please? I don't. Whether someone wants to take advantage of them is another matter. Those aren't 'fake' prices though, I can literally put that build together right now and have spent just $574 and $553. Tomorrow might be different, then again tomorrow a meteor might hit the planet and it won't matter anyway lol.

Actually, the above builds aren't accurate either. Without promos and such, the prices for the 4590 based system is $589 and the price for the 4690k build is $592. So the prices from my builds are relevant and accurate. In addition, the 212 evo that costs 'only' 26.98 in the previous system list is actually $36.98 without the $10 rebate pre applied in the price shown - and factor in an additional $8 for shipping which is the cheapest shipping option for that cooler from outlet pc. So the "$534" 4690k build would actually be $610.90.

hm, lets agree to disagree for now , and lets await for OP to tell us where does he live.

OC'ing is NOT a free upgrade in speed as you have to spend extra money to make sure your OC'ed CPU stays cool, ie better HSF, better case and case fans, better thermal paste, etc. Plus there is always the risk of breaking the CPU, or getting a K version that doesn't handel much OC'ing. Personally, I like the Xeon idea someone else mentioned if you don't want to OC.

Check the benchmarks, going from a 3.5Ghz i5-4690 to an OC'ed i5-4690K at 4.5Ghz doesn't help much in games as you're generally GPU bound.

A lot of those things are myths which continue to thrive. I usually recommend a better hsf regardless of stock and many others do as well. Aftermarket hsf's are more capable of lowering temps and typically use better quality designs and better quality fans which reduces system noise. Under extended use (as in gaming for hours) with the cpu maxed out the stock hsf can barely keep up. Gaming isn't usually considered 'average' use which is what stock coolers are geared toward. Common applications like web browsers, messengers, spreadsheets, word processing programs, viewing videos and so forth places nowhere near the load on a cpu that gaming can and does.

Any case should have adequate airflow, there are decent cases with this capability in all budget ranges. It doesn't take an expensive case to oc. That should be a goal regardless if the machine is a gaming machine or office pc. An oc'd cpu puts out relatively little difference in heat since the vast majority of heat in a gaming rig comes from the gpu (or gpu's if crossfire/sli).

Thermal paste is again personal preference for type, consistency (for application properties). It's already been shown that out of 40+ thermal compounds tested, aside from a couple of no name brand pastes you'd have to go out of your way to even dig up someplace, they all work within 1-3c of one another. To say oh, I'm going to oc, now I have to buy $30 thermal grease has never happened. Thermal compounds with enough for several applications can be had in all varieties and even so called 'performance' pastes run in the $6-10 range. If someone's spending $350 on a gpu they really shouldn't cry over $8 thermal paste.

Anything is a risk and there can be risk's when oc'ing. It takes effort, for users who don't feel like putting in the effort to do it correctly then oc'ing isn't for them. Oc'ing anymore is far safer than it has been in the past. The k series cpu's that don't oc well are far fewer than those that give performance consistent with averages.

People checking the benchmarks of current processors comparing today's cpu with today's game oc'd vs stock are in a sense missing the point. Since oc'ing can help an aging cpu handle new games with new gpu's as they become available. Meaning no, you won't see much difference now. Give it a few years with more powerful gpu's than exist today or multiple newer gpu's than exist today playing games that are more demanding than they are today with no benchmarks to try and justify it since there are no bench's from the future around.. and yes, the oc'd cpu will have a longer useful life.

Think of it like a 2500k. The performance difference between the 2500k stock and 4690k stock can be negated by overclocking the older 2500k. Here's a perfect example of what I was referring to. Looking at skyrim and the 4690k, fairly recent game and current cpu. Overclocked, the 4690k gains 7fps average and 5fps min framerates over the stock 4690k. Not a huge deal sure. Now looking at the i5 2500k, an older cpu on a more modern game. When overclocked, the 2500k is able to gain 21fps average and 19fps min framerates above what it was capable of at stock. Gaining 20fps when playing current games on an aging cpu by overclocking it is hardly 'no performance gain'. Where do you think the 4690k will be in 4yrs? In the same position the 2500k is now.

So say you spent even $100 more for the ability to overclock that 2500k when you bought it new. Additional for the cpu, better motherboard, better cooler. After 4yrs, that's $25 a year or $2 a month. In order to get the same level of performance as an oc'd 2500k, you'd be buying a 4690k for roughly $220 plus a new motherboard if you'd gone with the 2500 non k. To save $100 (or less) up front it would end up costing the thrifty user $350 to play the current games at the same level of performance the overclocked user is still playing at.

Same thing in shogun 2. http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2014/07/03/intel-core-i5-4690k-review/5

An i5-4690k is better than an i5-4460? Yes. It will be more future proof? Yes.

Which is better, invest on overclockable build or use the extra money to invest on other components, specially on GPU? There is no definitive answer. I can show you more recent games where overclock ability is irrelevant. One of them is Skyrim, where a 5 years old CPU can get more than 80 FPS minimum.

Another one is GTA V: http://static1.gamespot.com/uploads/original/92/929129/2847596-8988251569-gtav_.png The overclock improves FPS by 15-20%, but I ask, how many years we need for the i5-2500k to start struggling at stock speed? Specially if directx12 decrease CPU bottleneck.

Since the difference between r9 280x and 290 is at least 15 fps (at any resolution) which would be the best option, go with r9 280x + 4690k or with r9 290 + i5-4460?

Tom's Hardware - Benchmark 11 Bioshock Infinite 2160p