i5 4690k vs e3 1231 v3 processors

Rhezner · Jul 1, 2015

So i did some research and i found the e3 1231 v3 processor and i compared it with the 4690k which is 10$ cheaper and here are the differences.

xeon pros:
- hyperthreaded
- has workstation technologies
- better stock performance
- more reliable
- lower tdp by 8 watts

Xeon cons:
- not overclckakable
- no integrated GPU(not necessarily a con because you aren't paying for something you probably wont use.
- 10$ more.

4690k pros:
- 10$ cheaper
- overclockable
- has integrated graphics (not a pro if you have a dedicated GPU)
- higher tdp by 8 watts

4690k cons:
- weaker stock performance
- not hyperthreaded
- doesnt have workstation capabilities
- not as reliable

honestly, in the long run the xeon will cost about the same as the 4690k due to lower tdp, so think of them as the same price.

The real question is would you rather have hyperthreading and some other technologies or be able to overclock

Suzuki@1473780084@1473780163 · Jul 1, 2015

Overclocking is time consuming. Lots of testing involved, and knowledge on the subject. I recommend the Xeon.

N3rdR4ge · Jul 1, 2015

use this site as a comparison

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Xeon-E3-1231-v3-vs-Intel-Core-i5-4690K

the xeon has 4 cores 8 threads
the i5 has 4 cores 4 threads

Rhezner · Jul 1, 2015

im not really asking a question, but pointing out something interesting at least to me. I think i made this a discussion thread.

and yes i use cpuboss

Suzuki@1473780084@1473780163 · Jul 1, 2015

Most people look for advise. Since it's a discussion thread, there really isn't much to add. The Xeon is a Haswell Refresh, not your typical Xeon processor.

k1114 · Jul 1, 2015

Tdp is actually the same if not running the igpu. The higher tdp is from the igpu. It being a good deal has been known for a long while. Sb xeons were actually the same price than the i5 k cpus and intel seemed to have noticed people were buying them instead of ocing an i5 and raised the price for ib and of course hw. There isn't really any difference in "workstation capabilities" and "reliability" as the only real difference is ecc which people aren't getting at this budget and probably uses. Performance would then depend on threading capabilities of the software they are using to determine which cpu to go with. Games not being much more than 4 is why most are still going for the i5.

CTurbo · Jul 2, 2015

It needs to be said that a common build with the 1231v3 would be considerably cheaper than an effective overclocking i5 4690k build.

The greatest advantage of the Xeon is the fact the it works perfectly in any H81, B85, H87, or H97 motherboard whereas the 4690k requires a more expensive Z87/97 motherboard AND an aftermarket cooler in order to overclock.

Rhezner · Jul 2, 2015

CTurbo :

yeah i didn't think of that. You would have to add an aftermarket cooler if you wanted the 4690k to perform better than the xeon without getting too hot. Which would make the xeon cheaper.

CTurbo · Jul 2, 2015

I'm curious as to why you think the Xeon would be any more reliable than the 4690k? Reliability would not be any different.

Rhezner · Jul 2, 2015

CTurbo :

ive heard that workstation components are designed to run 24/7 with a load, I may be wrong that they are more reliable though.

Suzuki@1473780084@1473780163 · Jul 2, 2015

If you buy a workstation board and ECC memory, yes. Most people just won't.

CTurbo · Jul 2, 2015

The e3 Xeons and i3s, i5s, and i7s all started life from the same "sheet". They are seriously close to being the same chip. If anything, the i5 is the higher binned chip of the two thus would theoretically last longer at stock speeds. Of course the real world differences would be negligible anyway.

Rhezner · Jul 2, 2015

http://www.velocitymicro.com/blog/xeon-vs-i7i5-whats-difference/

here is a comparison that i found that basically says the same thing that i do.
It also states that

"Xeon processors are qualified to handle heavier, more intensive loads day in and day out. For the serious workstation user, this can translate to better longevity over i7 counterparts."

not that this source is authority but i also found a quote from intel that says xeons are designed for 24/7 reliability.

Rhezner · Jul 2, 2015

http://www.velocitymicro.com/blog/xeon-vs-i7i5-whats-difference/

here is a comparison that i found that basically says the same thing that i do.
It also states that

"Xeon processors are qualified to handle heavier, more intensive loads day in and day out. For the serious workstation user, this can translate to better longevity over i7 counterparts."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQ59vHSFfZA

luke also says that the xeon is better "probably because of the bin process"

synphul · Jul 2, 2015

That not being overclockable could be a major con. These are just a few bench's. When oc'd the 4690k scores better in games and better in other benchmarks including multitasking than the xeon (4770k stock).

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

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i5-4690K 3.5GHz Quad-Core Processor ($229.98 @ NCIX US)
CPU Cooler: be quiet! PURE ROCK 87.0 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler ($24.90 @ Newegg)
Motherboard: ASRock Z97M Anniversary Micro ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($74.99 @ Newegg)
Total: $329.87
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-07-02 01:01 EDT-0400

vs.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Xeon E3-1231 V3 3.4GHz Quad-Core Processor ($242.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Motherboard: ASRock H97M Anniversary Micro ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($64.89 @ OutletPC)
Total: $307.88
Plus shipping of $7 for the cpu and $8 for the motherboard
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-07-02 01:05 EDT-0400
Grand Total: $322.88

If picking up the i5 from microcenter, that drops the i5 build lower. If nothing else, more performance for the same price. In terms of overclocking, it's not time consuming. I could have the i5 at steady 4.5ghz in about 10-20min and done, more if fine tuning for a bit higher. Maybe 30 with 10min of stability test just to double check the oc. Food for thought anyway.

Rhezner · Jul 2, 2015

synphul :

The xeon 1231 v3 isnt mentioned in the link you gave and i would personally prefer hyperthreading and better stock performance according to the benchmarks i have seen to overclockability. But it is just a personal preference.

And you would need a really beefy cooler to get to 4.8ghz on an i5. you may as well just get a 4790k at stock clocks which only performs a bit worse than the 4690k@4.8ghz because it has hyperthreading and some other things going for it.

CTurbo · Jul 2, 2015

That is a blanket comparison though. There are literally DOZENS of Xeons out there over several sockets and a lot of them have nothing in common other than name. The e3 Xeons are nothing more than rebadged i5s and i7s that get a couple extra instruction sets and ECC memory support, and they should not be lumped in with their 10, 12, 18+ core E5 or E7 cousins which truly are made to handle the 24/7 workload demands, and would obviously do so much better than any i7. The e3 1246v3 and the i7 4770 would perform identically in a blindfold taste test(hehe) and would be equally reliable even after weeks of continuous use assuming everything else was the same.

CTurbo · Jul 2, 2015

I would also choose hyperthreading over overclocking 100% of the time. It is a much more useful feature and would actually get used whereas overclocking makes little difference outside of benchmarks and extreme situations.

synphul, here is no way a Z97 Anniversary motherboard would EVER get a 4690k anywhere near 4.5ghz even on the best consumer grade water cooler. That combo you posted would be lucky to get past 4.1ghz which would be a completely unnoticeable performance gain, and therefore waste or time, effort, and money.

microcenter runs deals on the 1231v3 too for $209 all the time, as well as the i5 4590 for $159.

TNT27 · Jul 2, 2015

Comparing the i7 4770 (Identical performance in most tasks as Xeon 1231) with the i5 4690k is easier.

The Xeon 1231 is just a cheap i7 without integrated graphics.

I personally would choose the Xeon over any i5, as overclocking does not yield noticeable results as much as having 8 threads would in multi tasking or applications capable of using 8 threads (Becoming more and more common as time goes on)

Rhezner · Jul 2, 2015

Is microcenter really that cheap? holy sheist.

also some games today are starting to take advantage of 8 threads, like battlefield.

anyways i learned something that i didn't realize before today that xeon processors can actually be a great choice for gaming/everyday builds, which is pretty cool. And who doesnt want to tell their friends that they have a xeon processor. Am i right?

TNT27 · Jul 2, 2015

I personally see three choices for most builds i throw together, cheap i5 (4460), Xeon 1231, or i7 5820k.
These builds are more for gaming/workstations/etc that i throw together.
Everyday users can get away with the cheapest cpus out there.

CTurbo · Jul 2, 2015

I personally see three choices for most builds i throw together, cheap i5 (4460), Xeon 1231, or i7 5820k.

Agreed but swap out the 5820k with the 4790k

Is microcenter really that cheap? holy sheist.

In store pickup prices only

Rhezner · Jul 2, 2015

CTurbo :

oh i know

synphul · Jul 2, 2015

The links I did give did show the 4770k which is in effect the xeon 1231v3 - except slightly faster which makes the xeon's performance lower. It's the 1231v3 everyone's referencing right?

Why wouldn't that board push 4.5ghz?

http://www.overclock.net/t/1544010/overclocking-help-with-z97-asrock-anniversary-i5-4690k
https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/353hla/i5_4690k_asrock_z97_anniversary_am_i_doing/

Here's a review of the asrock z97 pro3 overclocking the 4790k at 1.28v and 4.6ghz. Without ht the i5 would consume less power. Obviously this is the asrock z97 pro 3 and not the z97m anniversary however the pro 3 uses the same power phases, mosfets, chokes, etc etc. Right down to the model numbers of the parts according to Sin's list and fateswarm over at overclockers.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2014/11/19/asrock-z97-pro-3-review/7

I'd say being lucky to hit 4.1 is rather misleading as people have done it - both users and review sites.

If someone truly wanted the ht, I'd suggest a 4790k. At least it has decent clock speed out of the box with the ability for more. Despite everyone discounting clock speed it's shown time and time again to be an improvement right down to the latest q2 builds done here at tom's. Ht on it's own is more of a gimmick, always has been. It works some of the time, core speed works all of the time. If it didn't, intel wouldn't have given the best performing 1150 i7 the fastest core clocks in the entire intel lineup. There's a reason it dominates the benchmarks and ht isn't it. Lacking aggressive core speed the 1231v3 is the lowly h3 of the hummer lineup. Carries the badge and that's about it.

I will say it has ecc support, but I have a feeling if we asked every one jumping on the e3 fad to show a raise of hands, who forked over the extra cash for an ecc board and higher cost ecc ram and actually benefits from it the tally would be pretty low.

CTurbo · Jul 2, 2015

The z97 Fatality Killer is a WAY better board than the Anniversary, and for the Z97 Pro3 overclocking the i7 4790k to 4.6ghz, I don't think 200mhz is anything to get excited about. +200mhz sounds about right where I expected the Z97 to get the 4690k to (4.1GHz) anyway.

4.1ghz is a very realistic average on the Z97 Anni.

i5 4690k vs e3 1231 v3 processors

Admirable

Dignified

Distinguished

Admirable

Dignified

Titan

Pizza Monster

Admirable

Pizza Monster

Admirable

Dignified

Pizza Monster

Admirable

Admirable

Champion

Admirable

Pizza Monster

Pizza Monster

Distinguished

Admirable

Distinguished

Pizza Monster

Admirable

Champion

Pizza Monster

Share this page