Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Intel Core i7-3930K vs. Intel Core i7-3770K

Last response: in CPUs
Share
July 28, 2012 9:19:06 PM

Hello,

Im building a PC for gaming and some video editing. Was curious what people thought about these two chips. Many say the HEX Core is more future proof. I don't plan on doing a lot of 3D rendering, but definitely encoding and editing. I also love gaming. But i know each chip requires a separate motherboard. Thoughts?

JUST FYI, the configuration I have now is the following:

- Antec Nine Hundred Black Steel ATX Mid Tower Computer Case
- Intel Core i7-3930K
- 16 GB DDR3 RAM
- GTX 560 Ti w/ 2GB VRAM (mainly for the Adobe's Mercury Engine, but I hear this is a good video card for games too)
- 750 W Power Supply
- ASUS P9X79 PRO LGA Motherboard
- Crucial M4 128 GB SSD for main apps
- HGST Deskstar 7K1000.C 0F10383 1TB HDD for video and such @ 7200 RPM
a c 218 à CPUs
July 28, 2012 10:43:27 PM

The difference between the two cpu's is Pci-e bandwidth and ram support.
The 3930k lga socket 2011 will support up to 64gb of ram and has 40 lanes of bandwith for having multiple slots for video cards and you can end up with x16 , x16 and x8 or x8 x8 x8 x8 x8 , or x16 x8 x8 x8.
The 3770k will support up to 32gb of ram and have 16 lanes of bandwith for video cards and end up with x8 x8 or x16 x0. The motherboard then has the option to add the NF 200 chip and therefore add more lanes of bandwith. But that adds to the price of the board.
The build you have listed is a very good one and not knowing your budget I would say that the video card is a little weak for that system and you would be better off with a GTX 570 , 580 or 670.
m
0
l
July 29, 2012 12:34:29 AM

Thank you for your reply.

I will look into the other video card options. Since I am not doing 3D intensive applications, such as After FX and Cinema 4D / Maya, the GTX 560 Ti seemed like a reasonable choice. My main concern was picking a decent video card that had Adobe's Mercury Engine support. Although, from what I hear, you can add that support by amending a .txt file in the drivers of various other NVIDIA video cards. May have to research how that works.

But now I know what they mean by the 3930k Hex Core being future proof. That's an insanely large amount of options you have.
m
0
l
Related resources
a c 218 à CPUs
July 29, 2012 1:21:59 AM

Not sure why they (Intel) didn't expand on the LGA 2011 socket as we only have the three cpu's to choose from while there are a whole lot of Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge to choose from. I'm hopeing they will be coming out with more in the 2011 socket line as I intend to be upgrading next year and would like to see more of the 2011 socket cpu's to choose from.
There is a GTX 570 2.5gb video card to be had and it would be more powerful to be used in your rendering programs.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
m
0
l
a c 471 à CPUs
July 29, 2012 2:07:51 AM

Socket 2011 serves a limited niche market which is the reason why there are so few CPUs for it. Intel will be releasing Ivy Bridge-E CPUs in the 2nd quarter of 2012 if I am not mistaken; just prior to the release of the upcoming Haswell CPUs.

m
0
l
July 29, 2012 3:27:47 AM

Would you guys recommend on waiting for the Ivy-Bridge Enthusiast series? From what I have read, the Sandy Bridge 3930K is a good HEX Core, and people seem to love it. I also need this rig fast, as I'm currently editing on an old Intel Core 2 QUAD, and I can't take it any longer. ;) 
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
July 29, 2012 3:37:21 AM

im pretty sure to use mercury engine you need at least a 570... maybe not its one of those engines.
m
0
l
a c 116 à CPUs
July 29, 2012 3:39:32 AM

TyGuyy said:
I also need this rig fast, as I'm currently editing on an old Intel Core 2 QUAD, and I can't take it any longer. ;) 

If a lot of that editing consists of transcoding and the software you use can use QuickSync, an i5-3570k/i7-37xx would already run circles around a Core2Anything.
m
0
l
July 29, 2012 3:39:33 AM

cbrunnem said:
im pretty sure to use mercury engine you need at least a 570... maybe not its one of those engines.



Yea, I checked it out. You are correct. I plan on purchasing that now. The 590 is a little overkill for my needs.
m
0
l
July 29, 2012 3:44:00 AM

InvalidError said:
If a lot of that editing consists of transcoding and the software you use can use QuickSync, an i5-3570k/i7-37xx would already run circles around a Core2Anything.


With video editing, I will do a lot of transcoding and encoding. And trust me, my computer is 5 years old. It's a relative dinosaur, so I know anything is better than a Core2Whatever. I just want to future proof this sucker, so it will last another 2-4 years, etc. Will a i7-3930K handle things THAT much better than a i7-3770K?
m
0
l
a c 116 à CPUs
July 29, 2012 4:06:00 AM

TyGuyy said:
I just want to future proof this sucker, so it will last another 2-4 years, etc. Will a i7-3930K handle things THAT much better than a i7-3770K?

Probably not $800 worth better IMO. Ivy Bridge QuickSync transcode (if your software supports it) is 2-3X faster than the next fastest single-CPU/GPGPU transcode currently available, it puts even the 3960X to shame for that specific task.

For everyday computing, even the i5-3xxx are overkill for most software and since Intel has no plan to go beyond four cores in mainstream CPUs, current quads are likely to remain viable for quite some time.
m
0
l
July 29, 2012 4:14:18 AM

InvalidError said:
Probably not $800 worth better IMO. Ivy Bridge QuickSync transcode (if your software supports it) is 2-3X faster than the next fastest single-CPU/GPGPU transcode currently available, it puts even the 3960X to shame for that specific task.

For everyday computing, even the i5-3xxx are overkill for most software and since Intel has no plan to go beyond four cores in mainstream CPUs, current quads are likely to remain viable for quite some time.



I think the price difference between the i7-3770K and the i7-3930K (4 cores vs 6) is only $230.00 ($570 vs $340). I know Adobe CS6 supports QuickSync (at least I think they do) and CUDA from Nvidia's cards.
m
0
l
a c 218 à CPUs
July 29, 2012 4:23:01 AM

It might be worthgoing with the 3930k for two reqasons , one the cpu will overclock better then the 3770k which has heat issues when going ove 4.2ghz and voltage is applied. Second is the the 3930k has support for ram up to 64 gb so if the need arises in your video work for the need of that much ram it's there. Third as I spoke of previously the Pci-e lanes are there for the video cards and again if the need arises for two or even three video cards the support is there. All of this is the knowledge that if needed there is more to be had where with the 3770k you don't and while what's there is good there is no more to be had , so this decision is one for you to think about what the possabilities are and what you want to do.
m
0
l
a c 471 à CPUs
July 29, 2012 10:27:45 AM

Note that Quick Sync only supports 3 codecs to the best of my knowledge; H.264, VC-1, and MPEG-2.

It's also worth researching the video quality of Quick Sync. When initially released Quick Sync encoded video looked somewhat blurry and there were some video artifacts as well compared to the original source and video encoded using software that did not support Quick Sync like Handbrake. So while Quick Sync was able complete a 2 pass video encode extremely fast, it also produced the worse quality video from what I recall. Again, this is something you need research regarding the current implementation of Quick Sync.
m
0
l
a c 116 à CPUs
July 29, 2012 1:05:43 PM

jaguarskx said:
It's also worth researching the video quality of Quick Sync. When initially released Quick Sync encoded video looked somewhat blurry and there were some video artifacts as well compared to the original source and video encoded using software that did not support Quick Sync like Handbrake.

That would be Sandy Bridge QuickSync. Ivy Bridge QuickSync encoding on top of being twice as fast as Sandy's also improved quality substantially.
m
0
l
July 29, 2012 5:03:25 PM

So, after much soul searching, and some analysis, I decided to breakdown what I'd be using this machine for. Yes, lots of video editing, but also, a heavy load of gaming (since i work for a developer).

I would say about 50% Gaming / 40% Video Editing / 10% After FX


So, I decided to roll with the Ivy Bridge i7-3770K. Mainly to spend money elsewhere.

- Got a nice Corsair Vengeance Series Mid Tower Case
- GTX 670 NVIDIA Video Card, which I can use for CUDA / Mercury Engine with a simple tweak
- Nice fast ASUS Maximus Motherboard
- And, i also got my 16GB of Corsair memory, plus a 128GB SSD drive, and a 1TB Hitachi HDD.

basically, I am getting more components, at the same price. I do not edit video for my profession, although I dabble in some freelance here and there. So, whereas 6 Cores would be ideal, I figured it's not entirely necessary for what I am doing.
m
0
l
July 29, 2012 5:21:05 PM

i7 3930k is for rendering it cant beat i5 3570k in gaming they all have the same performance in gaming and also the i7 3770k have the same performance of i7 3930k ,3960x , i7 2700k but only the difference in rendering and heavy benchmarks
m
0
l
July 29, 2012 5:21:47 PM

inzone said:
Will you be overclocking the 3770k? If your going with the stock cooler and not overclocking then you don't have o worry about the ram heat spreaders but if you are overclocking and going with an after market heatsink then you want to get the low profile ram.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...



I did get a Cooler Master fan to cool the chip off in general for 20 bucks, but I have no immediate plans to overclock the CPU. I suppose it's something I may consider in the future. If so, would my current RAM be a problem? I purchased the CORSAIR Vengeance 16GB (4 x 4GB).
m
0
l
a c 218 à CPUs
July 29, 2012 5:30:15 PM

The ram is only a problem if the heat spreaders interfere with the heatsink on the cpu , sometimes the first ram slot can be covered by the heatsink and you have to have a low profile set of ram sticks so they fit under the heatsink. The alternative is to place the cpu heatsink in such a way so as to not cover the first ram slot. If you had gone with the 2x8gb set then you couls have placed the ram sticks in the 2nd and 4th ram slots and not have to worry about the first slot.
When you use the stock heatsink you don't run into that probelm. The ram you got is it the model with the tall heat spreaders?
m
0
l
July 29, 2012 5:45:54 PM

inzone said:
The ram is only a problem if the heat spreaders interfere with the heatsink on the cpu , sometimes the first ram slot can be covered by the heatsink and you have to have a low profile set of ram sticks so they fit under the heatsink. The alternative is to place the cpu heatsink in such a way so as to not cover the first ram slot. If you had gone with the 2x8gb set then you couls have placed the ram sticks in the 2nd and 4th ram slots and not have to worry about the first slot.
When you use the stock heatsink you don't run into that probelm. The ram you got is it the model with the tall heat spreaders?



Come to think of it, yes, they do have the tall heat spreaders.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...


I suppose I can change the order, since it hasn't been processed yet. Although, like you said, if I use the stock heatsink fan, It won't pose to be a problem, correct?

***UPDATE*** Lucky for me, it's Sunday. I was able to cancel the order before my CC was charged. I can now reconfigure the RAM. There shouldn't be a problem with those 2 8GB sticks, and this motherboard, correct?
m
0
l
a c 218 à CPUs
July 29, 2012 8:06:22 PM

That's correct and you can get the low profile ram sticks since the only difference is the heat spreaders the speed and timings remain the same and you can use the after market heat sink. I would be better than the stock heatsink even thogh you don't overcklock the Cooler Master will do a better job of cooling the cpu.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

By getting the low profile heat spreaders if the need arises you can add another set of these for 32 gb and not have to worry about the clearence. I know you may not be planning on 32gb but suppose latter on you decide to go in a new direction with graphic design or Blue Ray encoding or some real intensive ram busting process and you want that additional 16gb or even just another 8 gb by going low profile you have those options.
If your set on the two 8 gb sticks then they will work with that MB and you can put the two sticks in the number 2 and 4 slots.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
July 29, 2012 9:47:10 PM

TyGuyy said:
So, after much soul searching, and some analysis, I decided to breakdown what I'd be using this machine for. Yes, lots of video editing, but also, a heavy load of gaming (since i work for a developer).

I would say about 50% Gaming / 40% Video Editing / 10% After FX


So, I decided to roll with the Ivy Bridge i7-3770K. Mainly to spend money elsewhere.

- Got a nice Corsair Vengeance Series Mid Tower Case
- GTX 670 NVIDIA Video Card, which I can use for CUDA / Mercury Engine with a simple tweak
- Nice fast ASUS Maximus Motherboard
- And, i also got my 16GB of Corsair memory, plus a 128GB SSD drive, and a 1TB Hitachi HDD.

basically, I am getting more components, at the same price. I do not edit video for my profession, although I dabble in some freelance here and there. So, whereas 6 Cores would be ideal, I figured it's not entirely necessary for what I am doing.



the 670 is much slower for cuda computing.
m
0
l
July 29, 2012 10:33:47 PM

cbrunnem said:
the 670 is much slower for cuda computing.


Anything you'd recommend in the $400 dollar price range over the 670?
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
July 29, 2012 11:40:04 PM

the 570 is said to be the better cuda performer and the 670 is better at gaming
m
0
l
July 30, 2012 1:43:29 AM

cbrunnem said:
the 570 is said to be the better cuda performer and the 670 is better at gaming


I am no expert, but that is very odd, considering the 670 has twice as many CUDA cores. interesting......Also, take note....the 670 doesnt have native CUDA / Mercury Playback Engine support, but you can easily amend a .txt file to enable it.

How is the 570 for gaming...still pretty decent?
m
0
l
a c 218 à CPUs
July 30, 2012 5:02:06 AM

The GTX 570 and 580 are still great gaming cards , it's just a fact that the new cards are much better but they still will give great game performance. I have two GTX580's in sli and can play any game at any settings and resolution , currently playing at 2560x1600. The thing is that once you pass 60 fps there really isn't much you can notice for performance and the 570 and 580 will get you there.
m
0
l
a c 116 à CPUs
July 30, 2012 5:02:18 AM

TyGuyy said:
I am no expert, but that is very odd, considering the 670 has twice as many CUDA cores.

From what I read, Nvidia soft-capped the CUDA performance on newer mainstream GPUs to prevent them from competing against Quadro and their GPGPU-specific variant.
m
0
l
!