Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

3930K vs 3770K

Last response: in CPUs
Share
November 12, 2012 4:08:57 AM

Hi guys,
I'm building myself and extreme gaming machine for around $3000 and I am unsure about the benefits of these two processors. At first glance the 3903K would appear to be the better processor with an extra 2 cores and a larger cache (not to mention almost double the price tag) however my friend recently swapped from the 3930K to the 3770K and he is boasting much higher CPU scores on bench-marking software. I was wondering which I should buy and if his scores could have resulted from some of the other components being changed?

More about : 3930k 3770k

a b à CPUs
November 12, 2012 4:27:18 AM

Subject E57 said:
Hi guys,
I'm building myself and extreme gaming machine for around $3000 and I am unsure about the benefits of these two processors. At first glance the 3903K would appear to be the better processor with an extra 2 cores and a larger cache (not to mention almost double the price tag) however my friend recently swapped from the 3930K to the 3770K and he is boasting much higher CPU scores on bench-marking software. I was wondering which I should buy and if his scores could have resulted from some of the other components being changed?


first hes mostly wrong. anything but single threaded apps will prefer the 3930k. most cpu benchmarking software will and should score the 6 core cpu better so he isnt telling you the whole truth.

gaming wise the 3770k will be better. it will overclock just as high and has the advantage of new architecture that is 5-10% faster then sandy bridge tech that the 3930k has. plus you save 200+ dollars.

on an unrelated note. idk how you are going to spend 3k on a gaming computer. i could build one for 1500-1700 dollars thats just as fast. unless you are getting monitors with the build as well and the monitors are ones that are expensive...
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
November 12, 2012 4:27:45 AM

i7 3930K is a six-core/12-threaded CPU intended to be used for Multi-threaded and heavy applications that benefit from "more cores" and "more threads"

Also, at this point of usage..the more cache size will be beneficial, but when it comes to gaming...the very modern games are just starting to take advantage of 3 core CPU, in most scenarios you can't tell a difference between a $100 Core i3 CPU and $1000 core i7 CPU when playing some particular games.

And 3K on a Gaming PC is a much of a waste, you could build a beast Gaming PC with $1500 unless you're planing to do multiple monitors gaming.
m
0
l
Related resources
a c 78 à CPUs
November 12, 2012 4:32:03 AM

If all you're doing is gaming both are completely unnecessary and overpriced. An i5-3570K is all you need.

Like ilysaml said, 3k for a gaming PC is an extreme waste of money, theres a saying it goes "damn fool and their money soon part".
m
0
l
November 12, 2012 4:40:00 AM

cbrunnem said:
first hes mostly wrong. anything but single threaded apps will prefer the 3930k. most cpu benchmarking software will and should score the 6 core cpu better so he isnt telling you the whole truth.

gaming wise the 3770k will be better. it will overclock just as high and has the advantage of new architecture that is 5-10% faster then sandy bridge tech that the 3930k has. plus you save 200+ dollars.

on an unrelated note. idk how you are going to spend 3k on a gaming computer. i could build one for 1500-1700 dollars thats just as fast. unless you are getting monitors with the build as well and the monitors are ones that are expensive...




Thank you, that helps me a lot as I haven't built a new PC for a long time. $3000 may be a bit excessive, I am planning on using it for max settings with above 1080p resolution gaming. I will save some money with the 3770k though. If it's not going too far off topic what parts would you recommend?
m
0
l
a c 78 à CPUs
November 12, 2012 4:52:00 AM

Subject E57 said:
Thank you, that helps me a lot as I haven't built a new PC for a long time. $3000 may be a bit excessive, I am planning on using it for max settings with above 1080p resolution gaming. I will save some money with the 3770k though. If it's not going too far off topic what parts would you recommend?

You can get that without spending 3 grand. Do you already have monitors? or is that included in the price? Sure monitors can get expensive, this kind of question you're asking though is getting you into the realm of you should make a thread in the Homebuilt section and fill out the form there found under the thread "how to ask for build and upgrade advice".
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
November 12, 2012 4:57:07 AM

Subject E57 said:
Thank you, that helps me a lot as I haven't built a new PC for a long time. $3000 may be a bit excessive, I am planning on using it for max settings with above 1080p resolution gaming. I will save some money with the 3770k though. If it's not going too far off topic what parts would you recommend?


basically when you are building a computer for gaming you want to build around the gpu. since you have such a high budget i would recommend crossfired 7970's.

build around this

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/nprv

chose what cpu you want but it must be a lga 1155 cpu. then the rest is basically preference like the case ram and storage. if you decide for a ssd i strongly recommend a mushkin drive like this one.

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

its one of the best out there and i challenge you or anyone else to find a bad review on it. its a top tier ssd without the price tag of one.
m
0
l
a c 78 à CPUs
November 12, 2012 4:59:57 AM

*huffs off and pouts* I'm not buying an SSD til ~500GB models are reasonably priced.
m
0
l
November 12, 2012 5:01:28 AM

nekulturny said:
You can get that without spending 3 grand. Do you already have monitors? or is that included in the price? Sure monitors can get expensive, this kind of question you're asking though is getting you into the realm of you should make a thread in the Homebuilt section and fill out the form there found under the thread "how to ask for build and upgrade advice".


I don't have the monitor yet, the one I am looking at is around $700. I might make a new thread after I have considered all of this information. Oh also (and this is on topic) what is with the duel, triple, quad channel memory? The ivy bridge can only use duel channel but I have no idea what the implications of this are?
m
0
l
a c 78 à CPUs
November 12, 2012 5:11:47 AM

Subject E57 said:
I don't have the monitor yet, the one I am looking at is around $700. I might make a new thread after I have considered all of this information. Oh also (and this is on topic) what is with the duel, triple, quad channel memory? The ivy bridge can only use duel channel but I have no idea what the implications of this are?

The implications of it are, get ready to giggle. Imagine drinking a soda with a straw, imagine that single straw is a single channel memory module. Now, add a second straw, you can drink twice as much can't you? Well, that sort of how dual vs single channel memory works in terms of data transfer. Although, its not quite as performance increasing as drinking through more than one straw. In theory, this improves the efficiency of your system feeding data through the channels faster, since you have 2 channels instead of one.

I know benchmarks have been done on it, you tend to find the biggest advantage of dual channel vs single channel in lower end systems (not high end ones- and even the gains in lower end systems are minute) such as you're proposing. Why in the lower end systems? Because they're low end, and every little bit helps. LGA1155 doesn't support more than dual channel, yes LGA2011 supports triple and quad. But like I said, not really a major improvement enhancer.

You do want to build a system with 2 sticks of memory (buy an 8GB kit or 16GB kit if you wish). Or you can run 4 and max out an LGA1155 board with 32GB of RAM, not much benefit in that either, I put 16GB of RAM in my machine, and I don't even use most of it. Anyway, the reason you want to run RAM in pairs, is because you get "dual channel memory mode", that may seem like it contradicts what I just said, but its kind of a "why shoot yourself in the foot if you don't have to?" kind of thing.
m
0
l
a c 78 à CPUs
November 12, 2012 5:13:30 AM

I found this, yes its a few years old, but it hasn't changed much since DDR2, the principles are the same.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/PARALLEL-PROCESSING...

BTW, I hope my above post made sense, I try to avoid the blah blah blah technical terms as much as possible.

In regards to monitor choices, if you're looking to go extreme, you might want to consider high end 32 inch HDTVs in lieu of a monitor, but if you went that route, you might want to consider also having a regular monitor for every day tasks like emails browsing and forum posts, and use the HDTV to game. I have my 27 inch for gaming, but I often use my 2nd 19 inch for reading stuff, its more practical than my main monitor. But the problems I experience may be different than you. I wear contacts, and things up close kinda look blurry to me on the big monitor.
m
0
l
November 12, 2012 5:42:44 AM

nekulturny said:
I found this, yes its a few years old, but it hasn't changed much since DDR2, the principles are the same.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/PARALLEL-PROCESSING...

BTW, I hope my above post made sense, I try to avoid the blah blah blah technical terms as much as possible.

In regards to monitor choices, if you're looking to go extreme, you might want to consider high end 32 inch HDTVs in lieu of a monitor, but if you went that route, you might want to consider also having a regular monitor for every day tasks like emails browsing and forum posts, and use the HDTV to game. I have my 27 inch for gaming, but I often use my 2nd 19 inch for reading stuff, its more practical than my main monitor. But the problems I experience may be different than you. I wear contacts, and things up close kinda look blurry to me on the big monitor.



Thank you for all of your advice, I think I have a much better understanding now. Here is a summery of what I have taken away (please correct me if I'm wrong)

3770K
Slightly faster/better for gaming
Much cheaper
Only duel memory support (which wont make much of a difference to me)
1155 Motherboards will not have any new CPU's so I would have to buy a new one to upgrade
No PCI express 3.0 support (which is only an issue with more than 2 graphics cards?)

3930K
Extra cores may come in handy for future (or modded) gaming
Much more expensive
Triple or Quad channel memory will only give 1 or 2 extra FPS
2011 Motherboards will be compatible with new processors
If I want triple SLI or Crossfire this would be better?


Thank you everybody for your advice :-)
m
0
l

Best solution

a c 78 à CPUs
November 12, 2012 5:51:38 AM

No problem, alrite. Couple things.

3770K on 1155 does have PCI-E 3.0, as long as its Ivy Bridge. Prior Generation Sandy Bridge on the same LGA1155 does not have 3.0. You want to look for Z77 chipset motherboards. PCI-E 3.0 doesn't really have much of an advantage over 2.0. Heres an article on that if you want, they ran benches on it. While like I said, 3.0 isn't that much to get excited about, there have been reports of technical difficulties getting computers to POST with older Z68 chipset (Sandy Bridge) LGA1155 motherboards without a BIOS update when running Ivy Bridge CPUs in them. Yes they're compatible, but if the BIOS version isn't up to date, you may find yourself with a minor inconvenience of needing to borrow a friends CPU in order to update your BIOS, or RMAing the board to the manufacturer to get the current BIOS.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/07/18/pci_express_2...

The 2011 in theory would be better if you wanted tri-SLi/Crossfire. But I can't see as though you'd possibly need anything more than dual 7970s (or GTX 670s for that matter). And I'd suggest starting out with just one to see how it does before dropping $400-$500 on a second one.

Don't get too wrapped up in "future proofing" the machine. The way computer technology evolves, theres little point in overspending on the system wanting it to last you 8 years or something like that. 5 years ago Intel's $1000 "Extreme processors" of the day are outperformed by Intel's i5-3570Ks of today to give you perspective on that. If you really want the 2011 platform, it should be for what the computer can do for you today, not what it might do in a few years. You're better off just building 2 computers in the next 5-6 years rather than one super expensive one that would cost more than both of em that you expect to last the duration.

And, of course you're welcome.
Share
November 12, 2012 5:54:01 AM

Best answer selected by Subject E57.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
November 12, 2012 6:01:54 AM

3770K is not faster or better for gaming, it's just the same as 3930K in terms of gaming performance, who says unlike is flat wrong.

Dual Memory or Quad Memory doesn't make any difference whether it was intended for gaming or software Usage, the only one real benefit is the amount of RAM that can be plugged in for other purpose usage.

Neither the 1155 nor the 2011 sockets will carry newer generations, unless Intell is planing to release Ivy Bridge Extreme CPUs and I don't think so, cause 3970X was just releases, and if they did release newer CPUs it will be Useless as the performance gain will be very minor.

PCIE 3.0 in any case is not a problem at all, and you can consider it as "Never Existed" it will take some more years to benefit from PCIE 3.0 bandwidth.

If you want to Triple or Quad SLI/CF it will be useless as the third or fourth card doesn't add much benefit, only 2-way CF/SLI scale pretty well up to 100% performance boost.

m
0
l
!