Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Supposed Intel i7-3770K vs. i7-4770K Benchmarks Leaked

By - Source: Coolaler Forums | B 48 comments

Some Benchmarks have been leaked where the i7-3770K has been pitted against the upcoming i7-4770K.

A user over at the Coolaler forums has leaked some benchmarks of the Core i7-4770K; it compares them against what we're most interested in, its predecessor, the i7-3770K.

The i7-4770K will be a quad-core part with HyperThreading, resulting in eight threads. It will have a base clock frequency of 3.5 GHz and a boost clock of 3.9 GHz. There will be 8 MB of cache, HD 4600 "GT2" graphics iGPU, and a Thermal Design Power (TDP) of 84 Watts, seven more than the current i7-3770K. Earlier, it was leaked that the chip would cost about $327.

While the benchmarks aren't necessarily reliable, based on the rumors regarding Haswell's performance, they do not seem out of line. It remains a leak though, so do take it all with a grain of salt.

CPUMark99:

  • Core i7-3770K: 613 Points
  • Core i7-4770K: 676 Points

SuperPI 1M:

  • Core i7-3770K: 9.344 Seconds
  • Core i7-4770K: 9.220 Seconds
SuperPI 32M:
  • Core i7-3770K: 8:38.717 Minutes
  • Core i7-4770K: 8:15.059 Minutes
Cinebench R11.5
  • Core i7-3770K: 7.87 Points
  • Core i7-4770K: 8.55 Points
 
Overall, we can see that the CPU shows an increase in performance between 5 and 10 percent. Again, following the rumors from earlier, this doesn't come as a massive surprise. It mainly verifies what we already knew.

Coolaler also mentioned that, while Haswell will be very nice for overclocking, it still suffers from the same temperature problems that Ivy Bridge does, although perhaps not to as great an extent.


Discuss
Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the News comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 28 Hide
    Derbixrace , April 26, 2013 7:49 AM
    meh, still not a big jump from sandy bridge.
  • 12 Hide
    icemunk , April 26, 2013 8:25 AM
    yay... for 5-10% speed gains... zzzz
Other Comments
  • 2 Hide
    ssdpro , April 26, 2013 7:49 AM
    "Coolaler also mentioned that, while Haswell will be very nice for overclocking, it still suffers from the same temperature problems that Ivy Bridge does, although perhaps not to as great an extent"
    This was an over-baked Ivy issue anyway. As a 2600k and 3770k user I never found 3770k to be wildly hotter at all. Clock for clock, yes, it is a bit warmer - few degrees C. Something to worry about or a reason to avoid as some did, not at all. Is the chip "suffering"? That is just clown stuff.
  • Display all 48 comments.
  • 28 Hide
    Derbixrace , April 26, 2013 7:49 AM
    meh, still not a big jump from sandy bridge.
  • 5 Hide
    Augray37 , April 26, 2013 8:06 AM
    so an 8-10% increase in performance? not good, not bad, about what i expected. but these are 4 benchmarks only, and i'm guessing the 4770k used was an engineering sample? what i really want to see is how well they OC.
  • 2 Hide
    darkchazz , April 26, 2013 8:07 AM
    I upgraded from Phenom II X4 955 to i7 3770K in June last year. One of the best purchases I have made, next to my Crucial M4 SSD.
    The performance jump was unbelievable. It also draws much less power and runs cooler. The phenom bottlenecked my gtx670 even when overclocked to 4ghz.
  • 2 Hide
    icrf , April 26, 2013 8:10 AM
    I'm actually most interested in something that utilizes AVX2. I have high hopes that x264 can incorporate them and have gains well in excess of 10%.
  • -6 Hide
    Augray37 , April 26, 2013 8:13 AM
    Quote:
    I upgraded from Phenom II X4 955 to i7 3770K in June last year. One of the best purchases I have made, next to my Crucial M4 SSD.
    The performance jump was unbelievable. It also draws much less power and runs cooler. The phenom bottlenecked my gtx670 even when overclocked to 4ghz.


    hmm...that's weird, the gtx 670 didn't bottleneck my phenom ii x4 955 much at all really, not noticeably so. i was playing bf3 ultra at 1080p with no real lag at all. don't remember the fps exactly, but it rarely dipped into the 30s if i remember correctly.
  • 12 Hide
    icemunk , April 26, 2013 8:25 AM
    yay... for 5-10% speed gains... zzzz
  • 3 Hide
    redeemer , April 26, 2013 8:42 AM
    So these gains are from architectural changes or updated optimization coding that Intell pumps into these benchmark softwares?
  • -1 Hide
    crisan_tiberiu , April 26, 2013 8:52 AM
    well, since SB the TIC-TOC strategy was forgot :)  since SB we have TIC-TIC. The only thing that we forget is that intel cand aford this, they are far ahead...
  • 5 Hide
    ismaeljrp , April 26, 2013 9:10 AM
    Still no reason to upgrade from my 2500k, I think I'll just wait for DDR4 systems.
  • 3 Hide
    loops , April 26, 2013 9:16 AM
    A 5-10% bump that will cost you a new chip and mobo. That is some expensive 10% gains.
  • 0 Hide
    yhikum , April 26, 2013 9:17 AM
    I would be interested in what were clock speeds using this benchmarks. There is no mention of that in article.
    I have hard time believing that CPUMark99 scores were achieved on stock speeds. A bit of searching across forum boards show scores below 600 and scores themselves correlate to CPU speeds. This is for both AMD and Intel processors. Here is one for reference: http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2057154
    Jump to 10% is quite significant when it runs non-optimized code for specific processor. This is due to simple fact that instructions on CPU cannot be executed faster than they already execute, unless you apply speed factor of clock speed. And since CPUMark99 is single threaded benchmark, clock speed plays important role.
  • 0 Hide
    dimar , April 26, 2013 9:32 AM
    For me 6x SATA 6Gb native ports on 8 series motherboards would be good reason to upgrade.
  • 1 Hide
    loops , April 26, 2013 9:58 AM
    A 5-10% bump that will cost you a new chip and mobo. That is some expensive 10% gains.
  • 2 Hide
    CaedenV , April 26, 2013 10:25 AM
    Quote:
    At this rate it's gonna be like 5 years before OC Sandy Bridge users have a reason to upgrade.


    Just keep in mind that Intel is not looking at improving raw performance right now. Their largest competitor is not AMD, but the hordes of ARM manufacturers who are looking to break into the desktop and laptop space over the next few years. While the chip wattage is up a little bit this generation, the platform wattage is down, way down. The wattage increase is due to better IGP and integrated voltage regulation. These are useless improvements for desktop users, but it means a lot to laptop/netbook/tablet/AIO/server manufacturers where power usage vs performance is one of the largest considerations when choosing a chip.
    Broadwell will take this to the next level by integrating more and more stuff on the chip. Eventually Intel will move the chipsets themselves onto the CPU so that you essentially have an SOC solution to properly fight against ARM. Once they get to that point then we will see a move back to improved raw performance again.

    Until then I will enjoy my SB i7 and just throw money at the GPU as needed.
  • 2 Hide
    ilysaml , April 26, 2013 10:44 AM
    If steamroller takes on Sandy Bridge performance, there's a top chance AMD catch up with Intel.
  • 1 Hide
    milktea , April 26, 2013 10:46 AM
    I'll wait for 9770k before my next upgrade.
  • 3 Hide
    nhat11 , April 26, 2013 10:49 AM
    The point of Haswell is the power savings for mobile devices. At the moment I'm waiting for that instead of a simple performance boost for my next laptop.
  • 2 Hide
    Hupiscratch , April 26, 2013 11:00 AM
    This could be the time to upgrade. I think it would be a nice improvement over my Athlon 64 FX-60 :D 
  • 4 Hide
    InvalidError , April 26, 2013 11:14 AM
    Quote:
    gogogogogogogo AMD
    I'm tired of Intel getting away with this lazy junk

    If AMD had a rabbit they could pull out of their hat, they would/should have done so already.

    The cold reality is that single-threaded performance has pretty much reached as high as it is going to go so improvements there will remain pretty slow. With very few mainstream applications making reasonable use of more than two cores, there is very little demand for more than that so do not expect a desktop core-count race any time soon either.

    Expect the number of people upgrading their PCs only every 5-7 years to increase - provided they do not fail first or get prematurely replaced due to degraded performance from push-pin HSF no longer making adequate contact.
Display more comments