
Comparing the 3DMark suite score to the Graphics and Physics results shows that CPU performance is what moves the dial. Most notably, a stock Core i7-4790K is faster than our overclocked Core i7-4770K. Given that this test is well-threaded, and both configurations are set up for four-core Turbo Boost settings of 4.2 GHz, the outcome is unexpected. It is something you'll see happen consistently through the rest of our suite, though.

I picked PCMark 8's Creative suite for our little exploration in light of its emphasis on media and content creation (specifically, Web browsing, photo editing, video editing, gaming, and video chat). There are two versions of the benchmark: Conventional and Accelerated, the latter of which employs OpenCL-based acceleration. Because I specifically want to isolate the host processor, though, and not lean on the GeForce GTX Titan in our test machine, these numbers reflect the Conventional run.
The biggest speed-up comes from overclocking a Core i7-4770K from its stock 3.5 GHz up to 4.2 GHz. However, the Core i7-4790K wants to run at 4.2 GHz in its stock form, too, and it yields a bit of extra speed in the process. Pushing up to 4.4 GHz across all four of the 4790K's cores registers a a small speed-up, and you'd expect to see similarly subtle increases as you push the CPU harder.

The results from each processor are reflected in kilonodes per second. A node is a position on the chessboard. So, in the case of Core i7-4790K, Fritz evaluates more than 16,000 thousand nodes per second, or 16 million. In comparison, a Core i7-3930K, operating at its stock frequencies, returns more than 18,000 kN/s, and the Core i7-4960X approaches 20,000. Those CPUs get their advantage from six physical cores, even though they employ older architectures.
- Intel Core i7-4790K: Devil's Canyon Is For Enthusiasts
- Overclocking Core i7-4790K And TIM Performance
- How We Tested Core i7-4790K
- Results: Synthetics
- Results: Content Creation
- Results: Adobe CC
- Results: Productivity And Media Encoding
- Results: Compression Apps
- Results: Power Consumption
- Core i7-4790K Adds Enthusiast Appeal To Haswell
bring back solder intel.
I built my PC at the end of last year, beginning of this one and went with a i7-4930k. I really wanted a six core processor and have not been disappointed. I have been itching to build another PC because it was really fun to put the plan of components together and although my hands were to big and my medical conditions prevented me from getting to do a lot of the building, my wife helped a lot with that part and it was nice to see the finished product in action. With that being said, I don't have a lot of money for anything right now and hope that my disability pay finally comes through so I can start picking together parts for a computer for my wife. She won't need anything as powerful as I have, and the i7-4790k sounds pretty sweet.
On a side note, this website annoys me. I click to add comment and the default fields are for signing up, no logging in, and when I do, I am back to the homepage. Great.
bring back solder intel.
Second problem: Why is Tom's using 1.275 V for 4200MHz on both units? Is that actually 1.275v with LLC disabled or is LLC on a setting resulting in the lowest load voltage? If one of those units need 1.275v to be stable at 4200 you have a real donkey sample on your hands. Even the worst i7-4770k are stable at 1.20v @ 4200. Or was the over voltage designed to test an unrealistic incompetent situation to either emphasize or DE-emphasize the TIM difference?
Voltage wall is still at the approximate same place. Heat is still the limiting factor. I expect some of the better binned 4670K will hit equal or better than the 4690K.
I'll stay with my 3570K @ 4.3ghz - this clearly isn't much of a step up. Looks like I'm waiting for a DDR4 system in a couple years.
Not impressed.
My interest lies in, will the devils canyon i5 4690k be able to hit the same clocks and temperatures as the i7 4790k at the same voltages, or for the i7 is there just a more extensive binning process or something of the sort? Your comment at the beginning of the article when discussing these realistic and sustainable overclocks really hit home in relation to this.
Second problem: Why is Tom's using 1.275 V for 4200MHz on both units? Is that actually 1.275v with LLC disabled or is LLC on a setting resulting in the lowest load voltage? If one of those units need 1.275v to be stable at 4200 you have a real donkey sample on your hands. Even the worst i7-4770k are stable at 1.20v @ 4200. Or was the over voltage designed to test an unrealistic incompetent situation to either emphasize or DE-emphasize the TIM difference?
The point of running both CPUs at the same voltage and the same clock rate is measuring the difference of the TIM. For the rest of the tests, each chip is pushed as fast as it'll go, stably.
The FX-8350 at stock was roughly the same time as the i7-3770K in your 3DSM fly-by render ...
So why would you go out of your way to compare Devil's Canyon to the A10-7850K ??
Still, even though the performance is another step faster than AMD, for my purposes the cost is still a bit high. Still, I'd love to see what it can do at 5.0 GHz.