Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

flyaway

New system, help picking cpu

Recommended Posts

 

Hi guys, Im thinking about building a new rig, FSX oriented

Regarding CPU I cant decide between

 

i7 3770k or i7 4770k. Also what do u think about a i7 2700k

I dont wanna get into the delidding businees, I will certainly overclock tho.

I want a smooth FSX, any suggestions are welcome

 

Thx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

FSX always wants and can use more, get the fastest you can afford, which in this case is the 4770k.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How are its overclocking capabilities?

Needs delidding?

Previously I had an i5 2500k @4.7ghz. How does it compare?

Thx

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i7 3770K Haswell don't overclock that well plus you safe on not having to buy a new Motherboard.

Haswell is only 5%-10% faster clock for clock is not worth it IMO. 


 Average Haswell only overclocks to 4.3Ghz at best. Again go with Ivy. yep you need delidding Haswell forfeit you warranty nd all of that. Not that you wont with Ivy if you want to go pass 4.5Ghz or 4.6 Ghz(in some cases)

 

    P.S. IMO not worth it, save the money and go Ivy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont u need delidding Ivy as well??

Currently I have no rig so I'll have to buy a mobo anyways.

I read somewhere that a good overclocked 2700k will pair an overclocked 3770k without delidding.

I will have to delid the Ivy to get better clock and over perform the 2700k but im afraid of doing this and ruining the chip.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flyaway,

 

        My honest opinion is to go with Sandy if you can still find it. Is a better chip; it will last longer because of the solder and you don't have to delidding. The tim they use under the IHS is crappy and it will degrade with  time (not over night, but still....). Delidding is not worth it (yes it will lower temp, but if something goes wrong you are on your own (you know what I mean). The only way I will do something like that is if you have the finance's to go buy another chip. Finally I suggested Ivy even with the heat problem because compare to haswell is a little better.

 

    Honestly wish you the best of luck!!!!

 

 

     Happy Flying !!!!!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Further to this, in relation to FSX specifically... pretty rigorous benchmark tests have been done (by Doug Horton) which specifically looked at CPU only in regard to FSX performance. He found that it doesn't really matter what type of CPU you have, and whether it has 1 core, 2 cores, 4 or 8 etc... There was only a direct correlation between raw CPU speed and FSX frame rates. I.e. a single core CPU overclocked to 4.0GHz (for example) would outperform an i7 CPU running at 3.5GHz (for example).

 

So, basically, the conclusion of the tests was... just buy whichever CPU you can overclock to the highest speed.

 

Of course, this only applies to FSX performance. If you want to run other software and other games that may be designed better for multi-core processing, then you have to consider that as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


I.e. a single core CPU overclocked to 4.0GHz (for example) would outperform an i7 CPU running at 3.5GHz (for example).

 

But you would not be able to use the Affinetymask tweak to load the other cores which give better smoothness?

E.g When i run FSX on a single core on my CPU it stuttters, when I take the load of the first core and spread it on the others it's much smoother and takes away these stutters.... I wouldn't be able to do that if I had only 1 core?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True,

 

      The speed of instruction per clock is also important (IPC) plus the overclocking in essence is what will give the best performance

 

     example: (hypothetical number)

 

         Sandy @ 5.0 ghz = Ivy @ 4.5 ghz  = Haswell @ 4.2 ghz

 

      P.S. That why upgrading from sandy or Ivy is not relevant or necessary. To me it all come to built quality at least in between Sandy , Ivy and Haswell. Solder last longer than thermal interface material (TIM/ paste) exept if the TIM is good quality witch is not the case with Ivy or Haswell Intel used cheap Tim. That's why the heat and overclocking issues, also the fact the die is getting too small (not allowing the heat to dissipate as well vs the 32 nm die (Sandy))

 

    Happy Flying!!!!

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Ivy and Haswell. Solder last longer than thermal interface material (TIM/ paste) exept if the TIM is good quality witch is not the case with Ivy or Haswell Intel used cheap Tim. That's why the heat and overclocking issues,

    Happy Flying!!!!

 

 

 

 

 

From what I understand, the thermal issues with Ivy Bridge at high overclocks aren't related to the "quality" of the TIM, it's more to do with the "thickness" of the TIM.

 

Regarding reduced CPU longevity with TIM as opposed to solder, it's mere conjecture at this point. It may well be that the TIM is up to the task.

 

It may be a fallacy that the Ivy Bridge TIM is low quality.

 

Moreover, given that we enthusiast change our CPU's on a regular basis, it's probably not relevant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Martin Wilby,

Here is directly from Intel Spec sheet:

 

http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/core/3rd-gen-core-lga1155-socket-guide.html:

 

  See Page # 88:

 

         Stated the Thermal interface material used is: Dow Corning TC - 1996

Also here is the test from Hardware Secret that shows that such Tim don't even make the top tier:

http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/printpage/Thermal-Compound-Roundup-August-2011/1360

 

Have you seen the thermal paste when you are going to replace it on top of the CPU, it look like is disintegrating (that is because heat, chemical composition [metal vs grease] quality, in other words it degrades with time) and it needs to be replacing. Oh!!!! wait if you remove the cap or IHS what happen ? ........ you void your warranty....... Right (if you have the finances you can replace it (self insurance), but not everybody has that capability.

Bottom line Intel has change the solder for a TIM developed in 1996 and a cheap one too. Case in point is like we all know their is lack of competition, forcing people (overclocker's and flightsimmer's) to buy the xtreme lineup witch is overprice and not that beneficial (at least for FSX). They are deceiving us IMO, because if I buy a K part you expect bigger overclocking potential at least 4.5 ghz or 4.6 ghz not only 4.2 ghz - 4.3 ghz on average (at best, I repeat average). They are also deceiving us (IMO) because they are charging an additional $20 -$30 for a K and we are getting almost nothing (repeat almost). Finally if you want to think that all they do is ok........  Well  

 

P.S. Again as a fellow Simmer all I want to do with this reply is open people's Eyes, so people wake up and stop accepting this kind of treatment.

 

Happy Flying any how !!!

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well yes, TC-1996 is obviously not going to be as good as something like Arctic Silver, or Liquid Pro, but if you look at the chart, you can see there's only 3 degrees in it. So hardly a massive temperature difference.

And that 3 degrees is nothing like the 15-30 degree reduction in temps users see after de-lidding and replacing the TIM. Even installing just Arctic Silver under the IHS [rather than Liquid Pro] engenders much higher temperature reduction than the mere 3 degrees disadvantage imposed by TC-1996.

Hence... why I say the "thickness" of the TIM is the primary reason why de-lidding is so effective.

You also mentioned longevity, your hypothesis that TC-1996 would not last long before degrading. Do you have any definitive evidence of that? And if you do, is that degradation time frame greater than the average users tendency to replace their CPU?

 

 

Have you seen the thermal paste when you are going to replace it on top of the CPU, it look like is disintegrating (that is because heat, chemical composition [metal vs grease] quality, in other words it degrades with time) and it needs to be replacing.


Yes it does look like that. But given that the IHS and TIM has been disturbed during the de-lidding process I'm not surprised. And given that de-lidding is done by most users on a new chip, your degradation hypothesis does not apply. There is no chance of degradation on a new chip.

if I buy a K part you expect bigger overclocking potential at least 4.5 ghz or 4.6 ghz not only 4.2 ghz - 4.3 ghz


Average overclock on a non de-lidded 3770K is higher than that. 4.5 GHz is easy on a non de-lidded Ivy Bridge. Exactly what you asked for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Martin,

 

        You are missing the point specially on a K part the Tim under the IHS shouldn't be there in the first place. What I'm trying to convey is to stop been ok with things done wrong. Not just Intel but any company that does things like this. Wake up man!!!, I know about thinckness. Again the thing about this is we are paying a premium ($20-$30) for K parts  and getting fool with poor quality TIM.

 

 

      P.S. That's is not ok!!  also a few overclocking site doing their testing shows that after over clocking the tim will degrade around 3 yrs. Also you have made up your mind and I'm not going to change it, but at least want to informed the rest well.

 

 

     Any how happy Flying!!!!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote

You are missing the point specially on a K part the Tim under the IHS shouldn't be there in the first place.

 

Yes it should be there, because Intel decide such things, they are the designers of the chip. Intel design their CPU's, not you.

 

 

Quote

What I'm trying to convey is to stop been ok with things done wrong.

 

I didn't say I was okay with it, what I said was, that the primary reason de-lidding is so effective is due to the thickness of the TIM, not the quality of the TIM. Which you disagreed with, see below.

 

Quote

I know about thinckness.

 

Then why did you say the following...

 

 

Quote

exept if the TIM is good quality witch is not the case with Ivy or Haswell Intel used cheap Tim. That's why the heat and overclocking issues,

 

You then went on to inform me how the Intel TIM "didn't even make the top tier".

 

If you have changed your mind, and now agree that the TIM thickness is the primary reason de-lidding is so effective, and that the quality of the TIM is a secondary, minor factor, then great.

 

Quote

also a few overclocking site doing their testing shows that after over clocking the tim will degrade around 3 yrs.

 

Can you show us a link for that, and a quote?

 

QuoteAlso you have made up your mind and I'm not going to change it,

 

I have made up my mind that the TIM thickness is the primary issue... that was my only point, and it was in response to you claiming it was the quality of the TIM that was the issue. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Martin,

 

 

      I don't design cpu's for Intel , but I do have common sense and can analyze thing. In all honesty you are sounding a little fanatic of the company and their recent practices (that your point of view, not everybody else). The spirit of my topic's and feedbacks is to give simmer real objective facts (non bias). Please stop been a fanatic and please don't bother to reply. You have obviously make up your mind.

 

     P.S. Respectfully your maturity level is pretty low

 

      Happy Flying!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Show me where there is any fanatacism at all.

 

l have corrected you on only one point.

 

l have not not commented at all in regard to whether intels decision to use TIM meets with my approval or not

 

Unfortunately you have chosen to make unfounded claims regarding me

 

Simply tell us if you agree that TIM thickness is the primary reason for the considerable reduction in temps after de-lidding?????

 

No insults or attempts to put words in my mouth please. I have been respectful and so should you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who are you to correct me,

 

       You have talked and talked and talked of Tim thinckness been the primary reason. When I have show up directly from Intel spec papers the main reason for the thermal issues. They selected a cheap Tim develop in 1996. Let see if you delidding and apply any other kind of Tim/paste (correctly) it still don't bring the temps. That shows thickness is not the main reason for the thermal issues. Only with high end Tim the temps goes down (ex. Coollaboratory - Tim/Paste). So does this let us know? Oh!!! wait that the quality and composition of the Tim/Paste is what matters. In other words that is the main reason for the thermal issues.

 

    P.S. People has delidding and used (applied correctly) Tim like Tuniq, MX-4, AS5....... but the one's with 15C - 20C (average) drops are the people that has use Coollaboratory (High end Paste). So again quality of the thermal interface, either solder or high end tim is what has matter and is the main problem. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@flyaway, after reding your question carefully, i think 2700K is for you. No de-lidding is needed, and very easy to overclock. Excelent overclocker BTW!

If you go for H100 cooler, you should hit 5GHz without problems

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To the original poster:

 

I would reccomend going with one of the new Haswell CPUs. If you purchase a decent closed loop water cooler, you will not need to delid your CPU. You also should have acceptable temps as long as you are going to be OC'ing around 4.5-4.7GHZ.

 

@@jjcruz78

 

If someone is going to be buying a new CPU, why would they purchase an older generation when the current, faster generation will suffice?

 

The SB chips are over two years old and parts associated (mobos, ram) etc are slowly getting phased out.

 

Way too many people on this forum are continually bashing IB/Haswell even though they have little to no experience with them first hand.

Honestly (like I've already stated) a decent closed loop water cooler and a Haswell CPU work perfectly fine together. Just because these newer CPUs run a bit hotter doesn't really mean much of anything in terms of performance. I think people are overlooking the vast capability of these new CPUs. (Especially when paired with DDR3 2133+ and GTX680+)

 

If you look in the FSMark11 thread, you will see that the latest test shows 54FPS @ 4.7GHZ on a Haswell CPU. - This is about a 20% increase in framerate over similar SB systems. Why in the world would someone buy an older slower CPU when we have solid evidence as such?

 

 

Moreover, given that we enthusiast change our CPU's on a regular basis, it's probably not relevant

 

I am glad you brought this up. From what I have gathered most CPUs even overclocked are very likely to last much longer than the life of the technology. Why would I be using my 2700K in 10 years when much faster technology will be around? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ben Cap, on 21 Jun 2013 - 6:12 PM, said:

To the original poster:

 

I would reccomend going with one of the new Haswell CPUs. If you purchase a decent closed loop water cooler, you will not need to delid your CPU. You also should have acceptable temps as long as you are going to be OC'ing around 4.5-4.7GHZ.

 

I concur. Always get the latest CPU put out by Intel...unless and untill its clearly demonstrated that a CPU of 2 gen back is better. or extremely cheap/

 

We had the same conversation when IB was announced and the same stuff. and some knowledgeable folks who actually had both demonstrated that IB was an improvement in spite of some heat issue.

 

However, if some one already has a 2700K OCed to 5.0Ghz then maybe not worth going for either IB or Haswell... Since the trouble of building and reinstall may not be worth the improvement in CPU/FPS.. which I am certain there would be.

 

I have IB with 4.6 and I am happy. I know Haswell would be an improvement but not worth for ME to upgrade. But it would be ridiculous for me to sit here and claim my IB is so much better than Haswell!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

    Not all haswell are hitting 4.7 ghz the average is 4.2 ghz - 4.3 ghz. Heat is not and issue if you don't want the part to last long. why telling a fellow simmer to buy a part that is inferior in quality, when Sandy is still good (only a tad slower that's all). If the rig is only for FSX simmer will be better serve by Sandy and it will also last longer. IF Intel changes back to solder or at least a better quality tim then with the slight performance improvement, then upgrade is worth it (IMO).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

    Not all haswell are hitting 4.7 ghz the average is 4.2 ghz - 4.3 ghz. Heat is not and issue if you don't want the part to last long. why telling a fellow simmer to buy a part that is inferior in quality, when Sandy is still good (only a tad slower that's all). If the rig is only for FSX simmer will be better serve by Sandy and it will also last longer. IF Intel changes back to solder or at least a better quality tim then with the slight performance improvement, then upgrade is worth it (IMO).

On My MoBo is optimized deafault 4.3ghz turbo if your statement is correct the

Gigabyte Z87X-OC most be Very unstable, just My 2 cents.

 

Its fact that the Haswell is faster than the SB a rocksolid haswell @4.7 outperform a

2700k @5.4ghz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Manny,

 

     Why is always buying the latest better ? why ? Are we keeping up with the Joneses ? In this case Sandy is the better part, it has better thermal interface, last longer and is only slightly slower. To me buying Ivy or haswell that are inferior in quality is not a good idea. Now you tell me that Ivy or haswell brings over 30% performance improvement, that is a different story, but that is not he case. As a fellow Simmer I like to protect my investment (always buy better quality unless the performance improvement is noticeable, again that is not the case). And I advice fellow Simmer the same way I like to be advice (factual and the truth). Finally if people are going to use their rig for something else beside FSX, maybe video editing a program that may take advantage of the new AVX2 instruction set, then haswell will be a good option, but can't automatically assume new is better it depends.

 

     P.S. We have heard this before with Ivy and still stand with haswell, we need to stop using our visor and automatically assume new technology is better.

 

    Happy Flying!!!

 

 

 


  Westman,

 

        You just got a great cpu but that is not the norm. Their is a article on Google that talks about system integrators (in the UK)are having problems with haswell overclocking past 4.3 ghz as the norm. Again good for you (got a good cpu), again not the norm with haswell. So generalizing and potentially implying that is the norm is a disservice, plus you need high end water cooling too. Not everybody can afford that.


  Westman,

 

      Is haswell faster, yes by about 15%. That is not a noticeable improvement, marginal yes.


http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/382267/intel-haswell-hotter-and-slower-than-expected

 

 

 Here is a link that talks about Haswell Problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 Here is a ES sample overclocking demo. Again retail sample are having the problem of only overclocking to 4.3 Ghz on average

as per pcpro article above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites