New 4K Gaming Build

[CJCerny]

Your hatred of the i5 is really going to bite you in the ass on this build. It doesn't make sense to spend $500+ on video cards only to limit yourself with an $80 CPU. Spend an extra $100 and get the i5. The 860k is a fine CPU--in a budget build. This is not a budget build.

 

[Durvelle27]

But the percentage difference in frames is the important part. Just because the numbers get smaller the higher the res, the percentage difference is still there. And you can see the catastrophic difference between the 8350 and i5 in cpu bound games (Those include Crysis and Assassin's creed by the way). The i5 is not much more expensive than the 8350, but guarantees a massive improvement in CPU bound games, as well as a good percentage difference in GPU bound games.

You asked for opinions and advice, you have been given them. It would have been advisable to mention you simply don't want to buy intel hardware in the forefront, because I personally cannot understand why you "hate i5's" judging by the fact the motherboards are the same price, offer more features, and are only $20-30 more expensive for the chip, but offer such an improvement in all areas bar file compression and encoding/decoding.

If you don't want to receive advice on your choice of AMD processor, remove it from the original discussion, because everybody will tell you to change that Athlon. I have no problem if you want to go with AMD processors, but the 8350 is a minimum spec for 4K.

ok what about a Xeon

 

[EarthDog]

What about it? Which Xeon? Its exactly the same as its non server coutnerpart for all intents and purposes outside from perhaps some lower power use binning.

 

[the54thvoid]

It's kind of odd - a 4K gaming build requires an expense - why compromise?

I'm not even considering it until the next gen GPU's arrive (doesn't stop me mindlessly trawling etailers though...). As for the CPU it's a bit ignorant to skimp on it and think, "yeah it's only 10% slower than the top end". That performance gradient will increase as GPU power develops as the CPU is required to feed it.

If you're going 4K, you need to attempt some form of 'future proofing' (terrible term). In a year or two you can swap out gpu's without hassle but CPU swap outs require system changes. Don't cripple a 4K system on a less than average chip. I imagine a game like the 3rd Witcher or Star Citizen is going to bring everything to it's knees at 4k. That is the future - be warned.

 

[ZenZimZaliben]

ok what about a Xeon

Xeons are nice but are pretty much the same as the equivalent i7. Personally I would rather spend the extra $10 and get the higher clocked, unlocked, K version of the i7.

The Xeon E3-127x is basically a i7 4970k. Just clocked lower for reduced power use and greater chip life span. Locked multi. I guess the 1 benefit is you can use ECC with the Xeon, but why bother in a desktop environment.

 

[GhostRyder]

ok what about a Xeon

As others have stated your going to need some serious CPU power to run 4K effectively along with GPU power. While 2 290's can do it well enough and an 860K is a decent CPU the problem is that CPU is more for 1080p gaming and not for the extreme resolutions as the need for heavy CPU and GPU power becomes a thing. You would most likely get decent performance in some games if you overclock it upwards of 4.7+ghz but in the end you would be running into some problems in many games that require the CPU to be stronger especially trying to render 4K pixels (Not even including games yet that are actually designed around 4K like Ryse is).

If you do not want an i5 or you are planning on going heavy with the possibility of expanding later, why not go for a 5820K chip on an X99 board? You would be set for awhile and not have to worry about a bottleneck being anywhere on top of being able to throw a third GPU in later should you decide to.

 

[ZenZimZaliben]

Going 2011-3/X99/DDR4 is a very expensive route over socket 1150/z97/DDR3 and I am not sure the performance difference is worth the price right now.

 

[RealNeil]

I have an i5-4670K and a i5-4690K system here. Both of them are faster than my FX-8350 system. (and the FX-6300) All three systems have multiple GPUs in them. All three are running SSDs and 16GB of RAM.
I usually always advocate for AMD, and I still say that their performance is good enough, but Intel's CPU performance is that much better.

So, I just talked to a friend who is coming over later on today to make me an offer on my FX-8350 and FX-6300 CPUs and their motherboards. This money will go towards a new GPU.
I'm going to stay with the Dark Side until AMD lays a golden egg.

 

[Durvelle27]

What about it? Which Xeon? Its exactly the same as its non server coutnerpart for all intents and purposes outside from perhaps some lower power use binning.

Xeon E3-1230 V3

 

[ZenZimZaliben]

Xeon E3-1230 V3

Yeah that is the same as a i7 4770k..except not a K.

 

[Champ]

You should really go Haswell or Refresh and Z87/97. There are certain games that require as much from your processor as it does your gpus. BF4 or Dragon Age for instant require peak performance from both to play well. And that still with no Post or regular AA. I mean, you need to overclock you gear bawls off too. I just don't think the AMD could handle that efficiently.

 

[Durvelle27]

Yeah that is the same as a i7 4770k..except not a K.

Even than it can be OC'd slightly

 

[EarthDog]

Yes, even then, it can be overclocked.

I just don't get the point of a Xeon now... Why would you go that route?

 

[ZenZimZaliben]

Even than it can be OC'd slightly

Slightly, yes. But the unlocked multiplier is worth the extra $10. Especially if you will be watercooling..why limit yourself to bus clocking.

 

[Durvelle27]

Yes, even then, it can be overclocked.

I just don't get the point of a Xeon now... Why would you go that route?

Hyperthreading and cost less than a i7

 

[ZenZimZaliben]

It has not benefit over the i7's hyperthreading. The only difference is lower power draw due to lower clock speed, locked multiplier, ECC memory use and $10 cheaper.

 

[Aquinus]

ok what about a Xeon

No reason for VT-d, ECC memory, vPro, or any other feature Xeons have to offer. I would just say go with Intel for the IPC and get an unlocked i5 for the performance. If you're not running more than 2 GPUs, an i5 is the way to go IMHO. More than 2 GPUs and you'll be wanting skt2011 or 2011

 

[Dieinafire]

Epic fail build. 4790k with sli gtx 980s would be the start to a decent 4k build. Waiting for the titan 2 if you want a true 4k card

 

[Durvelle27]

It has not benefit over the i7's hyperthreading. The only difference is lower power draw due to lower clock speed, locked multiplier, ECC memory use and $10 cheaper.

Idk where you're looking but it's more than a $10 difference

No reason for VT-d, ECC memory, vPro, or any other feature Xeons have to offer. I would just say go with Intel for the IPC and get an unlocked i5 for the performance. If you're not running more than 2 GPUs, an i5 is the way to go IMHO. More than 2 GPUs and you'll be wanting skt2011 or 2011

2 GPUs for now

Epic fail build. 4790k with sli gtx 980s would be the start to a decent 4k build. Waiting for the titan 2 if you want a true 4k card

Please no

 

[Aquinus]

2 GPUs for now

Devil's Canyon i5, hands down. There is no better option IMHO for such a build if you don't plan to exceed 2 GPUs. If you're not sure if you'll get more GPUs, going 2011-3 and a 5820K might not be a bad option for starters, but the DC i5 will shine WRT IPC.

 

[EarthDog]

Dat horse... dat water... wonder if he'll drink?

 

[Aquinus]

Dat horse... dat water... wonder if he'll drink?

It takes a special brand of... Oh. Yeah, I don't need another infraction. The OP can choose to spend the money as he chooses, but in the end it's up to him to make the choice as to what will serve him best. If company preference triumphs, good for him, but logic can only be stated for him to make an informed decision, nothing more, nothing less.

Performance speaks for itself IMHO.

 

[Durvelle27]

Devil's Canyon i5, hands down. There is no better option IMHO for such a build if you don't plan to exceed 2 GPUs. If you're not sure if you'll get more GPUs, going 2011-3 and a 5820K might not be a bad option for starters, but the DC i5 will shine WRT IPC.

I may add a third GPU at some point

 

[Aquinus]

I may add a third GPU at some point

Is it more likely that you'll replace the GPUs than add a third? 3-way CFX/SLI has never been optimal. Think very carefully about that because going 2011-3 is probably going to cost twice as much with not a whole lot of real gain for gaming if you never actually go with 3-way CFX. I only say 2011-3 for the PCI-E lanes, not the cores.

 

[Durvelle27]

Is it more likely that you'll replace the GPUs than add a third? 3-way CFX/SLI has never been optimal. Think very carefully about that because going 2011-3 is probably going to cost twice as much with not a whole lot of real gain for gaming if you never actually go with 3-way CFX. I only say 2011-3 for the PCI-E lanes, not the cores.

I do indeed intend to add a third GPU eventually if not 290s than 970s