i5-3570k or i7-3770k?

[Sasqui]

I'm upgrading my main rig to Ivy Bridge this winter. I've already bought bought 16GB of DDR3 ram, and have nothing to put it in

Next up, the CPU:

i7-3770k @ $330 (Newegg)
i5-3750k @ $190 Here: http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?t=173973

Difference of about $140 - Help, I can't decide!
After that, need to choose a MB.

I'll be running AutoCAD Civil3D/Map 2013 with some large datasets, some video and photo editing (fairly lightweight), and a moderate amount of gaming.

 

[brandonwh64]

I'm upgrading my main rig to Ivy Bridge this winter. I've already bought bought 16GB of DDR3 ram, and have nothing to put it in

Next up, the CPU:

i7-3770k @ $330 (Newegg)
i5-3750k @ $190 Here: http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?t=173973

Difference of about $140 - Help, I can't decide!
After that, need to choose a MB.

I'll be running AutoCAD Civil3D/Map 2013 with some large datasets, some video and photo editing (fairly lightweight), and a moderate amount of gaming.

For those programs, you would want the extra threads. I would get the 3770K

 

[BarbaricSoul]

For those programs, you would want the extra threads. I would get the 3770K

agreed

As for a MB, if your looking for a high-end board, I've been very happy with my GD80. Might be worth looking at the Z77 version?

MSI Z77A-GD80 LGA 1155 Intel Z77 HDMI SATA 6Gb/s U...

 

[Nordic]

It all comes down to do you need/ those 4 extra logical cores and if they are worth the price.

 

[cadaveca]

I'm upgrading my main rig to Ivy Bridge this winter. I've already bought bought 16GB of DDR3 ram, and have nothing to put it in

Next up, the CPU:

i7-3770k @ $330 (Newegg)
i5-3750k @ $190 Here: http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?t=173973

Difference of about $140 - Help, I can't decide!
After that, need to choose a MB.

I'll be running AutoCAD Civil3D/Map 2013 with some large datasets, some video and photo editing (fairly lightweight), and a moderate amount of gaming.

Chances are, you'll get a better overclocker with 3770K, too.

 

[drdeathx]

IMC on 3770K is better than 3570K also. Ram will overclock much higher.

 

[cadaveca]

IMC on 3770K is better than 3570K also. Ram will overclock much higher.

ha, not with my 3570k and 3770k. Same ram overclocks, exactly, although the 3570 needs voltage and the 3770k does not. I guess I need to find a better ram kit then.

What's interesting to me is that the failures with memory with the two chips are EXACTLY the same, at the same speeds and such, so I know that ram is holding my 3770k back, for sure...and my 3570k has no issues with 2666 MHz+

 

[drdeathx]

ha, not with my 3570k and 3770k. Same ram overclocks, exactly, although the 3570 needs voltage and the 3770k does not. I guess I need to find a better ram kit then.

What's interesting to me is that the failures with memory with the two chips are EXACTLY the same, at the same speeds and such, so I know that ram is holding my 3770k back, for sure...and my 3570k has no issues with 2666 MHz+

This is not correct. Maybe you have a lucky 3570K. I thought they would overclock the same but Kingston told me the IMC is better on 3770K.

 

[cadaveca]

This is not correct.

It is with my two chips, thanks. Not all chips are equal.

Like really, I could care less. My experience is not like yours, however. I'm not saying you are wrong, and I am right...just that what you can get is pretty varied.

 

[drdeathx]

It is with my two chips, thanks. Not all chips are equal.

I thought they would overclock the same but Kingston told me the IMC is better on 3770K.

 

[cadaveca]

I thought they would overclock the same but Kingston told me the IMC is better on 3770K.

I don't have a kit that will hit 2800 MHz well yet, or both my chips have the exact same wall.

I'll say it might be BIOS, dunno. Need more ram, or more chips, to find out.

Liek clearly, 3770K is much better chip for me...4.6 GHz @ 1.2 V for 3770K, and haven't even got 4.5 GHz stable @ 1.3 V on the 3570K.


Both crap out @ 2750 Mhz on hte ram, and I have several 2666 MHz + kits.


As much as overclocking is apaprantly dead, there's still a tonne of variation that keeps things interesting, i think!

 

[BlackOmega]

For those programs, you would want the extra threads. I would get the 3770K

^This. For CAD and Photoshop you want as many cores/threads as possible and as much memory as you can get.

 

[drdeathx]

16G of memory is plenty and more cores the better

 

[Nordic]

I don't have a kit that will hit 2800 MHz well yet, or both my chips have the exact same wall.

I'll say it might be BIOS, dunno. Need more ram, or more chips, to find out.

Liek clearly, 3770K is much better chip for me...4.6 GHz @ 1.2 V for 3770K, and haven't even got 4.5 GHz stable @ 1.3 V on the 3570K.


Both crap out @ 2750 Mhz on hte ram, and I have several 2666 MHz + kits.


As much as overclocking is apaprantly dead, there's still a tonne of variation that keeps things interesting, i think!

Oh the life

 

[Sasqui]

I hear a resounding 3770k...

I read this, got 5Ghz on the 3570k out of the box, though running very hot with an H100

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2012/05/01/intel-core-i5-3570k-cpu-review/1

ha, not with my 3570k and 3770k. Same ram overclocks, exactly, although the 3570 needs voltage and the 3770k does not. I guess I need to find a better ram kit then.

What's interesting to me is that the failures with memory with the two chips are EXACTLY the same, at the same speeds and such, so I know that ram is holding my 3770k back, for sure...and my 3570k has no issues with 2666 MHz+

Memory controller portion on the 3770k perhaps?

 

[cadaveca]

1.4 V though for that 5 ghz. NO wonder it was hot

I'll have to volt mine up, I guess. My 3770k is hot with just 1.25V...I could not imagine pushing even 1.3 V through that chip.


And yeah, I dunno, it's just odd that the 3570K and 3770K both end at the same ram speed. Cpu clocking is very different though.

 

[Binge]

I hear a resounding 3770k...

I read this, got 5Ghz on the 3570k out of the box, though running very hot with an H100

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2012/05/01/intel-core-i5-3570k-cpu-review/1



Memory controller portion on the 3770k perhaps?

Time to travel back... back to 2009... the i7 920 was catching enthusiasts by storm for being an easy OC to 4.2GHz... There were one observation was made on a regular basis. Users memory controllers varied from chip to chip and some people couldn't get higher than 1866MHz if not 1600 while achieving speeds higher than stock. Considering intel has the mem controllers on the die I'd also assume this concept remains intact.

Oddly enough getting 950s or 960s did not help the memory OC either. The chips are basically the same they just have different areas unlocked or stepped up.

You will love the extra HT when it comes to processing. It does make a difference. I wish I had the money to spend on a 3770k while I was upgrading to ivy. I do video work a lot and the 3570k is good but I know it could be better.

 

[Sasqui]

1.4 V though for that 5 ghz. NO wonder it was hot
I'll have to volt mine up, I guess. My 3770k is hot with just 1.25V...I could not imagine pushing even 1.3 V through that chip.

Gotta say, I'm looking forward to playing with a new OC toy! I always start with stock volts, and push as high as she'll go to failure, then try a notch up on voltage, always keeping an eye on temps. Lather, rinse, repeat Takes a few days, usually to find the sweet spot.

You will love the extra HT when it comes to processing. It does make a difference. I wish I had the money to spend on a 3770k while I was upgrading to ivy. I do video work a lot and the 3570k is good but I know it could be better.

I just wonder how much I'd notice. I don't like the idea of getting the "next best thing" with the i5, but the price point seems to be pretty darn good.

 

[cadaveca]

Time to travel back... back to 2009... the i7 920 was catching enthusiasts by storm for being an easy OC to 4.2GHz... There were one observation was made on a regular basis. Users memory controllers varied from chip to chip and some people couldn't get higher than 1866MHz if not 1600 while achieving speeds higher than stock. Considering intel has the mem controllers on the die I'd also assume this concept remains intact.

Oddly enough getting 950s or 960s did not help the memory OC either. The chips are basically the same they just have different areas unlocked or stepped up.

You will love the extra HT when it comes to processing. It does make a difference. I wish I had the money to spend on a 3770k while I was upgrading to ivy. I do video work a lot and the 3570k is good but I know it could be better.

Most "power" and "extreme" users relate that memory clocking is largely CPU-dependant with IVB. And usually, that info comes from guys and gals that access many many chips.

For me, this is not the case, at all.


But with everyone saying the same thing, there must be something to it, or everyone is listening to the same advice from the same person. With the parts I have, many boards and ram kits, but just 3 CPUs so far, my results vastly contradict what's professed as the "norm".


Of course this makes me test even more...but I don't have enough funds to keep buying chips, and I don't get CPUs for free, generally. At least we can still try things out and see what works.



Oh, and I still do not agree with the whole "IVB runs HOT" BS, too.

 

[Binge]

I just wonder how much I'd notice. I don't like the idea of getting the "next best thing" with the i5, but the price point seems to be pretty darn good.

If the price point is too good for you I am currently interested in selling my i5 for $160 shipped so I can buy an i7. So you know, with the i5 @ 3.8GHz, I encode in real time, record to HDD, game, and drive a virtual sound-board for audio routing simultaneously. The i7 will buy you 20-30% extra performance for 50% more cost. To me it is worth it. For you it might be a wash.

Most "power" and "extreme" users relate that memory clocking is largely CPU-dependant with IVB. And usually, that info comes from guys and gals that access many many chips.

For me, this is not the case, at all.


But with everyone saying the same thing, there must be something to it, or everyone is listening to the same advice from the same person. With the parts I have, many boards and ram kits, but just 3 CPUs so far, my results vastly contradict what's professed as the "norm".


Of course this makes me test even more...but I don't have enough funds to keep buying chips, and I don't get CPUs for free, generally. At least we can still try things out and see what works.



Oh, and I still do not agree with the whole "IVB runs HOT" BS, too.

The great thing about that time was that people were asking me to buy i7 920s (microcenter 199.99 vs newegg 349.99) and test them before sending them out. I'd probably had my hands on over 80 920s by mid 2010. This forum saw so many of my trips to microcenter that on a fluke I recently bought one of my chips back from a forum member. The memory controller on the CPU is where all of the memory overclocking is bottle-necked. Without the ability for the CPU to handle the speed at which the ram is communicating the IMC will crash and you will BSOD or hard restart.

I also agree with you on the IVB to an extent. The chip will contain heat because of the 3d transistors and self insulates so despite the die shrink it produces the same heat as 32nm process. That aside intels IHS causes a minor setback to some users, but for every day WC/Air removing the IHS will not do enough. I'd take it off to super cool the thing.

 

[BlackOmega]

Intel's new slogan ----> Intel, AMD inside.

 

[Sasqui]

If the price point is too good for you I am currently interested in selling my i5 for $160 shipped so I can buy an i7. So you know, with the i5 @ 3.8GHz, I encode in real time, record to HDD, game, and drive a virtual sound-board for audio routing simultaneously. The i7 will buy you 20-30% extra performance for 50% more cost. To me it is worth it. For you it might be a wash.

Binge, perhaps a stupid question, but are you OC'ing the chip now?


Oh and a correction to my last statement:

I just wonder how much I'd notice. I don't like the idea of NOT getting the "next best thing" with the i5, but the price point seems to be pretty darn good.

 

[Binge]

Binge, perhaps a stupid question, but are you OC'ing the chip now?


Oh and a correction to my last statement:

normally the chip does not run at 3.8Ghz on all cores. Usually it does 3.4Ghz with 3.8Ghz turbo on core 00. When you OC an IVB the turbo does not work like it does on stock.

Technically its a small OC but there's no heat impact or extra voltage.

 

[Sasqui]

normally the chip does not run at 3.8Ghz on all cores. Usually it does 3.4Ghz with 3.8Ghz turbo on core 00. When you OC an IVB the turbo does not work like it does on stock.

Technically its a small OC but there's no heat impact or extra voltage.

Down the rabbit hole. The specs for the chips (in this case the 3570k) list 3.4Ghz/3.8Ghz Turbo. So when you change the multiplier for an OC, I assume there's some point when you have to cut out the power saver & turbo boost mode for the OC to be stable. I suspect it's motherboard/bios dependant?

 

[Binge]

Down the rabbit hole. The specs for the chips (in this case the 3570k) list 3.4Ghz/3.8Ghz Turbo. So when you change the multiplier for an OC, I assume there's some point when you have to cut out the power saver & turbo boost mode for the OC to be stable. I suspect it's motherboard/bios dependant?

All power-saving features and turbo are enabled. This is just how the new chips work. If you use a non-standard multi it cuts the turbo to one core only. I've pushed the chip to 4.5Ghz without much issue, but I don't see the benefit in my encoding apps for the heat difference made under load.