|
I'm trying to google to find out the effects of Virtu on newer graphics cards. Did they finally get AMD's "ZeroCore" power stuff working when Virtu is using the integrated graphics? (shutting off the fans) Ditto for nVidia - I'd love to use Virtu if it shuts off more fans in my system. I'll take the 1-2% FPS hit. Unrelated: I'm using an H87 board with a Pentium G3220. Thinking of jumping to the i7-4790k to last me until Skylake. Mostly interested in dat 4GHz base, since I can't overclock on my board. Good idea/bad idea? LiquidRain fucked around with this message at 06:52 on Jul 7, 2014 |
#
¿
Jul 7, 2014 06:50
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 23, 2024 13:12 |
|
|
Dead certain, yes, because I just checked and apparently I was dumb enough to buy an H81 ITX board instead of a B85 or H87 last year.  (this ASUS) It's in an SG05 as well so I imagine the i7 would be thermally challenging. I had no idea the H81 also restricted my memory to 1600, as well. Well, lesson learned. Cheap + impulse "I need something now" = crap. Captain obvious stuff there. Maybe I should opt for the i5-4690S instead.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2014 08:09
|
|
|
Don Lapre posted:I think its planned for some boards but hasn't come or isn't coming to all boards. My H81i-plus bios update didn't mention anything.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2014 02:42
|
|
|
How rare is it to get a DOA Intel CPU? Figures that the one lottery I've ever won...
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2014 17:07
|
|
|
2 steps ahead of you all. I upgraded the BIOS before putting the CPU in, confirmed that it's compatible with the i5-4690k right on the ASUS site, and when I put my old CPU back in I confirmed the BIOS revision. (2001) Also tried clearing the CMOS with the jumpers and the battery. And yet I still have a nagging feeling it's my motherboard. It just can't be the CPU.  I bought it from a brick and mortar though, they'll probably put it on a test bed before letting me exchange it, and I'll find out for sure then. Thanks for the tech support, but really, I was just curious if anyone else has ever had this. Everyone I've asked has just responded "there's no way." 
LiquidRain fucked around with this message at 03:34 on Aug 1, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2014 03:26
|
|
|
My gut feeling was right after all - the CPU worked just fine on the store's test bench. I had to upgrade the motherboard BIOS using ASUS' own program that uses Intel AMT. If you just normally upgrade your BIOS (via in-UEFI flash or what not) it will upgrade the BIOS but won't grant compatibility. To condemn myself, ASUS site says so itself in a note under the BIOS download (separate from the program) saying:quote:*Before using the new Intel 4th Gen Core processors, we suggest that you first download the BIOS updater for new Intel 4th Gen Core Processors and then update the BIOS using this tool. Suggest was not the right word to use, ASUS. It's required.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2014 20:41
|
|
|
Why can't we get gaming at 4k yet? What's the technical bottleneck - fillrate? shading power? everything, since its' 4x the pixels?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 31, 2014 11:48
|
|
|
Silverstone RVZ-01 but don't block the vents!
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2014 11:16
|
|
|
The 5900 series is a waste of money for a gaming machine, plain and simple, no ifs ands or buts. You pay double or more for the same performance. I'd say Devil's Canyon, ASUS Z97-A, Corsair RAM, and a single GTX 980 until you feel that a single isn't enough. Really the only place where a single 980 GTX wouldn't be enough out of the box is 4k, and you've already told us that's not what you have. Considering you have G-Sync as well, you won't be left in stutter/v-sync/tear hell when the card can't deliver top FPS either. btw, in gaming, the i5-4690k will match the i7 the majority of the time too. There is simply no reason to go balls to the wall on a PC for gaming anywhere except the graphics card right now, and that's only true if you're pushing 1440p or 4k. If you have a 2500k, unless you are getting a price that lets you pretty much in-place upgrade your base system for real cheap, I'd say just overclock and stay on that until we see what Skylake brings. It is honestly just not worth it.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2014 09:49
|
|
|
^^^  I thought that Intel and AMD have a perpetual x86 cross-license, as well as for AMD64/x86-64, and that it basically can't be broken? Doesn't stop Intel (and AMD) from doing other dick moves, like shutting nVidia out of making motherboards.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2014 06:02
|
|
|
Chuu posted:A very long time ago (~Gulftown) I found a doc on Intel's site that explicitly said what the new max turbo frequency was for a processor as you disabled cores. I've searched Intel's site for about an hour now and can't find a similar doc. Does anyone know where they hide this information now? LiquidRain fucked around with this message at 06:07 on Nov 18, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 02:11
|
|
|
Biggest difference is the lower voltage as standard and other power-saving features. Will help eek out that little bit more out of the battery. Standard voltage on DDR3L is 1.35V, DDR4 standard is 1.2, and DDR4 has additional sleep/etc functions.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2015 02:43
|
|
|
Fajita Fiesta posted:There are no good hardware encoders for low bitrate stuff they all poo poo out garbage quality video at that level, x264 beats the pants off them. For ShadowPlay, that's nvenc dumping at 10+mbit to the disk, which it's all fine and good at doing.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2015 15:35
|
|
|
Sidesaddle Cavalry posted:I'm glad Skylake's going to support DDR3L memory. That's almost a cool couple hundred bucks off of the upgrade for me considering how crazy DDR4 prices are, still.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2015 02:47
|
|
|
Twerk from Home posted:Oh, I know that it's impossible in reality, but it's a nice dream. If we somehow could get more single threaded speed it would be vastly preferable to more cores. Intel and ARM keep trying through all the ways they can (though the conspiracy theorists here argue otherwise), and all we get are IPC, branch prediction, cache efficiencies, and new instruction sets that help single threads. Physics is a bitch. Can't go faster. At least, not while we're still using silicon.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2015 05:51
|
|
|
cisco privilege posted:That could sometimes happen on socket 775 boards, or they'd just get hella unstable when changing states like my Q6600 box that had to be hard set at 3.6ghz. Any modern CPU should handle dynamic overclocking fine unless the board's garbage or dvid is set incorrectly though, so you're just stressing the chip and wasting electricity really.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2015 01:52
|
|
|
THE DOG HOUSE posted:http://www.kitguru.net/components/cpu/anton-shilov/intel-core-i7-6700k-skylake-overclocked-to-5-20ghz-with-air-cooling/ Maybe with the FIVR off-chip this time though, we can get something... who knows?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2015 03:03
|
|
|
BobHoward posted:This is not true. Intel publishes tables that show maximum frequency versus active core count. None of them can hit max boost with all cores active. One interesting thing from that table: with more than 1 core active the i7-6700K cannot turbo at all. Is my math wrong here or does that.. just.. mean there's barely any difference?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2015 08:22
|
|
|
In "possibly dumb but smart" side-grade news, I went from an el cheapo H81 ITX board that broke the rules by being able to barely overclock to a nice used ASUS TUF Z97. I got it for about the same price as the normal Z97s, for my poor little 4690k. More and faster RAM, PCIe SSDs (limited to PCIe 2.0 though :/ ), and christ. Went from needing a constant 1.3V just to hit 4.1GHz (with BSODs!) and a constant 1.2V for 4.0, to being able to feed an Speedstep-adaptive 1.175V (offset +0.1V) to hit a stable 4.4. And fan controls, oh my the fan controls. 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2015 18:50
|
|
|
Buy a non-overclocking board, get the top end i7, turn on "multicore enhancement", bam.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2015 05:02
|
|
|
USB 3.1 Gen 1, USB 3.1 Gen 2, USB Type C, and how many should support USB PD? 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2015 11:41
|
|
|
I just spent the last week comparing Z97 v X99 v Z170. Haswell-E isn't always the best. A friend of mine who's heavy into Lightroom wanted something faster than his i7-3770k, so I got him the i7-6700k. We discussed it and figured out that the 4.0 base and 4.2 turbo is better - once he has batch jobs running he doesn't mind walking away as typically his work is over at that point. The extra 1-2 core clock speed, which Lightroom tends to gobble, was worth it, and the ability to go 64GB of RAM (while not as good as X99) is still better than a Devil's Canyon. I'm more or less in the same boat, so I'm sticking with my 4690k overclocked to 4.4 for the foreseeable future. Unless you need those extra 2 cores/4 threads for something, think hard about what you really need!
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2015 15:05
|
|
|
Botnit posted:How did you get him a 6700k, you son of a bitch? They also have the i7-5770C in stock here if that's your fancy, at about 55,000Y.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2015 02:31
|
|
|
Honestly, RealTek is just fine. Killer is straight up awful though.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2015 16:41
|
|
|
Again that's ignoring battery life improvements. On your desktop things have not changed much, but my ThinkPad x201 had 2-3 hours worth of movie watching battery life. The equivalent current day pushes 8 and that's considered poor for its battery size.
LiquidRain fucked around with this message at 11:06 on Sep 12, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2015 11:04
|
|
|
My first thought is that he's running 1T and not 2T. Running 1T with 4 modules is asking for trouble. We have a subforum for these kinds of things, but this isn't the first (nor will it be) the last.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2015 15:59
|
|
|
s.i.r.e. posted:The stock cooler gave me higher temps; it's a gaming rig built in an RVZ02 but I also stream and emulate GameCube/Wii/PS2 stuff which is more CPU intensive. The CPU was a gift, so I went balls deep when I picked it. I tend to stray away from the microwave look of most mITX builds hence my case pick. Seems like this build wasn't the best. LiquidRain fucked around with this message at 08:05 on Nov 23, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2015 08:02
|
|
|
Ahh sorry, I didn't realize the 02 was that different. That sucks! They ruined a perfectly good thing!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2015 09:59
|
|
|
Spend the extra $100 to get the 4790k if you want the best and don't want to overclock. You do actually get a sizeable performance increase, especially with motherboards that have "multi core optimization." (this is all of them, more or less, and what it does is run the CPU at full turbo even if all cores are taxed) If you don't mind overclocking, a 4690k is a great way to save $100 and get the same performance with an easy overclock.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2015 06:07
|
|
|
Then spend the extra scratch to get a decent Z board. You have 2 options with voltage: constant voltage, or a +/- offset voltage. All H81/H87 non-Z overclocking I've tried require constant full voltage but did frequency stepping, I don't know how H110/170 will do. The Z boards step both, but maintain the voltage offset at all steps.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2015 09:57
|
|
|
ARK is authoritative. The guy probably didn't flip the option in his BIOS. As for the FIVR, the official reason is that it added to the package height and would have required motherboards to have a cut out at the bottom of the socket to make sure there was room for the FIVR sticking out the bottom of the CPU. Intel opted to have a thinner package with an off package regulator that didn't place extra burden on motherboard manufacturing.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2016 16:45
|
|
|
The only worthwhile upgrade might be a 4790k I'd say. Nothing else would offset the cost of the motherboard to justify it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2016 07:09
|
|
|
The i7 i5-5775C? If minimum framerates are the problem, the 5775C would be a good choice if you can overclock it well, and you get hyperthreading. You don't need to buy new RAM, and if you have a Z97 board it's drop-in replacement.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2016 05:24
|
|
|
I dunno, a used 750 Ti would make for a pretty sweet upgrade. That CPU will hold him back at that point.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2016 16:09
|
|
|
sincx posted:Speaking of not upgrading from Sandy Bridge, I think (overclocked) Sandy Bridge is really the first time CPUs got "fast enough"--i.e. the vast majority of actions felt like they were completed instantly--even for enthusiasts. If things already feel like they're happening as fast as possible, why change? edit: vvv yeah, for editing there's no helping it, purely single threaded. it does use all available cores on a single export job. you can see N files show up at a time for N cores as it goes by. export time I'm less concerned about, I want more faster editing. :| LiquidRain fucked around with this message at 09:49 on Mar 31, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2016 02:01
|
|
|
Latest, and no, the previewing of touching effects is GPU accelerated, such as brushes. Those layer on top of the photo. However, anything to do with white balance, color, or exposure (highlights/shadows/etc) is all reliant on the CPU, as is flipping between photos in a library. It doesn't help that Adobe's Fuji RAW converter is slow as hell in all this. (bla bla Adobe Fuji RAW bla bla demosaicing bla bla Capture One  I use LR and I like its workflow, I just want it to be as fast as working with JPEGs)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2016 11:48
|
|
|
PCIe is a non-issue for gaming. If you have shitloads of USB 3.1, Thunderbolt, or PCIe SSDs in addition to your Tri-SLI setup then yeah, it can make a difference. Otherwise though? Not at all. Buy it for virtualization, but it'll be a downgrade for gaming.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2016 06:54
|
|
|
Is a Z board a real requirement for the 4790k? "multi core turbo enhancement" is enough to push one of those to its limit.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2016 00:26
|
|
|
I'd kill to finally have one machine that can truly handle everything. That Skull Canyon would come close with an external GPU, but I'd want that NUC in a the packaging of a Surface or similar 2-in-1. I can keep dreaming. My desktop's 4.4GHz keeps me coming back for Lightroom work and I love me my games, and as a result I still have these gigantic expensive desktops. 
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2016 07:22
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 23, 2024 13:12 |
|
|
I had something like that but gave up because it's more expensive for more noise and my gigantic desk has a PC shelf so why not just use it. I'd only be interested in power I can get on the go. Wasn't there a laptop that hooked up to some kind of external water cooler? Something like that would be ultra-rad, when undocked it shuts off 2 of its cores to keep within 15W, but plug it in to some external heatpipe/cooling solution and kablammo 45 or 60W. I mostly just want one machine, I hate having to sync/maintain 2 these days.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2016 07:43
|
|