Choosing a Gaming CPU October 2013: i7-4960X, i5-4670K, Nehalem and Intel Update
by Ian Cutress on October 3, 2013 10:05 AM ESTDirt 3
Dirt 3 is a rallying video game and the third in the Dirt series of the Colin McRae Rally series, developed and published by Codemasters. Dirt 3 also falls under the list of ‘games with a handy benchmark mode’. In previous testing, Dirt 3 has always seemed to love cores, memory, GPUs, PCIe lane bandwidth, everything. The small issue with Dirt 3 is that depending on the benchmark mode tested, the benchmark launcher is not indicative of game play per se, citing numbers higher than actually observed. Despite this, the benchmark mode also includes an element of uncertainty, by actually driving a race, rather than a predetermined sequence of events such as Metro 2033. This in essence should make the benchmark more variable, but we take repeated in order to smooth this out. Using the benchmark mode, Dirt 3 is run at 1440p with Ultra graphical settings. Results are reported as the average frame rate across four runs.
One 7970
Similar to Metro, pure dual core CPUs seem best avoided when pushing a high resolution with a single GPU. The Haswell CPUs seem to be near the top due to their IPC advantage.
Two 7970s
When running dual AMD GPUs only the top AMD chips seem to click on to the tail of Intel, with the hex-core CPUs taking top spots. Again there's no real change moving from 4670K to 4770K, and even the Nehalem CPUs keep up within 4% of the top spots
Three 7970s
At three GPUs the 4670K seems to provide the equivalent grunt to the 4770K, though more cores and more lanes seems to be the order of the day. Moving from a hybrid CPU/PCH x8/x8 + x4 lane allocation to a pure CPU allocation (x8/x4/x4) merits a 30 FPS rise in itself. The Nehalem CPUs, without NF200 support, seem to be on the back foot performing worse than Piledriver.
One 580
On the NVIDIA side, one GPU performs similarly across the board in our test.
Two 580s
When it comes to dual NVIDIA GPUs, ideally the latest AMD architecture and anything above a dual core Intel Sandy Bridge processor is enough to hit 100 FPS.
Dirt3 Conclusion
Our big variations occured on the AMD GPU side where it was clear that above two GPUs that perhaps moving from Nehalem might bring a boost to frame rates. The 4670K is still on par with the 4770K in our testing, and the i5-4430 seemed to be on a similar line most of the way but was down a peg on tri-GPU.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
137 Comments
View All Comments
konondrum - Thursday, October 3, 2013 - link
Thank you for doing this, it's quite informative. I just have one suggestion, perhaps you could get a Lynnfield CPU into these benchmarks. I've been happily using my i5-750 for about 4 years now, but I'm unsure if the performance would be closer to a i7-920 or Q9400. I'm thinking it may be getting close to time to upgrade, but I've still never come across a game or app that seems to choke it.teiglin - Saturday, October 5, 2013 - link
+1 to Lynnfield. My i5-750 is still running great at a gentle ~3.5GHz, and I haven't really felt the burn in games, but I also am not running multi-GPU. Still I'd love to see how well it stacks up to the competition.cbrownx88 - Thursday, October 3, 2013 - link
BF3/4 pleeeease.BF4 beta seems very CPU-bound on an i7920 at 4.2ghz at 1920x1200... very different story than BF3 (where I currently didn't feel the need to update)
pandemonium - Friday, October 4, 2013 - link
I love articles like this! Excellent stuff, thanks!I'm still confused why you guys don't have an i5-3570k in your line-up. Of all of the processors, that's probably the most crucial to have, being it's performance for the price and popularity for builds. These tests give me little to go on without that processor, as important as it is for the general builder!
pandemonium - Friday, October 4, 2013 - link
Also, CPU benchmarks for gaming aren't as necessary with single player games. A necessary contrast for CPU comparison will be for MMOs or multiplayer FPS runs. Obviously it's more difficult to get accurate baseline results for such instances, but a large amount of runs should at least minimize any variables between each testing instance and give a broader definition for how well each processor will perform.If you guys could get on the latest MMOs and test out these rigs, that'd be where I see charts for CPU comparison really come into play for gaming.
Nirvanaosc - Friday, October 4, 2013 - link
Final Fantasy XIV has a benchmark, but I don't know if it fits on their needs. Maybe worth check it although I'm not sure if that represents real world gameplay.BOMBOVA - Friday, October 4, 2013 - link
Guys and Gals:, i have started using Video editing software, Coral, and Photo software ACD17, and need the best out of my i7 960, so, i have spent considerable time fitting with a new SYBA x4 SATA 3 controller, "50" bucks, and a better CPU cooler, double fan, big aluminum / copper beast. out come it works, SSD's are working like they should in Raid 0, / with 2.5 hdd backup, using hot swap. and i went back to the literature " stories " of over clocking, and settled on a 4.2 overclock. Letting you all know it words really, really good. i am almost ashamed of myself, " being techie " that it took me so long to get practical. . i am now resigned to waiting for DDR 4, and PCIe 3.x for future considerations. good article/ thanksBOMBOVA - Saturday, October 26, 2013 - link
update, i really parked the beast cpu 960 at 3.8x Mhz, 4.2 is too HOT, the fan rate is NOISy, and it is unstable, as i am wondering if my hard drive crashes are Malware, or just unstable, NONE of that at 3.8x, i will adjust my PCIe rate up from 133 MHz, say towards 137 or even 140 if stable, on all add in cards. it only works to your least stable card, i have settled on a Marvel, hdd controller card, for cheap , cost effective, bottom line, i like this article, and after 3 days of work, i am on to doing work with my computer. thanks all. Cheers Thomas Gx yvr.ca Vancouver CanadaRanger101 - Friday, October 4, 2013 - link
Every time an article of this sort is written, the conclusion is the same: In the vast majority of cases, due to GPU bottlenecks the differences between Cpus are so minute that no-one would ever notice the performance difference in game. Yawn.Ranger101 - Friday, October 4, 2013 - link
Every time an article of this sort is written, the conclusion is the same. In the vast majority of cases, due to GPU bottlenecks, the performance differences between CPUs are so minimal that no-one would notice the difference in game. Yawn.