Choosing a Gaming CPU October 2013: i7-4960X, i5-4670K, Nehalem and Intel Update
by Ian Cutress on October 3, 2013 10:05 AM ESTTo start, we want to thank the many manufacturers who have donated kit for our test beds in order to make this review, along with many others, possible.
Thank you to OCZ for providing us with 1250W Gold Power Supplies.
Thank you to G.Skill for providing us with memory kits.
Thank you to Corsair for providing us with an AX1200i PSU and 16GB 2400C10 memory.
Thank you to ASUS for providing us with the AMD GPUs and some IO Testing kit.
Thank you to ECS for providing us with the NVIDIA GPUs.
Thank you to Corsair for providing us with the Corsair H80i CLC.
Thank you to Rosewill for providing us with the 500W Platinum Power Supply for mITX testing, BlackHawk Ultra, and 1600W Hercules PSU for extreme dual CPU + quad GPU testing, and RK-9100 keyboards.
Also many thanks go to the manufacturers who over the years have provided review samples which contribute to this review. For this Intel update we would particularly like to thank Gigabyte for loaning the Haswell and Nehalem CPUs!
Testing Methodology
In order to keep the testing fair, we set strict rules in place for each of these setups. For every new chipset, the SSD was formatted and a fresh installation of the OS was applied. The chipset drivers for the motherboard were installed, along with NVIDIA drivers then AMD drivers. The games were preinstalled on a second partition, but relinked to ensure they worked properly. The games were then tested as follows:
Metro 2033: Benchmark Mode, two runs of four scenes of Frontline at 1440p, max settings. First run of four is discarded, average of second run is taken (minus outliers).
Dirt3: Benchmark Mode, four runs of the first scene with 8 cars at 1440p, max settings. Average is taken.
Civilization V: One five minute run of the benchmark mode accessible at the command line, at 1440p and max settings. Results produced are total frames in sets of 60 seconds, average taken.
Sleeping Dogs: Using the Adrenaline benchmark software, four scenes at 1440p in Ultra settings. Average is taken.
If the platform was being used for the next CPU (e.g. Maximus V Formula, moving from FX-8150 to FX-8350), no need to reinstall. If the platform is changed for the next test, a full reinstall and setup takes place.
How to Read This Review
Due to the large number of different variables in our review, it is hard to accurately label each data point with all the information about that setup. It also stands to reason that just putting the CPU model is also a bad idea when the same CPU could be in two different motherboards with different GPU lane allocations. There is also the memory aspect to consider, as well as if a motherboard uses MCT at stock. Here is a set of labels correlating to configurations you will see in this review:
CPU[+] [CP] (PCIe version – lane allocation to GPUs [PLX])
e.g. A10-5800K (2 – x16/x16): A10-5800K with two GPUs in PCIe 2.0 mode
- First is the name of the CPU, then an optional + identifier for MCT enabled motherboards.
- CP indicates we are dealing with a Bulldozer derived CPU and using the Core Parking updates.
- Inside the circular brackets is the PCIe version of the lanes we are dealing with, along with the lane allocation to each GPU.
- The final flag is if a PLX chip is involved in lane allocation.
This one of the more complex configurations:
i7-3770K+ (3 – x8/x8/x8/x8 PLX)
Which means an i7-3770K (with MCT) powering four GPUs in PCIe 3.0 via a PLX chip
Common Configuration Points
All the system setups below have the following consistent configurations points:
- A fresh install of Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit
- Either an Intel Stock CPU Cooler, a Corsair H80i CLC or Thermalright TRUE Copper
- OCZ 1250W Gold ZX Series PSU or Corsair AX1200i PSU for SP
- Rosewill 1600W Hercules for DP systems
- Up to 4x ASUS AMD HD 7970 GPUs, using Catalyst 13.1
- Up to 2x ECS NVIDIA GTX 580 GPUs, using GeForce WHQL 310.90
- SSD Boot Drives, OCZ Vertex 3 128 GB
- LG GH22NS50 Optical Drives
- Open Test Beds, either a DimasTech V2.5 EasyHard or a CoolerMaster Test Lab
CPU and Motherboard Configurations
Those listed as ‘Part 2’ are new for this update.
| Part 1 | A6-3650 + Gigabyte A75-UD4H + 16GB DDR3-1866 8-10-10 |
| Part 1 | A8-3850 + ASRock A75 Extreme6 + 16GB DDR3 1866 8-10-10 |
| Part 1 | A8-5600K + Gigabyte F2A85-UP4 + 16GB DDR3-2133 9-10-10 |
| Part 1 | A10-5800K + Gigabyte F2A85-UP4 + 16GB DDR3-2133 9-10-10 |
| Part 1 | X2-555 BE + ASUS Crosshair V Formula + 16GB DDR3 1600 8-8-8 |
| Part 1 | X4-960T + ASUS Crosshair V Formula + 16GB DDR3-1600 8-8-8 |
| Part 1 | X6-1100T + ASUS Crosshair V Formula + 16GB DDR3-1600 8-8-8 |
| Part 1 | FX-8150 + ASUS Crosshair V Formula + 16GB DDR3-2133 10-12-11 |
| Part 1 | FX-8350 + ASUS Crosshair V Formula + 16GB DDR3-2133 9-11-10 |
| Part 1 | FX-8150 + ASUS Crosshair V Formula + 16GB DDR3-2133 10-12-11 + CP |
| Part 1 | FX-8350 + ASUS Crosshair V Formula + 16GB DDR3-2133 9-11-10 + CP |
| Part 1 | E6400 + MSI i975X Platinum + 4GB DDR2-666 5-6-6 |
| Part 1 | E6700 + ASUS P965 Commando + 4GB DDR2-666 4-5-5 |
| Part 1 | Xeon X5690 + EVGA SR-2 + 6GB DDR3 1333 6-7-7 |
| Part 1 | 2x Xeon X5690 + EVGA SR-2 |
| Part 1 | Celeron G465 + ASUS Maximus V Formula + 16GB DDR3-2133 9-11-11 |
| Part 1 | i5-2500K + ASUS Maximus V Formula + 16GB DDR3-2133 9-11-11 |
| Part 1 | i7-2600K + ASUS Maximus V Formula + 16GB DDR3-2133 9-11-11 |
| Part 1 | i3-3225 + ASUS Maximus V Formula + 16GB DDR3-2400 10-12-12 |
| Part 1 | i7-3770K + Gigabyte Z77X-UP7 + 16GB DDR3-2133 9-11-11 |
| Part 1 | i7-3770K + ASUS Maximus V Formula + 16GB DDR3-2400 9-11-11 |
| Part 1 | i7-3930K + ASUS Rampage IV Extreme + 16GB DDR3-2133 10-12-12 |
| Part 1 | i7-3960X + ASRock X79 Professional + 16GB DDR3-2133 10-12-12 |
| Part 1b | E6400 + ASUS P965 Commando + 4GB DDR2-666 4-5-5 |
| Part 1b | E6550 + ASUS P965 Commando + 4GB DDR2-666 5-6-6 |
| Part 1b | Q9400 + ASUS P965 Commando + 4GB DDR2-666 5-6-6 |
| Part 1b | i7-4770K + Gigabyte Z87X-UD3H + 16GB DDR3-2400 10-12-12 |
| Part 1b | i7-4770K + ASUS Z87-Pro + 16GB DDR3-2400 10-12-12 |
| Part 1b | i7-4770K + MSI Z87A-GD65 Gaming + 16GB DDR3-2400 10-12-12 |
| Part 2 | A6-5200 + ASRock IMB-A180-H + 8GB DDR3-1333 9-9-10 |
| Part 2 | Fusion E-350 + Zotac Fusion-A-E + 8GB DDR3-1066 7-7-7 |
| Part 2 | i7-4770K + MSI Z87 XPower + 16GB DDR3-2400 10-12-12 |
| Part 2 | 4x E5-4650L + SuperMicro + 128GB DDR3 1600 11-11-11 |
| Part 2 | 2x E5-2690 + Gigabyte GA-7PESH1 + 32GB DDR3-1600 11-11-11 |
| Part 2 | Celeron 847 + ECS NM70-I2 + 8GB DDR3-1333 9-9-9 |
| Part 2 | i7-920 + Gigabyte X58-UD9 + 6GB DDR3-1866 7-8-7 |
| Part 2 | i7-950 + Gigabyte X58-UD9 + 6GB DDR3-1866 7-8-7 |
| Part 2 | i7-990X + Gigabyte X58-UD9 + 6GB DDR3-1866 7-8-7 |
| Part 2 | i7-920 + ASRock X58 Extreme3 + 6GB DDR3-1866 7-8-7 |
| Part 2 | i7-950 + ASRock X58 Extreme3 + 6GB DDR3-1866 7-8-7 |
| Part 2 | i7-990X + ASRock X58 Extreme3 + 6GB DDR3-1866 7-8-7 |
| Part 2 | i5-4430 + Gigabyte Z87X-UD3H + DDR3-2400 10-12-12 |
| Part 2 | i7-4670K + Gigabyte Z87X-UD3H + DDR3-2400 10-12-12 |
| Part 2 | Xeon E3-1280 v3 + Gigabyte Z87X-UD3H + DDR3-2400 10-12-12 |
| Part 2 | Xeon E3-1285 v3 + Gigabyte Z87X-UD3H + DDR3-2400 10-12-12 |
| Part 2 | Via L2007 + ECS VX900-I + 8GB DDR3-1066 7-7-7 |
Our first port of call with all our testing is CPU throughput analysis, using our regular motherboard review benchmarks.
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.