Trying to choose a CPU for new build

I'm looking at possible options for my next build and have come to a question.

I typically use my main PC for email, internet browsing, gaming, listening to music, watching youtube videos, backing up hard drives, and performing scans for viruses and malware on drives. I might have some other uses for my PC, but those are the main ones I can think of at the moment.

Also, I have a tendency to use a computer for 4-5 years before I decommission it and build a new one.

Do I really need a hyper-threaded CPU? Or will I notice a difference in my usage of my PC if the CPU is hyper-threaded, vs. a non-hyper-threaded CPU? The last two times I built a PC hyper-threading wasn't a thing that existed in the CPU model lines that I could actually afford to build with, so it's never been a question that occurred to me before.

At the moment I'm considering the Core i5 4670K, Core i5 4690K, Core i7 4770K, and Core i7 4790K.

I'm assuming that with Hyper-Threading a CPU would be relevant for a longer period of time before it becomes a hindrance to completing tasks and running programs.

I know that the Core i5 model line is cheaper than the Core i7, and I don't really want to just spend money needlessly if I won't see some benefit of a higher-end model line.

You could always get a 4690K and then upgrade later, like you have with your current system.

With what you listed, I don't see why an i5 wouldn't work for you. As far as I know, none of those tasks (minus gaming) are really multi-threaded, and it's too early to tell if game developers will start utilizing more than 4 threads as the norm. And, as ATMINSIDE said, you can always go i5 now, and if it ends up not being enough you can upgrade later on. It definitely should be fine for now.

If you can give up your overclocking fix, a hyperthreaded Xeon can be had for the price of a K SKU i5.

Theocnoob said:

If you can give up your overclocking fix, a hyperthreaded Xeon can be had for the price of a K SKU i5.

Click to expand...

I have one of the HT Xeons and it's a great CPU. It runs really cool and always seems to have the headroom to run at least at the 3.6GHz all cores turbo whenever I'm doing something.

But back to the op's question, I don't see anything that screams i7/Xeon for your usage. A few games seem to run better on hyperthreaded processors, but for the most part the Core i5 is the sweet spot for price to performance. And you won't bottleneck any GPU out there with even an i5-4430, much less an overclocked i5-4690k.

About hyperthreading:

In a single core, a stream of instructions is processed, and in modern CPU's several instructions in that stream may be executed in parallel by various execution units. This is dependent on the content of that stream. On average modern CPU's are able to execute about 7 or 8 instructions in a row in one cycle (or so), but sometimes there's just no choice to execute more than 1 or 2, maybe 3 in a row.

When that happens a significant portion of the CPU's capability is wasted. This is especially significant in multithreaded operating systems where 2 or 4 cores, typically, are busy doing things - but there are still available execution units that could do work, but aren't.

That's what hyperthreading is all about. In other CPU designs, like Power7, the CPU is able to execute 4 threads in one core (the Power8 can execute 8 threads in 1 core), but Intel's implementation is merely 2 threads in one core. The odds are much higher, as a result, that more of the execution resources are put to use per unit of time.

That is, if you have work for them to do.

You usage profile is hardly a challenge for a typical quad core CPU. I used an AMD 955 @ 3.7 Ghz for several years to great effect, and I upgraded to the 4790K recently. I do see a huge difference in some situations, and NONE in others. I'm an engineer, so I have rather intimate familiarity as to why, and I kick my machine hard sometimes. At any one moment you'd observe that I have anywhere from 3 to 5 operating systems in VM's at once, with video transcodes, video playback or audio playback, maybe video editing, 3DS Max, Photoshop, C++ compilations...all going at once. I benefit from hyperthreading significantly.

It doesn't sound to me like you'd notice except on very rare occasions, and those occasions would slip by even on a non-HT machine rather quickly, as in seconds.

There is really no such thing as future-proofing, but in the last few years I have for the first time observed that desktop and workstation machines are generally powerful enough that software doesn't really tax their capabilities. In the professional usage patterns there are reasons to invest in higher core counts and platform features, but generally the kind of consumer oriented patterns you're showing don't challenge even older platforms, which suggests that even a 4 year old platform was, effectively, proofed against the future you're now in.

Frankly, we need our machines refreshed in 4 years because capacitors age, disks fail, and occasionally we do new things with our machines. If your usage profile changes, then you may certainly find the need for more CPU compute power, or more GPU compute power, but otherwise you're really just in need of refreshed components that don't fail.

One example that MIGHT apply to you is 4K video. You didn't mention it, and probably have no plans right now, but there could be a time in the next few years that you'd find more interest in viewing 4K video. If so, that obviously begins with a new monitor and a GPU solution which supports it, which may imply an interface your motherboard doesn't support, starting a chain reaction of upgrades which allow for it all. That would represent a shift in usage pattern driving a hardware upgrade requirement.

There is one little thing I forgot to mention.

I do quite often browse the internet with quite a lot of open tabs in my internet browser, as in 100+. I've seen 160 separate open tabs at times, especially if I'm researching several different things at once (PC hardware related, automotive related, cell phone related, etc).

That is the kind of thing that regularly brings my little quad core to it's knees if I have 10+ of those tabs actively being refreshed while I'm browsing. And if all of them are active, forget about being productive, the whole machine basically locks up for a good five minutes if all tabs are active while the processor tries to catch up. That's when I see 2-3GB of memory being used by the Internet Browser on its own.

Solution? Don't leave so many tabs open.

Remember that you'll roughly be tripling your multi-threaded performance with a 4690K or almost quadrupling with a 4790K.
Won't be such a problem any more

Well, I have some news about multi-tabbed browsing.

Good and bad.

It's not just the tabs themselves, it's what is in the pages. I'm an engineer, a developer. I see some of the most awful code ever written on modern web sites, even those you'd expect to be high end work.

There is only so much you can do about browsing a site which uses flash in advertisements, launches video in ads without your consent, and enters into infinite loops inside javascript code.

RAM requirements go through the roof, but as long as you have the RAM to back that up, that's not a problem.

Depending on the browser you choose, sometimes what you end up with are really strange race conditions fighting for resources. If web pages were better engineered there wouldn't be a problem, and if browsers themselves were engineered to avoid these problems all would be much better.

The bottom line is this: whether you have an 8 core AMD, 4 core i7 with HT, or a 16 core HT workstation (32 threads)....the browsers end up doing the same thing to the machine

It does help some, but you are far better off with some mitigating efforts instead.

Personally, I don't touch the web with my host operating system. I don't even have TCP/IP enabled unless I'm connecting to update the operating system. I use VM's under Linux to browse the web, exclusively. It isolates the problem you're observing from the host, and in the bargain isolates the host from invasion. It's really tough for a virus to jump from the web, into a Linux VM and then into the Windows host.

Now, virtual machines are GREATLY benefited from HT, or from more cores, or both.

I highly recommend it.

Video, from all sources I've ever tried, works very well inside VM's on a decent machine (even an old 955 AMD 3.7 Ghz box did great).

Well, as i can tell. I got both the i5 4690k and the G3258 cpu.
For the use you you describe (i think) the G3258 running at 4.2-4.3ghz, is everything you need! It does that with the stock cooler without any problem. I have been running 4.4ghz with stock cooler, and gaming and all other kind of use is no problem. If you want something heavier, the 4690 is a bulletproof cpu. But the cost is about 3-4 times as much.

Now im running the G3258 @ 4.6ghz 1.390v with the Corsair H100i for cooling with idle at 30-35*c and load peak @ 70*c with stress test, (fans at max 1000rpm) and all games i have tried have been no problem. Halflife 2 (all episodes), Unreal Tournament 3, Grey Goo (awesome game if you like C&C or Red Alert), Diablo, Archage and so on.....

Georgsen said:

Now im running the G3258 @ 4.6ghz 1.390v with the Corsair H100i for cooling with idle at 30-35*c and load peak @ 70*c with stress test, (fans at max 1000rpm) and all games i have tried have been no problem. Halflife 2 (all episodes), Unreal Tournament 3, Grey Goo (awesome game if you like C&C or Red Alert), Diablo, Archage and so on.....

Click to expand...

So in other words, you haven't tried any demanding games on it. . Seriously though the most demanding thing on that list is UT3 and that FLEW on my C2D system from like 8 years ago.

Theocnoob, true. Just my 5cent going trough Tech Tweaker usage list. Later he can upgrade if he feel the need, guess the i7 4790 price will drop in time, or just wait for that new cpu intel is comming up with.

Georgsen said:

Theocnoob, true. Just my 5cent going trough Tech Tweaker usage list. Later he can upgrade if he feel the need, guess the i7 4790 price will drop in time, or just wait for that new cpu intel is comming up with.

Click to expand...

If you'd been following prices for the past several years, you'd know that Intel doesn't drop prices. a 3770K, new, is the same price now as it was when it came out in 2012. Sometimes even more expensive due to rarity. Same thing happens to out-dated motherboards that become really hard to get but are still in demand. Price goes up.

http://www.amazon.com/Intel-i7-3770...=UTF8&qid=1422841792&sr=8-1&keywords=i7+3770k

^See what I mean?

AMD drops prices, Intel doesn't. The chips cost what they cost when they come out, and a BNIB chip costs that much forever after, regardless of how outdated it is. If it's in high enough demand after it becomes an EOL product, the price can actually go up.

You buy used down the road, that's how you upgrade for cheap.
Nobody buys 3 year old CPUs new...

the G3258 might be a good choice while he waits for others to switch/upgrade and snag a deal on a i5/i7 K cpu later. i mean i went from a i7 [email protected] to my G3258 and honestly this newer setup seems smoother/faster overall. maybe due to the higher speed on the cores, i play CSGO/BL2/TL/TL2/POE @1080p. granted not the newest of games but i get smoother game play then on the lower clocked quad core, yes i had HT disabled for lower temps.

the biggest problem with multi-tabbed browsing is the memory usage mainly from flash enabled sites. that is what causes most of the slow downs even on quad cores, is the flash. i think their is a better way to do what their doing with flash but im not a programmer so what do i know..

Evilsizer said:

the G3258 might be a good choice while he waits for others to switch/upgrade and snag a deal on a i5/i7 K cpu later. i mean i went from a i7 [email protected] to my G3258 and honestly this newer setup seems smoother/faster overall. maybe due to the higher speed on the cores, i play CSGO/BL2/TL/TL2/POE @1080p. granted not the newest of games but i get smoother game play then on the lower clocked quad core, yes i had HT disabled for lower temps.

the biggest problem with multi-tabbed browsing is the memory usage mainly from flash enabled sites. that is what causes most of the slow downs even on quad cores, is the flash. i think their is a better way to do what their doing with flash but im not a programmer so what do i know..

Click to expand...

Yes there is! The best way to do what they're doing with Flash is to STOP USING IT! HTML 5 does most of what Flash does, with a smaller memory footprint and more stability. Flash is outdated, there's no need for it any more.

tell that to Adobe, *rolls eyes*

The web service my mother uses to do her bids as a flight attendant requires flash and java. I often wonder what idiot designed it.

I personally tend to go with the more cores and more threading (there are weeks when I have to edit videos, and the hyper threading really does help).

However for what you have listed an i5 4690k should work just fine.

On the other hand, the CPU with the fastest stock single core speed is currently the 4790k. This is what I run for daily use as it's stock single core speed is un-matched (it is much lower on the non-k 4790).

So if you need to save some cash and are good with overclocking the 4690k will be great for you at around 4.4GHz. If you want to run stock clock speeds the best you can get right now is the 4790k (which also has a ton of extra cores for knocking out whatever else you might find yourself doing).