- Joined
- Nov 1, 1998
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
FRONTPAGE Intel i7 4790K Devil's Canyon CPU Review
- Thread starter Overclockers.com
- Start date
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2006
i second this.
also it seems to me that the TIM upgrade is not that big of an upgrade as i thought it would be
. i guess de-lidding is still the way to go. (for me ill be sticking with my 2600K as long as i can. this thing @ 4.5ghz 1.28 volts under water does not go past 58C 
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2006
- Location
- CYYZ Pearson
Single thread and HT gain would be great.
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2009
"2D benchmarks show a distinct advantage for the i7 4790K where single threaded testing is performed. The Intel XTU and SuperPi results show the i7 4790K coming out on top by as much as 21% over the other two CPUs. The wPrime testing showed the i7 4930K and its eight cores with a sizable advantage."
Last sentence needs some correction.
Last sentence needs some correction.
I'll have my 4770K test bench hooked back up tomorrow, I'll run a couple benchies at 4.4 GHz for you guys and report back. I seriously doubt there will be any difference though, but I'll check and let you know.
I see that average OC of 4790K in most reviews is 4.8GHz ~1.4V ( +/- 0.05V ) what is nothing special but also gives hope that worse samples won't hit a wall at ~4.5GHz 1.4V like it was with many 4770K. There are also only ES results so maybe retail will clock slightly better ( I just hope that not worse ).
I hope you do that, I'm dying to know if they updated Haswell architecture any.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2011
- Location
- Republic of Texas
Thanks, nice review.
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2014
- Location
- Rotterdam, NL.
I think you don't gonna notice any differance in next gen gaming between a overclocked 8 core FX AMD chip and this one.
Except lower temps and much lower power usage. Still games that use 2 cores will run much faster on Intel ( there is still a lot of new games like that ).
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2014
- Location
- Rotterdam, NL.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2012
Thanks Dino, looks good. It appears they did help the thermals a bit with their new TIM which should help most users. I'm also curious as others in a direct comparison , interested to see if the new chipset actually has any benefit?
Fair point, It's just that i can 'almost' buy three 8 core AMD chips for that money
I don't want to argue about that as it's pretty pointless but there will be 4690K soon which is also faster than any FX 8000 series and cost not much more.
You can also buy i3 CPU cheaper than FX and not much worse in most games. In some titles it will be even better.
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2014
- Location
- Rotterdam, NL.
I think multicore has the future look at games like BF4 that already uses 8 cores and don't forget the lazy console ports
Last edited:
Yes but so far not many games are using more than 2-4 threads and FX is running more like 2-4 cores not 8. Results in games on i3 ~3.5GHz and FX/APU 4 thread series ~4.5GHz are about the same while there is ~1GHz difference in clock.
FX looks better when screen resolution is higher and more graphics cards are in use. Most gamers are still using 1080p so more cores are the future thing. Till next year we will see 3 new Intel chips. So far no news about even 1 from AMD.
The only games where more threads really count are maybe BF4 in multi and some online mmo games.
I'm not saying that because I hate AMD or something like that. I'm not on any side and I like to test everything. I had FX8120 and 8320 so I could compare performance and everything else so it's also not something that I just found somewhere in the web.
I also had i3 4330 which I sold 2 weeks ago and I have A8 6600K which is about as good as FX series on similar clock so everything is easy to compare.
I think that new K Pentium will be something more interesting than i5/i7 and unlucky for AMD it will probably take large part of cheap CPU market as 2 core Pentium won't be much worse than any 4 thread AMD.
FX looks better when screen resolution is higher and more graphics cards are in use. Most gamers are still using 1080p so more cores are the future thing. Till next year we will see 3 new Intel chips. So far no news about even 1 from AMD.
The only games where more threads really count are maybe BF4 in multi and some online mmo games.
I'm not saying that because I hate AMD or something like that. I'm not on any side and I like to test everything. I had FX8120 and 8320 so I could compare performance and everything else so it's also not something that I just found somewhere in the web.
I also had i3 4330 which I sold 2 weeks ago and I have A8 6600K which is about as good as FX series on similar clock so everything is easy to compare.
I think that new K Pentium will be something more interesting than i5/i7 and unlucky for AMD it will probably take large part of cheap CPU market as 2 core Pentium won't be much worse than any 4 thread AMD.
It will be the exact same thing... or should be at least. There were no enhancements on this CPU outside of slightly better binning, a better TIM, and added caps... its all there in the Intel slides. No instruction set changes or updates, nothing.
Still worth it to confirm, but... the performance gains you see are due to the clockspeed increases only.
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2014
- Location
- Rotterdam, NL.
FX is a much more powerful series overall with a higher multi-threaded performance. APU's will always have less CPU power.
This
I have to swap out the M7G and 4790K to the M6F and 4770K today, so I'll set the 4770K to 4.4 GHz and run a quick check on a few benchmarks.
I've already tested the 4770K on a few Z97 motherboard reviews, as has Joe. The difference between Z87 and Z97 chipset performance is pretty much non existent.
Similar threads
