Silly Question but I would like your thoughts on it.

[ITAngel]

I don't use pcpp... so I have no idea what quad looks like on pcpp... hence my question (then I looked it up and edited).

Like ATM said, you should buy it in a kit. Chances are single x4 will be fine...but I'm risk averse. But anyway, I see what you were doing now.

The ~10% performance increase comes from sandybridge-e architecture to haswell-e... Not in the ram.

Either build would be fine. The big difference between the two pcs that I see is the massive difference in power use and heat with the pair of 290x cards versus the single, or even dual (budget busting), 980. That and if he needs or wants the additional horsepower.

The OP has some.choices to make... if he can sell that build.

True, I did read on each of the parts. I also put into a build time, how long it will be to get the parts. How much it will cost me on top of the price and discount. Plus reputation of the company selling them. I like to stick to companies I trust and know and pay the extra if needed. Also if I build a new system I want to stick with 290X all the way and MSI Lightning if possible.

Keep in mind so far the DX12 is favoring the 290X big time making them compete vs the titan X. So I might even skip going after the 980 due to that reason.

Also I just notice that the CPU I would get for the X99 is best for a single card and not CF or SLI. So with that said, I might just end up keeping mine since my system doesn't limit me on my lanes.

 

[EarthDog]

I'm not too worried about dx12 and NVIDIA performance. Zero behind this, but I feel it will improve with drivers and the gap will close. I could be woefully off though.

As far as performance in 8x/8x config, if 1-2% loss is an issue for you, I understand. It's not something I would worry about with that much horsepower personally.

 

[ITAngel]

I'm not too worried about dx12 and NVIDIA performance. Zero behind this, but I feel it will improve with drivers and the gap will close. I could be woefully off though.

As far as performance in 8x/8x config, if 1-2% loss is an issue for you, I understand. It's not something I would worry about with that much horsepower personally.

Is not so much that, but I don't update my system as often as others do. Most of my systems once I reach a "x" percentage of performance. i stay there for many years before I consider upgrading again. This is the first time I had done so much upgrades considering all my parts were used with the exception of my GPU, PSU, and Case which were recently upgraded. Last year I did my SSD, and my GPU which I gave to my wife since her system was way behind on upgrades. I am still debating if I am going to CF two R9 270X 2GB each or sell them and give her something much better. She still run the FX-8150 with Sabertooth 990FX v1.0 and Hyper 212 which were my old parts. So I take chances in deals if they seems just right, if not I kind of stick to what I have. If it wasen't for a great deal on my CPU and Mobo I would had been with my FX-8350+Sabertooth v2.0 and R9 270X. XD

Finally, I don't mind losing performance 1 or 2% as long as I am still able to not only run my stuff but also have a future proof system.

 

[Dlaw]

My question is: If the goal when you started was a future proof system, why do you feel the need to upgrade now? I mean, your CPU will be more than serviceable for at least a few more years (probably more, people still run 2500K's in their gamers), your GPU is fine (and can be crossfired), your ram is plenty adequate, your running an SSD and you have plenty of power on quality parts. I would call her good man, your running top tier stuff. Even if it is a few years old.

 

[ITAngel]

My question is: If the goal when you started was a future proof system, why do you feel the need to upgrade now? I mean, your CPU will be more than serviceable for at least a few more years (probably more, people still run 2500K's in their gamers), your GPU is fine (and can be crossfired), your ram is plenty adequate, your running an SSD and you have plenty of power on quality parts. I would call her good man, your running top tier stuff. Even if it is a few years old.

Yea you do have a point and all I really want right now is one more MSI R9 290X Lighting or a R9 295x2 GPU and I will call it good for now. I am actually talking with someone who might be selling me a MSI 295x2 so we will see if i can come up with the money for it by selling some other stuff. Then I am done for a couple of years. I still want a mechanical keyboard too and that will be final. Haha,...

 

[Dlaw]

Oh yea, I don't mean peripherals. I think I go through headsets once every couple years, and mice don't last long either. I'm hoping I can get 5+ years out of this keyboard.

Yea, I'm constantly getting new stuff for my system, lol.

 

[bob4933]

Here's an oddball thought, have you thought about going the xeon route for your processing needs? You can get a 16 thread cpu for not a whole bunch more than what you have spent now. Be a lot more stable too for your rendering stuff.

 

[EarthDog]

Good thinking bob! One other thing to consider there though is that the Xeon 8 core variants lose significant clockspeed over the 5820K and the 5930K. So while you may have a couple more cores, will that be able to make up for the 700/900 Mhz difference for the 5820K/5930K clockspeed??

Also, the price on the cheapest s2011-3 Xeon octo is $682 at newegg versus $390 and $580 5820K/5930K and we are already scraping the ceiling on the budget.

That said those CPUs are no more stable at stock speeds than the 5820K/5930K. They are binned for power consumption only really...stable is stable at stock speeds Xeon/S/K series.

 

[bob4933]

Good thinking bob! One other thing to consider there though is that the Xeon 8 core variants lose significant clockspeed over the 5820K and the 5930K. So while you may have a couple more cores, will that be able to make up for the 700/800 Mhz difference for the 5820K/5930K clockspeed??

Also, the price on the cheapest s2011-3 Xeon octo is $682 at newegg versus $390 and $580 5820K/5930K and we are already scraping the ceiling on the budget.

That said those CPUs are no more stable at stock speeds than the 5820K/5930K. They are binned for power consumption only really...stable is stable at stock speeds Xeon/S/K series.

You're thinking gaming. Rendering mate! More cores = more performance. I'd run one of those 30 thread xeons at 2.4ghz if it weren't ungodly expensive haha.

If you haven't recorded, you won't really understand how annoying latency is. Its entirely why I run an AMD 8 core, not an i7 with hyperthreading. It's simply a better performer for recording. It's also superior when it comes to rendering, as all cores are utilized.

As for stability, I was implying ECC ram and data protection.


In this case ->

i7 =


Xeon ->

 

[EarthDog]

No, I am not thinking gaming.

Clockspeed, particularly that much of a gap, can make up for the lack of cores. 700 to 900 Mhz is a pretty big difference.

 

[bob4933]

No, I am not thinking gaming.

Clockspeed, particularly that much of a difference, can make up for the lack of cores. 700 to 900 Mhz is a pretty big difference.

Video Editing -Adobe Premiere, Lightworks, and testing SONY Vega now.
Audio Recording - Cubase, Propellerhead Reason, Audicity, Fruity Loops, Orion and a bunch of VSTi.
Broadcasting - OBS,
Photo Editing - Adobe Photoshop, GIMP, Inkscape
Network Lab - GNS3, Oracle VM VirtualBox, VMware Horizon View, Wireshark, and more.

cores > speed for almost all of these applications. If he's running FL11+ its ABSOLUTELY more important. Adobe premiere is also absolutely thread dependent.


I will ABSOLUTELY take core count over speed for this...

 

[EarthDog]

Bob, you do not need to repeat what I already know he is using. Well aware of the apps . That does not detract from the fact that the hex cores have a significant clock speed advantage which can make up for the difference in cores.

I wouldn't bet my life on it, but I would imagine that the performance is very close...if the 5930K doesn't then match and beat it. 900 Mhz... that is nearly a 40% difference in clockspeeds.

And again, it costs $100+ MORE when we already have budget constraints.

 

[bob4933]

Bob, you do not need to repeat what I already know he is using. Well aware of the apps . That does not detract from the fact that the hex cores have a significant clock speed advantage which can make up for the difference in cores.

I wouldn't bet my life on it, but I would imagine that the performance is very close...if the 5930K doesn't then match and beat it. 900 Mhz... that is nearly a 40% difference in clockspeeds.

And Im willing to bet you've never ran Massive VST with mastering vst's on top of it in a DAW setting as well. Theres a reason studios run mac pros with xeon's and not alienware.

edit: not trying to offend here, I simply think you aren't understanding the depths of audio's compute requirements either.

edit 2: another thing, the hex core i7's are JUST FINE. I just know going from a 3930k to a 5820k will provide almost no benefit to his audio stuff. Where as, adding 2 extra cores (4 threads), and ECC ram will definitely make adifference

 

[EarthDog]

I understand you are not trying to offend. I am not taking offense.

I understand the depths of audio's compute requirements. I may not dig deep into audio production personally, but I dont have to to understand what a big difference clockspeed can make over cores in applications, particularly with such a HUGE clockspeed gap.

Again, this need tested to prove it conclsuively (I have seen this in rendering applications first hand, note), but I would bet good money (just not my life, LOL) that the Xeon @ 2.4 GHz and a 5930K @ 3.5 GHz (a 1.1 GHz difference ~46% faster, sorry!!!) are damn close if the 5930K doesn't pull away.

Again, the 5930K is $100 cheaper too and we are at the limit of the budget. So this conversation is kind of a moot point anyway unless he ponies up some cash.



EDIT: ECC ram wont make a difference in performance... if anything, wouldn't it be slightly slower due to the ECC?

I would imagine that the audio software can take advantage of the ~10% clock for clock performance increases through architectural changes. Will it make a 10% difference? Probably not, but enough to counter the 'almost no benefit' sentiment. Now, is it WORTH it... THAT may be the question.

 

[bob4933]

Again, the 5930K is $100 cheaper too and we are at the limit of the budget. So this conversation is kind of a moot point anyway unless he ponies up some cash.

This is what he will need to do to get "improvements" where he will see them. I don't necessarily believe that running into an x99 is necessarily the "best option" considering his uses. All things considering, Im not sure he even should "upgrade" from that beastly 3930k. I know he wants "shiny newness", I am just trying to ground him in the fact that x99 (sans the 1000$ 5960x) wont net him much if any gains where he's utilizing his system the most.


Ive been looking at cinebench scores, the 3930k still holds its own compared to the 5820k in performance.

 

[ITAngel]

True that bob4933, If I had the choice I would be running dual Xeons on Windows or even Mac. Also won't be connected to the internet at all but for what I do is not professional so a 3930k will do just fine or even the X99 6-core will do just fine. However; I do run a separate Audio unit to process all live recording and is what I use with ASIO on my software's. My system currently runs most of what I need great and like I said before it was just a build bug I had. If I had the choice to sell my system is it even possible to build a new one that would be similar or a little better than what I have. That is what I was trying to get in case my friend is interested on my current system. I can still build one that will allow me to do my music recording, video editing, and gaming. =) I feel I have learn a lot from you guys advice and information provided to me. As I have very busy job I sometimes don't spend to much time following changes in the hardware department.

Thanks by the way to all.

 

[EarthDog]

I get the end game bob, but that isn't a talking point currently (we have went over that already)... for the most part, I do agree. My points were purely on your post regarding the Xeon versus the other options he has on X99. I guess we have moved on from that.

On to something completely different... yep, 3930k isn't a slouch, but it still needs at least a few hundred Mhz more to match the faster clock for clock performance of a 5820K. That is the architectural differences we are speaking of showing itself there. Look at #5, #6, and #7, as well as #14 and #15.

is it worth it? Naa, not likely, but there are notable gains to be had... and the Xeon really wouldn't be my choice due to this particular situation's budget and questions on if it actually can perform as fast as or faster than a hex core clocked almost 46%(1.1GHz) higher.

 

[ITAngel]

I get the end game bob, but that isn't a talking point currently (we have went over that already)... for the most part, I do agree. My points were purely on your post regarding the Xeon versus the other options he has on X99. I guess we have moved on from that.

On to something completely different... yep, 3930k isn't a slouch, but it still needs at least a few hundred Mhz more to match the faster clock for clock performance of a 5820K. That is the architectural differences we are speaking of showing itself there. Look at #5, #6, and #7, as well as #14 and #15.

is it worth it? Naa, not likely, but there are notable gains to be had... and the Xeon really wouldn't be my choice due to this particular situation's budget and questions on if it actually can perform as fast as or faster than a hex core clocked almost 46%(1.1GHz) higher.

Oh yea I do understand were you are coming from with that. My understanding is that from what I have learned the 5820k dosen't OC as much as the 3930k and that the limitation of the lanes makes it not an appealing choice. However; it is a newer chip, so value will hold later on if I decide to sell the system. I won't mind going that route if only I can have the card combination I want which is the 295x2. But might be hard to pull that off I think, so yea I am not sure.

 

[EarthDog]

5820K will hit the same median the 3930K will really... 4.4-4.7Ghz...

The lanes thing is an issue again? I thought you were good with the meager differences?

 

[ITAngel]

5820K will hit the same median the 3930K will really... 4.4-4.7Ghz...

The lanes thing is an issue again? I thought you were good with the meager differences?

No I was just stating the fact of what I learned base on the two chip-sets. To some people that is huge when you want to SLI but I did learn that I can run a 295x2 and not have a single issue in performance. SLI maybe but like you said 1-2% lost is not that bad of a deal. XD

Sorry if I wasen't clear with what I was trying to say.