Core i7 4820K processor review

#4648726

Corbus

2013-09-03 09:05

Really nice memory performance.

#4648737

DerSchniffles

2013-09-03 09:38

glad to see that my purchase of the 3770k is still holding up very nicely. Those memory speeds are incredible though.

#4648739

CrazY_Milojko

2013-09-03 09:44

Really nice memory performance.

I agree, insane is better word. Now 16xxx MB/s on my i7-920 OC'ed to 4.01GHz paired with 6x Patriot 4GB 1866 CL9 (Triple Channel) looks so f**king small 🙁

#4648765

-Tj-

2013-09-03 11:04

Thanks, is 4820K review missing OC part? ___________________________________ hm i7 4960x is very hot at only 4.6Ghz @ 1.45v, makes me wonder did they really use proper soldering or not.. Also power consumption, I thought it would be much lower on IB-e Edit: i checked anadtech and he couldnt even get it to 4.6ghz 😀

#4648782

southamptonfc

2013-09-03 11:37

I think it's time to retire FarCry2 and Crysis2 from the benchmark suite. (review says "New in the CPU benchmark suite is Crysis 2.") Crysis3 is about the only title that would've shown the potential of a 6core so really needs to be there instead of Crysis2.

#4648784

BLEH!

2013-09-03 11:43

There's some disparity on the AIDA memory readings. Sandra seems to give a better figure, which is missing for some reason. 🙁

#4648792

RavenMaster

2013-09-03 11:54

Well, as far I as I can there is absolutely no point in me upgrading from my 3970X as the performance boosts wouldn't even be noticeable when gaming. Think i'll wait for X99 and Haswell E

#4648802

Undying

2013-09-03 12:02

Kinda expected. I still find 4770k best choice out there.

#4648808

Hilbert Hagedoorn

Administrator

2013-09-03 12:12

There's some disparity on the AIDA memory readings. Sandra seems to give a better figure, which is missing for some reason. 🙁

I dropped Sandra for memory testing, with each massive update the tool scores change as well. So that it unfortunately is not reliable/consistent enough.

#4648838

Loobyluggs

2013-09-03 13:07

Great review as always Hill. Those Cinbench figures are off the chain!

#4648843

Mraz

2013-09-03 13:17

Thanks, is 4820K review missing OC part?

Ít says in the conclusion that the OC was giving him crash at boot!

#4648867

CPC_RedDawn

2013-09-03 14:06

So the 4820K is $30 cheaper than a 4770K yet it only performs around 2-3% slower. It will be overclockable once we get a better BIOS, the quad channel memory reads are just insane, it can drive SLI/Crossfire better thanks to 40 Pcie lanes....? People here seem pretty blind, to me the better choice is without a doubt the 4820K, I was going to get a 4770K near the end of the year but now I am starting to think the 4820K would be a much better option in the long run. I mean are we really going to argue about the difference between 250fps and 248fps???

#4648870

Undying

2013-09-03 14:11

No you are dead right mate, this is the problem now, they ground tech to a halt because they realize why release something which is 20-30% better, when they can release something 10% better, get all the sales from that, then move to the next minimal increment, (as small as they can realistically get away with) it's a total utter scam, utter rip off, they are playing us for fools, and it works because the majority are. Technology is showing this pattern more and more in so many different areas but PC hardware is one of the very worse.

I don't know why is that bothering you? Do you love spending 500$ on CPU/MB/RAM every year? I don't think so... You got 3930k and now enjoy two years until Skylake and DDR4. It gives you chance to upgrade something that really matters more often, like a GPU.

#4648904

BLEH!

2013-09-03 15:35

I'm good with my "980X" for a while yet.

#4648920

H83

2013-09-03 16:31

I knew the performance was going to be similar to the core I7 3960X so no problems there but i was expecting a better overclocking potencial. Can´t wait to see the OC results of the 4820K that seems to me to be a very interesting chip and cheaper than the 4770K! Also i think i´ve noticed two small mistakes on the 4820K article: In page 2 says that the 4820K is a quad core chip with 15mb of L3 cache but the chip should have 10mb of L3 cache. And in page 5 says that the 4820K is a six core chip capable of handling 12 12 threads... A great article as always!

#4648924

schmidtbag

2013-09-03 16:42

While I don't exactly like Intel, I think this CPU is a lot better than this article gives it credit for. The problem, as weird as it sounds, is it's pointlessly good. The tests aren't that impressive because nothing can push it hard enough. The quadruple memory channel made more of a performance difference than the extra 2 physical cores, which might mean that memory is actually the bottleneck for a CPU like this. I would have to say I'm not impressed with the power consumption. For intel, I thought it should have done much better.

#4648930

CPC_RedDawn

2013-09-03 16:57

There is also the fact that down the road if you feel the need you can always look for a deal on a 4930k giving 4820k users an extension path (rather than upgrade) for the future. I agree, while Haswell's IPC might be slightly better, the limitations of PCIe lanes, memory bandwidth, and heat due to the IHS far outweigh the little advantage it has with IPC. There is also the fact that it isn't jerry rigged with a PLX chip like the z77/87 chipsets have been. So the latency upon addition of another one-two GPUs encountered with the PLX chip wont be so on the x79 platform. Kind of like the 3930k, sure it's single threaded performance isn't as good as Ivy or haswell but it's by no means bad and i'd gladly trade some single threaded performance (we're talking 5-10%) for two more cores. Currently i don't do anything but game, but we're looking to a multi-threaded future the new consoles are evident of that. Since i'm going multi-GPU either way thinking of selling my 3570k and G1.Sniper3 to go X79. Might just go the yard and get the 4930k and be done with it. Agreed as well, for gaming CPU test i think Crysis 3 should become somewhat of the standard until something else comes along.

Thank you, at least there are still people here with some common sense. The 4820K is a no brainer for me when compared with the 4770K, I shall be going with a second 7970 soon once the 9970 is announced, priced, and dated and we get performance results in. So the 4820K is the better option anyway.

#4648982

tsunami231

2013-09-03 19:09

That is some crazy fast memory read/write speeds that is more then double the read/write speeds I get on my triple channel 1600mhz on my i7 920 @ stock. These new cpu are seriously tempting me to make new build.... But I Still not about to do that, only game I have that I play that plays bad on my build is swtor, damn never everything else I play is 60 fps solid.

#4648988

tsunami231

2013-09-03 19:29

Yeah, those read/copy memory numbers are off the chart. Here's a comparison to a 3770k@4.9Ghz and memory 2400mhz@11-12-11-24-CR1 timings. http://www.guru3d.com/index.php?ct=articles&action=file&id=6294&admin=0a8fcaad6b03da6a6895d1ada2e171002a287bc1 http://s7.postimg.org/cw71zviln/Best.png

yah i need to stop reading all that is makes me want to upgrade when I have no reason. those numbers are just crazy. And the day developers actual give correct multi core support for everything I expect the even crazier numbers Haswell might of not been the huge jump the "minority" the enthusiasts crowded expects from next gen but the power usage is amazing. great for laptops people user and the people that think gaming is good idea on laptops seeing heat just cant dissipate fast enough them, but useless for desktop seeing most dont care about power consuption on desktops ,but frankly intel has nothing to lose but lowering power consumption on the cpu, they are already running circles around amd in raw power

#4649019

holystarlight

2013-09-03 20:36

Great review. im surpised I thought it would do a lot better than my current 3930k was really looking forward to an upgrade but I might give it a miss after reading the reviews. And my 3930k clocked at 4.6ghz 2133mhz 9-12-12-28-c1 http://s22.postimg.org/nkctestup/cachemem.png there not much in it... I was hoping this new chip would be a great overclocker. but I guess only time will tell!