BF4 Build - i5 or i7 ?

N

NastyNative

Gawd
Joined
Jan 28, 2009
Messages
522
Greetings

Last time I built a PC for BF3 it seems that i5 was the way go to since BF3
would not use all cores in an i7.

For BF4 I want to build a new system.
Which Chip would you use and why?
 
i5-4670k
Cheaper
Does the job just as well
HT isn't good for games (lowers performance)
Wont bottleneck your GPU
 
Its a tad hard to comment on a game that hasn't been released yet.

But BF3, nice blog

http://chipreviews.com/main-feature/main-news/frostbite-2s-limit-6-core-performance-in-battlefield-3/3/



So 4770K quad or 3930K hex imo

You could have a minor drop in a few poor multithreaded games going 3930K as the single core performance of the 4770K is around 10-15% better clock for clock. The 3930 however probably a slightly better easier overclocker. The there is $$ to consider and you haven't stated a budget.
 
If you don't mind Newegg, they still have some tempting 4770K + motherboard combos.

For instance: http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.1386750

You get $100 off plus a $15 dollar gift card. There are some deals for 4670K bundles, but the discount is not as large.

I'm still not entirely sold on the need for HT, but I keep buying i7's anyways. One of these days I'll actually benefit from it! :p I'd rather have it and not need it, than need it and not have it.
 
sbudbud said:
i5-4670k
Cheaper
Does the job just as well
HT isn't good for games (lowers performance)
Wont bottleneck your GPU
Click to expand...

Wrong.

BF3 performs much better with HT enabled, I would expect BF4 to do the same.
 
NukeDukem said:
Wrong.

BF3 performs much better with HT enabled, I would expect BF4 to do the same.
Click to expand...

Well... It performs better, I wouldnt say "much" better, unless we are talking about dual cores with and without HT, then its much better.

That said, unless you're on a strict budget you might as well go with an i7, $100 isn't THAT much.
 
I cannot comment on the specific differences between 4770k and 4670k.

BUT... with my i7 920, there was a massive performance increase IN BF3 when I enabled HT. This is using dual 7970's, and a single 1080p 120Hz monitor.
 
Id say stay away from 2011 unless you have CASH and or NEED.
Just get an I5. pound for pound an I5 is about top of the line for "Current Gaming Needs". Anything more is either epeen or your gonna use the shit out of the extra threads and cache. Trust me games are not even making full use of the processor already as BF3 and 4 are going to be heavily GPU dependent.
 
BF3 MP can VERY easily be CPU dependant actually. And with upcoming consoles sporting 8 cores (albeit weak cores) an I7 isn't a bad investment IMO.
 
tangoseal said:
Id say stay away from 2011 unless you have CASH and or NEED.
Just get an I5. pound for pound an I5 is about top of the line for "Current Gaming Needs". Anything more is either epeen or your gonna use the shit out of the extra threads and cache. Trust me games are not even making full use of the processor already as BF3 and 4 are going to be heavily GPU dependent.
Click to expand...

Did you not read what I just posted? Most games will not utilize extra threads but BF3, specifically, DOES.

What does this say about BF4?
 
RamonGTP said:
BF3 MP can VERY easily be CPU dependant actually. And with upcoming consoles sporting 8 cores (albeit weak cores) an I7 isn't a bad investment IMO.
Click to expand...

By the time you need more than 4 cores for gaming the 4770K is going to be outdated anyway.

I still have no idea why I bought a 1055T instead of a 965BE, biggest waste of bread ever.
 
Sodapopjones said:
By the time you need more than 4 cores for gaming the 4770K is going to be outdated anyway.

I still have no idea why I bought a 1055T instead of a 965BE, biggest waste of bread ever.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you should learn from the previous posts.
 
Sodapopjones said:
By the time you need more than 4 cores for gaming the 4770K is going to be outdated anyway.

I still have no idea why I bought a 1055T instead of a 965BE, biggest waste of bread ever.
Click to expand...

And BF3 can still be easily CPU limited....

Reminds me of the Q6600 vs e8400 days. What happened when BC2 came out? E8400 owners were complaining on forums about now to improve their performance while Q6600 owners were enjoying the game. Once they realized there were no hidden tricks they upgraded while Q6600 owners continued playing the game and saving their money.

Those who don't learn from history are bound to repeat it. Writings on the wall. Xbox One 8 cores, PS4 8 cores. How much faith do you have in developers to optimize their ports to work well on 4 threads even if theyre a lot more powerful than the consoles? Why chance it for $100?
 
I have played BF3 with different builds, 2500k, 2600k, 2700k, and 3930k. I was unable to notice the difference. I am sure there are charts and graphs and all kinds of testing that may show you get a few fps if you go with this processor over that one, whatever.

I did notice a difference though when I dropped a 2nd and 3rd GPU into the systems. Like they say, put your money to your GPUs. Personally if I were in the market and didn't want to break the bank, I would go with a 3570k and then drop a couple of GPUs into a rig (GTX 770s or 760s). If you have the money and you want "the best", go with SB-E platform with a couple of GTX 780s. Just my opinion.
 
BF3 actually scales extremely well with additional threads. Easily the best multi-threaded engine out there now.

See this benchmark:
http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/3303/2506.png

For example, an i5 2500K at 3.3GHz gets 59 minimum fps. An older i7 975 with 3.33GHz (only a 30MHz clock advantage) gets 81 minimum fps. The only difference is the 975 has hyperthreading that the game is able to take advantage of, espeically like in a full 64 player server. That's really where the engine shines with many threads. A 975 is even about 10% slower clock for clock than a 2500K, yet still beats it by quite a bit.

Another example is look at the Phenom II X4 980 vs the Phenom II X6 1100T. Both of these CPUs are the same architecture and are the same performance clock-for-clock. Yet the 3.7 GHz quad core scores 49FPS minimum, and 3.3GHz (boost to 3.7) 6 core scores 61 minimum fps. So clearly, threads above 4 still provide noticeable performance gains in an engine like Frostbite 2.0. I would expect Frostbite 3.0 to do just as well if not possibly even better.
 
Johnny26 said:
I have played BF3 with different builds, 2500k, 2600k, 2700k, and 3930k. I was unable to notice the difference. I am sure there are charts and graphs and all kinds of testing that may show you get a few fps if you go with this processor over that one, whatever.

I did notice a difference though when I dropped a 2nd and 3rd GPU into the systems. Like they say, put your money to your GPUs. Personally if I were in the market and didn't want to break the bank, I would go with a 3570k and then drop a couple of GPUs into a rig (GTX 770s or 760s). If you have the money and you want "the best", go with SB-E platform with a couple of GTX 780s. Just my opinion.
Click to expand...

If I was on a strict budget and getting an i7 means getting a weaker GPU, then I'd agree. If I'm not on a strict budget and getting an i7 means I just added $100 to my total build, I'd get the i7
 
RamonGTP said:
If I was on a strict budget and getting an i7 means getting a weaker GPU, then I'd agree. If I'm not on a strict budget and getting an i7 means I just added $100 to my total build, I'd get the i7
Click to expand...

I agree.
 
RamonGTP said:
Those who don't learn from history are bound to repeat it. Writings on the wall. Xbox One 8 cores, PS4 8 cores. How much faith do you have in developers to optimize their ports to work well on 4 threads even if theyre a lot more powerful than the consoles? Why chance it for $100?
Click to expand...
Can always just sell the i5 and get an i7 if it comes to that, though. And then the question would be which one will depreciate less by that time. ...Such advice isn't good for people who hate buying and selling things, however.

Remember the Q6600 was very expensive when it came out, and even a year later when the 8000s came out they were still almost double the price of the core2s. And now a Core2 is worth anywhere from $1 to whatever, while a Q6600 is around $50-$60 or so. The Q6600 is worth more now than the duos, but it cost a lot more new too.

I personally think "future-proofing" often sucks since the future has yet to be written. And if you spend more but guess wrong, or if things depreciate faster than you expected, or if some new whiz-bang technology comes out, you lose, whereas it's generally not hard to upgrade to something later if needed.
 
If I could go back I would have bought a 2600K instead of my 2500K for the Hyperthreading
 
Ehren8879 said:
If I could go back I would have bought a 2600K instead of my 2500K for the Hyperthreading
Click to expand...

I get more FPS turning off HyperThreading on my 2600K, im running it at either 4800Mhz with HT or 5000Mhz with it off. Even at the same Mhz im getting a few more FPS with it 0ff!
 
Marcdaddy said:
Also check out this Review with BF3 turning off HyperThreading
http://chipreviews.com/main-feature/...3-revisited/5/
WOW 6 core with Hyperthreading OFF is a MONSTER in BF3


http://chipreviews.com/main-feature/...ttlefield-3/5/
Click to expand...

I read the review some time ago. The problem is i play witheverything set to low apart from mesh set to ultra. How would i benefit from 3930k. i am getting crazy high fps with gtx680 single or sli and 3770k 4.4hgz.


Posted from Hardforum.com App for Android
 
BF3 chews through as many cores as you can throw at it. One of the few games that is truly "Multithreaded"
 
BF3 chews through hardware like no other.... i just bought a 7970 upgrade from my 6970 and though i would see 60+ FPS with 3x1080p resolution and man.... it is playable on ultra but around the 30-40 fps range.

BF4 no doubt will eat as much hardware as you give it.... just depends if you are okay running the game on Ultra or Low.....

I got my i7 for video editing work, otherwise I would have gone i5 and a watercooling or good HSF and overclock like crazy!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top