This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

How much better is say a i7 4770k to a i7 920?

  • Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. PC
  3. How much better is say a i7 4770k to a i7 920?

User Info: Whitemike20052

Whitemike20052
3 years ago#1
Just upgraded to a 780ti but still have my i7 920. Its running great @ 3.7 and i can get it to 4 no problems.

But as far as gaming wise goes, is the upgrade worth it?

I seem to get FPS loss when theres alot of enemies/bodies onscreen, thats a CPU issue right?
'Don't tell me to calm down. Don't EVER tell me to calm down! I'll shoot you 3 *** in the head and TAKE your damn farm!'
THE GAME

User Info: DRAGON07891230

DRAGON07891230
3 years ago#2
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/47?vs=836
GameFlux: Unofficial GameFAQs board browser

User Info: JKatarn

JKatarn
3 years ago#3
DRAGON07891230 posted...
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/47?vs=836


Those are all CPU-bound benchmarks of course, and most games are GPU bound, so they are going to favor the newer processor. The 920 being a first-generation i7 is of course going to be somewhat slower in general than the newer Sandy/Ivybridge etc., but I don't know that it will make that much of a difference. Also, what game(s) are you seeing a performance loss in tc? Some games/engines can be more CPU bound than others, though short of strategy titles, most mainstream games tend to put far more stress on the GPU. Regardless, I'd think with a 780ti you should be able to max out just about any game at 1080p without any major performance problems, though even with the best cards you are going to see some performance loss in "worst case scenarios" as the card of course has to do more work. if you're still getting 60+ or more with the supposed "performance loss", you don't have much to complain about, if it's dropping into the 30's or 20's though, that's another thing.
Asus P8Z68-V LE | Core i7 2600K | 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws DDR3 | Gigabyte GeForce GTX 660 Windforce OC
PS3 | PS2 | PSP| Wii | 3DS | DS | X-Box 360 | X-Box | NES

User Info: Shub

Shub
3 years ago#4
I seldom run benchmarks, but I upgraded from an i7-930 (OC'd to 4 GHz) to an i7-4770K while keeping the same video card (7970) and didn't notice a difference. To be extra clear, I may have seen a difference if I'd run benchmarks or paid any attention to performance numbers like frames per second, but I don't do these things, so what I'm saying is that I didn't really observe a difference in my everyday gaming activities. I kind of expected that but I upgraded because I wanted to transplant my i7-930 to a different computer.
-What is best in life?
-To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of the women.

User Info: Whitemike20052

Whitemike20052
3 years ago#5
JKatarn posted...
DRAGON07891230 posted...
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/47?vs=836


Those are all CPU-bound benchmarks of course, and most games are GPU bound, so they are going to favor the newer processor. The 920 being a first-generation i7 is of course going to be somewhat slower in general than the newer Sandy/Ivybridge etc., but I don't know that it will make that much of a difference. Also, what game(s) are you seeing a performance loss in tc? Some games/engines can be more CPU bound than others, though short of strategy titles, most mainstream games tend to put far more stress on the GPU. Regardless, I'd think with a 780ti you should be able to max out just about any game at 1080p without any major performance problems, though even with the best cards you are going to see some performance loss in "worst case scenarios" as the card of course has to do more work. if you're still getting 60+ or more with the supposed "performance loss", you don't have much to complain about, if it's dropping into the 30's or 20's though, that's another thing.


Fallout 3 for example. I have tons of mods installed. Most of which add alot of enemies and such.

Im getting 60 frames pretty much everywhere until 20-30 zombies are on the screen and once they die, another 20 or so enemies are in the distance and then the FPS starts slowing dropping to the 30's.

It seems to only occur when there are lots of enemies on screen. I tested it further by adding sweetfx, which usually drops FPS, in those scenes the fps didnt change. Making me think its a CPU issue or something.
'Don't tell me to calm down. Don't EVER tell me to calm down! I'll shoot you 3 *** in the head and TAKE your damn farm!'
THE GAME

User Info: Whitemike20052

Whitemike20052
3 years ago#6
It happens in Chivalry also, on a 64 bot match, everything is super smooth until i get closer and closer to the enemies. And once the bodies start piling up, the FPS drops alot.

Another example would be Contagion, i spawn in zombies, once i hit about 100 or so the FPS starts dropping to the 40's, high 30's.
'Don't tell me to calm down. Don't EVER tell me to calm down! I'll shoot you 3 *** in the head and TAKE your damn farm!'
THE GAME

User Info: SinisterSlay

SinisterSlay
3 years ago#7
Whitemike20052 posted...
It happens in Chivalry also, on a 64 bot match, everything is super smooth until i get closer and closer to the enemies. And once the bodies start piling up, the FPS drops alot.

Another example would be Contagion, i spawn in zombies, once i hit about 100 or so the FPS starts dropping to the 40's, high 30's.


Sounds like poor optimization. The physics processing probably isn't being released on corpses.

If you play warband, watch as an enemy dies, they fall to the ground and roll but once they stop, they become untouchable. The physics processing is removed.
He who stumbles around in darkness with a stick is blind. But he who... sticks out in darkness... is... fluorescent! - Brother Silence

User Info: Whitemike20052

Whitemike20052
3 years ago#8
Ok, so if the bodies still have physics on them while there on the floor, theyre still sucking up memory?

So its not a CPU issue then?
'Don't tell me to calm down. Don't EVER tell me to calm down! I'll shoot you 3 *** in the head and TAKE your damn farm!'
THE GAME

User Info: SinisterSlay

SinisterSlay
3 years ago#9
Whitemike20052 posted...
Ok, so if the bodies still have physics on them while there on the floor, theyre still sucking up memory?

So its not a CPU issue then?


No that's a CPU issue then. Far as I know, Havoc still calculates physics on the CPU instead of using something like PhysX to calculate on the GPU.
Anyone have updated information on that?
He who stumbles around in darkness with a stick is blind. But he who... sticks out in darkness... is... fluorescent! - Brother Silence

User Info: Trance_Fan

Trance_Fan
3 years ago#10
i7 920 to i7 4770k is like taking 1hr getting somewhere compared to 10min..the difference is night and day in every way
i think it's nice
  1. Boards
  2. PC
  3. How much better is say a i7 4770k to a i7 920?

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

  • Topic Archived