TR Forums

kumori wrote:

My machine has been really picking about RAM since the beginning, but I kind of doubt that is the cause.

Same here. I can't even get my RAM up to 1333 much less 1600 even though it's rated at 1600.

I kind of hate my i7 920...performance wise its fine but its been a bitch to keep stable.

I've got my chip running back on stock setting now with 1600mhz RAM. Stable so far.

Its a shame though because I've got a Scythe Mugen 2 CPU Cooler attached and at stock that giant hunk of metal is overkill.

kumori wrote:

I've got my chip running back on stock setting now with 1600mhz RAM. Stable so far.

Its a shame though because I've got a Scythe Mugen 2 CPU Cooler attached and at stock that giant hunk of metal is overkill.

Well, it still keeps it cooler with less noise, no?

DeadOfKnight wrote:

Well, it still keeps it cooler with less noise, no?

Yeah, and I have the fan running at very low RPMs.

What kinda temps you get on that?

I have a Q8200 OCed to 2.8 GHZ with a Cooler Master Hyper 212 Evo and I get decent temps. 38-41C right now idling in a cabinet that does not permit a lot of good air flow.

I.S.T. wrote:

What kinda temps you get on that?

It idles around 36C. I keep the fan spinning at about 400RPM. Under load it can get a little hot (high 50s), but I turn up the case fans to exhaust the heat.

My ambient is currently around 24C.

I'm on the same boat. I currently have a i7 920 @ 3.6GHz (MHz lol) ; G.SKILL F3-12800CL6T2-12GBPIS (2Gx6); Radeon HD5870, on an ASUS P6X58D-E also a Samsung 512GB 830 series for the OS.
Even though work and desktop usage is fast enough I really feel the performance hit in ArmA2:CO and SPECIALLY ArmA3. This is actually how I currently evaluate my systems and builds—since it's a great part of my gaming.
ArmA is a hog when in comes to performance, it really taxes the CPU ( well, GPU as well but specially the CPU); sometimes even more than Metro Last Light/Crysis—the engine is huge and it's not fully optimized. What really matters to me is the online component anyway; the synthetic benchmarks are useless.

Reading this thread I figured I will wait; maybe Skylake will be a better option for us? So, I guess I'll go for the new GTX 780; even though I know for a fact it will still tank on big battles and large AOs, the power of a 780 can't hurt, right?
It's still better than upgrading the whole system; besides, I'd really get those CUDA cores some decent usage~I so wish Adobe would support opengl for good

Heartborne wrote:

I'm on the same boat. I currently have a i7 920 @ 3.6MHz

3.6Mhz?! No wonder it's slow! `,､('∀`) '`,､

Heartborne wrote:

ArmA is a hog when in comes to performance, it really taxes the CPU ( well, GPU as well but specially the CPU); sometimes even more than Metro Last Light/Crysis—the engine is huge and it's not fully optimized. What really matters to me is the online component anyway; the synthetic benchmarks are useless.

ARMA is definitely a CPU hog, but ARMA3 is really poorly optimized right now; I would really hope the engine's performance improves over what it is. I can't hardly run it either, on a 3570K @ 4.4Ghz and GTX Titan. Sooo, don't upgrade for that. ('∀`)

Heartborne wrote:

Reading this thread I figured I will wait; maybe Skylake will be a better option for us?

Skylake is a long way away. Broadwell is closer, but you're still looking at ~1 year from now. Haswell would be a good upgrade for you folks. My brother's currently eyeing a 4770K. There are a lot of ancillary improvements in Haswell (and especially the platform surrounding it) that you will appreciate. (╹◡╹)

auxy wrote:

Heartborne wrote:

I'm on the same boat. I currently have a i7 920 @ 3.6MHz

3.6Mhz?! No wonder it's slow! `,､('∀`) '`,､

Heartborne wrote:

ArmA is a hog when in comes to performance, it really taxes the CPU ( well, GPU as well but specially the CPU); sometimes even more than Metro Last Light/Crysis—the engine is huge and it's not fully optimized. What really matters to me is the online component anyway; the synthetic benchmarks are useless.

ARMA is definitely a CPU hog, but ARMA3 is really poorly optimized right now; I would really hope the engine's performance improves over what it is. I can't hardly run it either, on a 3570K @ 4.4Ghz and GTX Titan. Sooo, don't upgrade for that. ('∀`)

Heartborne wrote:

Reading this thread I figured I will wait; maybe Skylake will be a better option for us?

Skylake is a long way away. Broadwell is closer, but you're still looking at ~1 year from now. Haswell would be a good upgrade for you folks. My brother's currently eyeing a 4770K. There are a lot of ancillary improvements in Haswell (and especially the platform surrounding it) that you will appreciate. (╹◡╹)

Ahah, my bad on the frequency; habit I guess. Ghz Ghz Ghz Ghz!

Thanks for that feedback (3570K @ 4.4Ghz and GTX Titan); if that's the case, I will just sob on the corner D: .
Well then, I better save a few more Euros and wait for sales to come through. I wonder what the prices will be like for the 4770K, in Portugal It can't be pretty.

Heartborne wrote:

Ahah, my bad on the frequency; habit I guess. Ghz Ghz Ghz Ghz!

Hehe, I'm only teasing; I knew what you meant. Nice first post. Welcome to Tech Report!

auxy wrote:

Heartborne wrote:

Ahah, my bad on the frequency; habit I guess. Ghz Ghz Ghz Ghz!

Hehe, I'm only teasing; I knew what you meant. Nice first post. Welcome to Tech Report!

Thank you!

I'll see what I can get around here and I'll report back later

Do you WANT to move on to another platform or do you feel the NEED to do that?

I have a system based on the Core i7-990x and I feel absolutely no need to consider moving away from it. The last time I was in a similar situation was back when I had a system based on the Harris 25MHz 286 and gave the whole 386 generation of processors a miss and the next system I built for myself was based on the 486 DX50.

With regard to the GPU, for what I was doing at the time the Hercules Monochrome graphics card suited my needs. Even when I made the move to VGA there was quite a time where I missed my Hercules card.

I have the feeling that this is the first time where the reason for me to change will be dictated by the CPU dying. Normally the systems I build for myself start becoming a bit long in the tooth, performance wise, about this point (my system has been running 24/7 for 952 days 1 hour) and in another year or so I would be looking to replace it with something with a lot more performance. That eventuality is not even a blip on the horizon yet.

I made the jump from Nehalem to Haswell. The way I look at it is I had a first generation i7-950. Then there was i7-8xx, Sandy Bridge, Sandy Bridge-E, and Ivy Bridge. I didn't feel any of those were really worth upgrading to. But with the new enhancements in the Z87 chipset and power efficiency of the Haswell CPUs, i thought it was finally the time to upgrade. and in my case all I had to buy was the CPU and motherboard which I got in a combo deal from newegg. I had enough other spare parts already laying around to put together another complete PC with the i7-950 which I sold for more than it cost me to upgrade. and I still have a spare Samsung 830 series 128 GB SSD and 4 GB of DDR3-1333 memory sitting around.

So I to am in this position! My use case is a little different, mainly using Photoshop and Lightroom for image editing. Going from a X58A MB and i7-930 to Z87X MB and a i7-4770K. By some of the charts it looks like I should notice a difference. Any thoughts?

cwall64 wrote:

So I to am in this position! My use case is a little different, mainly using Photoshop and Lightroom for image editing. Going from a X58A MB and i7-930 to Z87X MB and a i7-4770K. By some of the charts it looks like I should notice a difference. Any thoughts?

The increase in core speed as well as the increase in per-clock performance could push the delta between the two CPUs to near 50%, depending on the clockspeeds.

Are you overclocking?

Airmantharp wrote:

cwall64 wrote:

So I to am in this position! My use case is a little different, mainly using Photoshop and Lightroom for image editing. Going from a X58A MB and i7-930 to Z87X MB and a i7-4770K. By some of the charts it looks like I should notice a difference. Any thoughts?

The increase in core speed as well as the increase in per-clock performance could push the delta between the two CPUs to near 50%, depending on the clockspeeds.

Are you overclocking?

Not on really planning on it. I have in the past, but now really just looking for consistent, stable performance (of coarse I say that and will probably turn one or two things up a little!).

cwall64 wrote:

Airmantharp wrote:

cwall64 wrote:

So I to am in this position! My use case is a little different, mainly using Photoshop and Lightroom for image editing. Going from a X58A MB and i7-930 to Z87X MB and a i7-4770K. By some of the charts it looks like I should notice a difference. Any thoughts?

The increase in core speed as well as the increase in per-clock performance could push the delta between the two CPUs to near 50%, depending on the clockspeeds.

Are you overclocking?

Not on really planning on it. I have in the past, but now really just looking for consistent, stable performance (of coarse I say that and will probably turn one or two things up a little!).

Well, I ask because the non-k CPUs may be more interesting to you.

I'm a gamer, so I'll be overclocking any future rig (2500k at 4.6GHz now), and one thing I can say is that Lightroom 5 just isn't fast, regardless of system performance. Photoshop may fare better, but the closest thing I have is Elements 10. I mostly use it for compositing HDR sequences and stitching panoramas, and I have found that 16GB of RAM is cutting it pretty close .

Well, I ask because the non-k CPUs may be more interesting to you.

I'm a gamer, so I'll be overclocking any future rig (2500k at 4.6GHz now), and one thing I can say is that Lightroom 5 just isn't fast, regardless of system performance. Photoshop may fare better, but the closest thing I have is Elements 10. I mostly use it for compositing HDR sequences and stitching panoramas, and I have found that 16GB of RAM is cutting it pretty close .

I was looking at a package deal from Microcenter - 4770K & GA-Z87X-UD5H for$429.99. By your sig we have several of the same lenses! I was on a 7D, but just recently move to a 5DM3.

cwall64 wrote:

Well, I ask because the non-k CPUs may be more interesting to you.

I'm a gamer, so I'll be overclocking any future rig (2500k at 4.6GHz now), and one thing I can say is that Lightroom 5 just isn't fast, regardless of system performance. Photoshop may fare better, but the closest thing I have is Elements 10. I mostly use it for compositing HDR sequences and stitching panoramas, and I have found that 16GB of RAM is cutting it pretty close .

I was looking at a package deal from Microcenter - 4770K & GA-Z87X-UD5H for$429.99. By your sig we have several of the same lenses! I was on a 7D, but just recently move to a 5DM3.

Nothing wrong with the package deals- I may go that way when I'm ready to upgrade this system, but that probably won't be this year, and may not be the next, given how slowly processors are evolving at the top end.

I actually went T1i -> 60D -> 6D; 5D III was a little too rich for my blood and the 6D was just too cheap when it went on sale the first time with the kit lens, and stuff like the crazy low-light focusing and the WiFi/GPS antennas is really nice. I do miss the higher frame-rate, and I am looking at a 70D/7D II sometime in the future as an 'action' camera, depending on how well Canon's new crop sensor does- that was the biggest turnoff on the 60D!