New i5/i7 vs old i7 - how does they compare in gaming with 1x GPU?

Discussion in 'Processors and motherboards Intel' started by Sneakers, Feb 7, 2015.

  1. Sneakers

    Sneakers Guest

    Messages:
    2,716
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Gigabyte 980Ti Windforce
    Hey guys, I still have my X58 system, and it has a couple of years on its neck by now and I was wondering how my old CPU compares to the new i7s today with a SINGLE gpu setup?

    My cpu today is a Xeon i7 W3520 (higher binned i7 920 basically), currently it is clocked at 4.5 ghz and has been for a while.

    Being a X58 sys it has pci-e 2.0, so one pondering I had is if we have reached the bandwidth limit of pci-e 2.0 yet?

    Would I be CPU bound at 60-70 fps using this x58 system together with a 980 GTX highly OCed or later this year a GM200 chip?

    What do you guys think?

    I will never do multi GPU systems again after having a single gpu with high end water cooling (best thing ever!), so you don't have to account for extra cpu power for future multi gpuing.

    The games I play currently:
    Planetside 2
    Warthunder
    Dark age of camelot
    Chivalry

    Have no issues performing well on this current rig, but I will be playing throughout the Star Citizen alpha+beta and in that game using cry engine 3 I feel I lack on the GPU side, and maybe even on the CPU side of things.
     
  2. IcE

    IcE Don Snow

    Messages:
    10,693
    Likes Received:
    79
    GPU:
    3070Ti FE
    You'll definitely see some nice gains in Planetside 2 if you upgrade, especially to X99.
     
  3. Sneakers

    Sneakers Guest

    Messages:
    2,716
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Gigabyte 980Ti Windforce
    Really?

    I never really had any issues with PS2 performance though.

    Havn't played it since summer now but iirc fps were 50-80, worst being around 40ish or so in massive fights, but still gpu bound at 99% utilization.

    This is at 1200p maxed settings.

    Only time I can remember being cpu bound in PS2 was during early beta times, but back then AMD cpus crawled around at 10-15 fps were Intel had 35+ at worst times.


    Just curious, as to were this ~7 yo processor lays in terms of gaming performance.

    4.5 ghz is still quite a respectable clock, and the core performance is relatively high, for a single gpu setup.

    You know of any database or site that still keeps older i7s in the loop for their benchmarks?
     
  4. CPC_RedDawn

    CPC_RedDawn Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    10,390
    Likes Received:
    3,064
    GPU:
    PNY RTX4090
    I went from an i7 960 D0 4.2GHz to my i7 4770K and had a HD7970 at the time.

    With the 4770K @ stock it was still faster than my i7 960 @ 4.2GHz minimum frame rates went up by around 10fps in a lot of games.

    Overall smoothness improved too. I got PCIE 3.0, USB 3.0, and SATA 3.0 without spending more money for a newer X58 board which would only give me USB 3.0

    The cost of upgrading to the Z87 and a CPU was great. Sure I did have 12GB RAM on the X58 and had to give up 4GB to keep up with dual channel memory but we all know triple channel did nothing for gaming at all.

    My benchmark scores all increased by a substantial amount as well.

    Only thing I wish I had waited a little longer and got a Z97 board so I then have option to upgrade to Broadwell-K as Z87 won't support these new chips.
     

  5. Sneakers

    Sneakers Guest

    Messages:
    2,716
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Gigabyte 980Ti Windforce
    Thanks for the input RC!

    Sounds like a big step then, 10 min fps going from OCed older i7 to unclocked ( boost cpu ) newer model one.

    When looking at benches at tweaktown from 2008-2011 it seems cpus hardly make any diffrence at all for single gpu setups.

    Guess maybe I will hold off and upgrade the whole system once the GM200 chips start landing. Always felt awkward pairing different gen hardware anyway :)
     
  6. snip3r_3

    snip3r_3 Guest

    Messages:
    2,981
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    1070
    I came from a i7 950 @ around 3.8.

    The difference is massive. In BF3/4, the minimum FPS increased drastically, even with the same 7950. I barely go below 70 (75 cap), and even then, it'll be due to the GPU. Before, I was heavily CPU bound (CPU was usually maxed in multiplayer) and couldn't stream or record without taking another 10-20FPS hit, now I can record with basically negligible loss.

    While I don't really play the games you listed, you'll definitely be starting to hit some limits after more "next-gen" intensive games get released. Star Citizens seems to be either poorly optimized for DX11 or just has massive CPU bottlenecks from what I've seen in its increases with Mantle and DX12 preview vs DX11.

    PCIE 2.0 16X for one card is more than enough for a long time. I doubt you'll see anything more than 1-2% difference even with a 980. I remember seeing some scaling benchmarks and it doesn't really matter until you go below 3.0 4x / 2.0 8x / 1.0 16x. USB 3.0 and SATA6 however, are nice upgrades. You might want to wait just a tad more though since boards with 3.1 are just coming out, might as well since you don't have performance issues just yet.

    I do miss the 950 as a heater though, X58 was a very hot platform and could warm my room during cold winter days :) But seriously, X58 was one of the most future proof platforms that I ever had, hopefully X99 would prove the same.
     
  7. BLEH!

    BLEH! Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,401
    Likes Received:
    418
    GPU:
    Sapphire Fury
    I'm working on something to answer this question, bear with me.
     
  8. fantaskarsef

    fantaskarsef Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    15,636
    Likes Received:
    9,512
    GPU:
    4090@H2O
    I'm not benching or gaming already, but I'm fairly sure my X99 rig will wipe the floor with my 950 / 580 rig. It's about minimal fps...
     
  9. BLEH!

    BLEH! Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,401
    Likes Received:
    418
    GPU:
    Sapphire Fury
    If anyone has anything they'd like me to bench, let me know.
     
  10. fantaskarsef

    fantaskarsef Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    15,636
    Likes Received:
    9,512
    GPU:
    4090@H2O
    hehe what? you got all the hardware? :D

    I've just put my things together, and that's just on air, will put my 5930k / x99 and 980 strix sli under water eventually.
     

  11. Sneakers

    Sneakers Guest

    Messages:
    2,716
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Gigabyte 980Ti Windforce
    Hey BLEH, you putting up a comparison benchmark test?


    Would be cool to see CPU heavy games on single gpu old i7 vs new i5/i7?

    If you have access to Star citizen I wouldn't mind some 'benching' in that, even though the alpha state of the game currently lacks a "fixed benchmark" tool.


    As others already mentioned the X58 sys has been a really good platform for many years, probably the best ever released by Intel (so far), 7 years down the road and it still works well, imo.

    I am kinda looking for the next X58 sys in terms of tech leap from previous gen (remember c2q to i7 was a HUGE leap back then).

    I think Star citizen will eventually require a GM200 chip to run its graphics really well so a next gen cpu will most likely be needed to pair it.
     
  12. darrensimmons

    darrensimmons Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,690
    Likes Received:
    98
    GPU:
    ZOTAC RTX4090AMPEXT
    Went from i7 920 @4.3 to 3770k @4.6 and wow...massive gains :)
     
  13. Sneakers

    Sneakers Guest

    Messages:
    2,716
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Gigabyte 980Ti Windforce
    Did you test the move from i7 920 to i7 3770 with the same gpu setup or did you switch gpu aswell?

    Also did you SLI on the i7 920 as well?
     
  14. BLEH!

    BLEH! Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,401
    Likes Received:
    418
    GPU:
    Sapphire Fury
    More gunna see how well X58 still scales with clock speed, RAM speed, etc. I know I've got a slight advantage having 6 cores but I can turn 2 of them off to simulate a 4-core i7 from the first gen. THere's very little in it as far as IPC goes, otherwise.
     
  15. signex

    signex Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,045
    Likes Received:
    297
    GPU:
    RTX 2080 Ti
    There was a guy on a forum who benched i7 4770k with my i7 860, and FPS difference was pretty minimal.

    Though i don't think he tried it vs BF3/BF4.

    I'm pretty sure in CPU heavy games there is a big difference.
     

  16. -Tj-

    -Tj- Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    18,095
    Likes Received:
    2,601
    GPU:
    3080TI iChill Black
    @Sneakers

    I have some old tests with 580gtx in it, we can compare in 3-4cpu bound benchmarks if you want, :nerd:


    All tests are at either 4.6 or 4.7ghz..

    X3TC, very single threaded cripple
    RE5 benchmark, dx9 720p, noaa, rest high., jobthread =8

    *gpu 900mhz, cpu 4.7ghz,
    Variable
    [​IMG] [​IMG]
    Fixed
    [​IMG]




    LP2 - Test B, dx9, 720p, noaa, rest high. Jobthread=8 in cfg ini file
    [​IMG]


    FFXIV reborn, highly OC'ed 570

    720p
    [​IMG]

    1080p
    [​IMG]


    Batman AO, all enabled, physx , except fxaa.
    [​IMG]


    Sleeping dogs, cfg in benchmark
    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2015
  17. snip3r_3

    snip3r_3 Guest

    Messages:
    2,981
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    1070
    I think this is because most users typically max out the GPU on any platform. The main difference lies with CPU intensive games like you said, and in minimum FPS.

    I think the largest IPC gains were from Nehalem to Sandy Bridge. SB had a vastly better memory controller and around 10-20% IPC gains over Nehalem. My roomate's 2500K @ stock with a 560ti ran SC2 much better than my 950 @ 3.8 with a 670.

    I believe X58 didn't scale much with double->triple channel, nor did clock speeds really affect it. The same is true for X79 and X99, memory makes negligible difference in most non-synthetic applications, and only occasionally in pro/server applications.
     
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2015
  18. darrensimmons

    darrensimmons Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,690
    Likes Received:
    98
    GPU:
    ZOTAC RTX4090AMPEXT
    Yes, just changed cpu/mobo with same cards and it really was a huge difference especially in games like bf3/bf4. It was sli that I noticed the biggest difference. Massive gains in planetside 2 also.
     
  19. Sneakers

    Sneakers Guest

    Messages:
    2,716
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Gigabyte 980Ti Windforce
    I have been googling around a bit to try and find anecdotes from various forums about people running 4ghz+ i7 900 series coupled with a single 980 GTX and even in BF4 64 player server people are reporting frames far above what could be considered a "performance damaging" cpu bottleneck.

    https://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf3/forum/threadview/2979150493819202668/

    Going through this little thread reports fps of 60-70+ minimum FPS using 780 GTXs, and albeit the 980 is a faster card, 64 player is very CPU demanding and pushing 60-70 min FPS seems 'good enough' to me?

    What you guys think? Have you possibly exaggerated the impact your brand new shinys have had on your min fps?
     
  20. snip3r_3

    snip3r_3 Guest

    Messages:
    2,981
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    1070
    Nope, I had dips into 40s plenty of times in heavy combat. I get flawless 60 in Metro/Locker (other than when in snow) though. I have the drawfps command always up, and a dip to 40s is very noticeable. I will say the 6 cores should be fine, but a quad core would have some trouble. Most of my graphic settings are High with no MSAA/Scaling/AO. GPU usage usually hovers around 60-70%. Currently capped at 75 (I capped at 60 when using the i7 950).

    It was actually the dips that made me want to upgrade.
     
    Last edited: Feb 11, 2015

Share This Page