i7 4790k from a i5 4590

[MoltenFrost2021]

Is this even a worthy upgrade to make? The speed increase from 3.3 to up to 4.7 is nice but will it really matter besides an extra 10 frames here and there?

The 4790k are expensive as hell right now compared to the 4590, why is that? High demand for the lga 1150 socket?

[MarioTwins]

I had a i7 870 overclocked to 4ghz

[Revelene]

If you can find one at a decent price, sure. The 4790K is a wonderful cpu. Devil's Canyon. Made for overclocking. Keeps up with the latest fairly well. I personally still have one in my main gaming PC. Just can't see a reason to replace it, when it just does so well.

The problem with you upgrading from the 4590 is that you'll most likely be on a non-overclockable motherboard. This just makes the upgrade that much more expensive and more than likely just not worth it, over upgrading to a newer platform.

Older hardware can sometimes be expensive, due to supply. Since it is no longer available, DDR3 is still widely used, and it is the best DDR3 platform CPU available... Yeah, it'll have some mark up. And Intel products are just usually like this. Looking up some other older cpus and you'll see similar high prices.

[MarioTwins]

I overclocked mine to 4.8 (tried for 5ghz but was unstable and I wasn’t comfortable adding more voltage then I was at)
My motherboard boosts all cores to 4.4 by default. So I guess it is technically overclocked to 4.4.

I only saw a difference in benchmarks from 4.4 to 4.8

I tested a few games bf1 and pubg were 2 of them
And saw zero performance increase.


When I did my i7 870 to 4ghz it was a huge difference.

I’m glad I upgraded to my 4790k
But I am still running it at 4.4 for now

I may fine tune my 4.8 overclock one day. But for now don’t see the point.

Revelene님이 먼저 게시:

If you can find one at a decent price, sure. The 4790K is a wonderful cpu. Devil's Canyon. Made for overclocking. Keeps up with the latest fairly well. I personally still have one in my main gaming PC. Just can't see a reason to replace it, when it just does so well.

The problem with you upgrading from the 4590 is that you'll most likely be on a non-overclockable motherboard. This just makes the upgrade that much more expensive and more than likely just not worth it, over upgrading to a newer platform.

Older hardware can sometimes be expensive, due to supply. Since it is no longer available, DDR3 is still widely used, and it is the best DDR3 platform CPU available... Yeah, it'll have some mark up. And Intel products are just usually like this. Looking up some other older cpus and you'll see similar high prices.

[TehSpoopyKitteh]

IMHO, yes it's worth it. If it doesn't come with a cooler, and you have enough space for it, I'd really recommend a good cheap fan-based cooler like the one here might help you achieve the 4.7GHz OC that you want to achieve.

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/j4HN3F

That little sucker allows me to OC my Core i7-6700K to 5.0Ghz at 70°C from 4.0GHz on the default clock...the boost clock adds 200MHz...

Disclaimer: OC abilities are highly dependent on the motherboard. The motherboard I own is the one on that parts list. If the motherboard has a Z or X Intel Chipset as opposed to B, H, or Q. You'll be good to go with B H and Q chipsets even without the OC to 4.7Ghz.

Be aware of cable management as well. Proper ventilation is key to having a healthy, nearly dustbunny-free system....that and the screen's they use in lint traps (sorry...tangent ;-) ).

In short, yes...it's worth it. Just be aware of other factors like power consumption. You should be OK though because the i7-4790K is still a beast ;-)

[MarioTwins]

I have a dark rock pro 3 on it.
And I was at 1.320 volts for 4.8 (still working my way back. But I think hats close to where till be)
Maybe I will reapply my OC and use it for a bit

[Revelene]

MarioTwins님이 먼저 게시:

I overclocked mine to 4.8 (tried for 5ghz but was unstable and I wasn’t comfortable adding more voltage then I was at)
My motherboard boosts all cores to 4.4 by default. So I guess it is technically overclocked to 4.4.

I only saw a difference in benchmarks from 4.4 to 4.8

I tested a few games bf1 and pubg were 2 of them
And saw zero performance increase.


When I did my i7 870 to 4ghz it was a huge difference.

I’m glad I upgraded to my 4790k
But I am still running it at 4.4 for now

I may fine tune my 4.8 overclock one day. But for now don’t see the point.

You shouldn't be looking at a frame rate counter for cpu performance increases.

It helps with overall performance, especially in more cpu intensive applications. Typically helps more with the lowest/highest frame, rather than the average. For high refresh rate monitor users, a beefy cpu clocked high definitely helps.

Not overclocking on an overclockable cpu is basically a waste. Might as well have got the locked version if you're going to run at stock clocks.

[MarioTwins]

Might reapply the OC and see how it goes.

I did go through the effort to delid the sucker too. Haha
So I’ve done all the necessary steps for a high OC

[Revelene]

MarioTwins님이 먼저 게시:

Might reapply the OC and see how it goes.

I did go through the effort to delid the sucker too. Haha
So I’ve done all the necessary steps for a high OC

You should!

I've given thought about delidding and replacing the terrible TIM they used, but I'm surprised at how even my temps are across all cores even with the terrible TIM.

Good luck with the OC! Hit that big 5.0

[MarioTwins]

It gets hot still.
I was at 1.41 volts. When I tried for 5 and stopped there
I’m currently at 1.315 for 4.8 (testing)

What are your temps ?
If I run prime “max heat” I will still reach the 90s at 4.8. But at 4:4 it’s about 70-75

The prime95 blend test. It hits about 75-80 at 4.8

Revelene님이 먼저 게시:

MarioTwins님이 먼저 게시:

Might reapply the OC and see how it goes.

I did go through the effort to delid the sucker too. Haha
So I’ve done all the necessary steps for a high OC

You should!

I've given thought about delidding and replacing the terrible TIM they used, but I'm surprised at how even my temps are across all cores even with the terrible TIM.

Good luck with the OC! Hit that big 5.0

[Revelene]

MarioTwins님이 먼저 게시:

It gets hot still.
I was at 1.41 volts. When I tried for 5 and stopped there
I’m currently at 1.315 for 4.8 (testing)

What are your temps ?
If I run prime “max heat” I will still reach the 90s at 4.8. But at 4:4 it’s about 70-75

The prime95 blend test. It hits about 75-80 at 4.8

I don't use Prime95. It is a bit excessive, even for a stress test. It hits too many of the hardest hitting instructions at once, which would never happen in normal usage.

I use AIDA64, but it isn't free. There is a free trial, though.

I believe my max temp during a 24 hour stress test on AIDA64 was around 70 something. With Prime95, it would give me temps 10c or more at times. Prime95 was very inconsistent for me.

[MarioTwins]

I’ll use prime for now (been using it for like 10 years lol)
I’m at 1.305 volts now for 4.8
Crashed at 1.3 so I’m close

Then I’ll log my bios settings. Then might try for 5ghz

I finally figured out adaptive voltage on this thing. So using that. And confirming voltages with cpuz

We kinda hijacked this thread so may start posting in my other thread

My updates now will be in the thread titled “finally going for it”

Sorry for the highjack

[Revelene]

MarioTwins님이 먼저 게시:

I’ll use prime for now (been using it for like 10 years lol)
I’m at 1.305 volts now for 4.8
Crashed at 1.3 so I’m close

Then I’ll log my bios settings. Then might try for 5ghz

I finally figured out adaptive voltage on this thing. So using that. And confirming voltages with cpuz

We kinda hijacked this thread so may start posting in my other thread

We kinda did lol oops

Well, if anything, this shows the OP the potential of this CPU.

As long as he doesn't have to spend a bunch, the upgrade would be viable. But if he has to upgrade the motherboard as well, possibly even an aftermarket cooler... Then he'll definitely be better off spending that money on a newer platform.

[Big Boom Boom]

For Prime95 do not uses version higher than 26.6 for Intel from 2nd and higher (or was it 3rd gen).

Prime95 is entirely correct, Aida64 normal stress is low for actual meaningful temp test. If you run AIDA64 FPU only then it's just overestimate temp for the same reason like Prime95 over v26.6.

I find Prime95 v < 26.6 blend test very accurate. I get the same temp playing Warhammer or using handbrake. Aida64 not so much.

[MarioTwins]

Correct. I use an older version of prime. Newer versions will over volt the cpu. Same with ibt

[Revelene]

Big Boom Boom님이 먼저 게시:

For Prime95 do not uses version higher than 26.6 for Intel from 2nd and higher (or was it 3rd gen).

Prime95 is entirely correct, Aida64 normal stress is low for actual meaningful temp test. If you run AIDA64 FPU only then it's just overestimate temp for the same reason like Prime95 over v26.6.

I find Prime95 v < 26.6 blend test very accurate. I get the same temp playing Warhammer or using handbrake. Aida64 not so much.

I'd rather use an up to date program that I'm familiar with and know how to use. Been using AIDA, both personally and professionally, for many years and have yet to get an undesirable result.

Don't get me wrong, Prime95 is a great free application. But many seems to believe it to be the only app capable of a proper stress test... And that is just not true.

Yes, you did need to use an older version for Haswell, but I believe that has long since been patched. The problem I have with it is that it has multiple tests, with little to no explanation of what they do. This does not help the average gamer just trying to make a simple overclock for gaming. Certain test runs unnecessary instructions at the same time, which would never happen in real world usage, leading to a false failed stress test in certain situations. To a gamer, these certain tests are overly excessive for their system use case. That was my point, not necessarily about the temp.