Forum Thread

What's a good upgrade from 980x?

mydecember1985 722 138 February 20, 2016 at 07:47 AM
I've been out of the PC components game for a few years and lost track of what was leading the way. I'd really like to keep it under $1000 for CPU, MB, and RAM.
I'm set on GPUs and already have a PSU, so really its just those components.

The problem is that I can't really find many benchmarks that include the 980x because it's an "old"er chip. I know it smokes any i5 and half the i7 chips currently in production. But which chips really pull ahead of it?

In that price range, will I see a noticeable jump in performance? Or should I just keep the current setup for the next ~2 years til something really new break through?

Current:
I7-980x @ 3.7
P6X58D-E
12GB

Built late 2010 with several GPU upgrades since.

I do some moderate gaming, but our baby has pulled my attention away from that. The only reason I need the horsepower is for the 780s in SLI and frequent video encoding.

Thanks for any feedback

7 Comments

1

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

#2
Quote from mydecember1985 View Post :
I've been out of the PC components game for a few years and lost track of what was leading the way. I'd really like to keep it under $1000 for CPU, MB, and RAM.
I'm set on GPUs and already have a PSU, so really its just those components.

The problem is that I can't really find many benchmarks that include the 980x because it's an "old"er chip. I know it smokes any i5 and half the i7 chips currently in production. But which chips really pull ahead of it?

In that price range, will I see a noticeable jump in performance? Or should I just keep the current setup for the next ~2 years til something really new break through?

Current:
I7-980x @ 3.7
P6X58D-E
12GB

Built late 2010 with several GPU upgrades since.

I do some moderate gaming, but our baby has pulled my attention away from that. The only reason I need the horsepower is for the 780s in SLI and frequent video encoding.

Thanks for any feedback
If you haven't seen it, Anandtech has a few benchmarks in common between the two and conveniently one is x264: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/pr...42?vs=1543

It's a noticeable improvement, but not night and day. Honestly I think the biggest improvement would likely be around power and heat going from a 130W TDP to 91W with considerably better idle power usage, but they don't have those stats.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Joined Oct 2008
Why are you looking here?
722 Posts
138 Reputation
Original Poster
#3
I know that PCI-E lanes is of minor concern. It has 28?? lanes though, so would this be an issue if need to have USB3 front ports for the possibility of Occulus support? Already, I'd be dragging my cards down to 8x (which has little effect on gaming, I know), but can have major effects on customization if chose to install a PCIe SSD or something.
I think that CPU is geared toward single card builds.

Quote from quotidian View Post :
If you haven't seen it, Anandtech has a few benchmarks in common between the two and conveniently one is x264: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/pr...42?vs=1543

It's a noticeable improvement, but not night and day. Honestly I think the biggest improvement would likely be around power and heat going from a 130W TDP to 91W with considerably better idle power usage, but they don't have those stats.
see above
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Last edited by mydecember1985 February 20, 2016 at 08:51 AM
Polk TSi300 x2 = $103ea
Polk VM10 x4 = $80ea
Polk R50 x4 = $78ea
Polk CS10 = $72
Boston Acoustic HPS10SE x2 = $85 ea
Premier Acoustic PA-120 x4 = ~180ea
Infinity TSS Sat1200 x8 = $19ea
Behringer EP4000 = $115 (used)
Having 5.1 for your computer, both bedrooms, 7.4 in the living room, and 7000+ watts RMS = Priceless Whee
Screw what the wife EX says, it's never loud enough! Annoyed
#4
Quote from mydecember1985 View Post :
I know that PCI-E lanes is of minor concern. It has 28?? lanes though, so would this be an issue if need to have USB3 front ports for the possibility of Occulus support? Already, I'd be dragging my cards down to 8x (which has little effect on gaming, I know), but can have major effects on customization if chose to install a PCIe SSD or something.
I think that CPU is geared toward single card builds.
2x8 PCI-E lanes for graphics still leaves you with 12 lanes for everything else. A PCI-E ssd mostly only uses 4 lanes, so I don't think you've limited yourself too greatly. I should add that I don't really know anything about the Oculus or its requirements.

That said, there might be some disconnect on what you and I consider "moderate gaming" Smilie

If you want 40 PCI-E lanes, you're left with the Haswell-E so far as I know. The 5930K fits within your budget, but I'm not sure it's enough of an upgrade to justify the price: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/pr...316?vs=142.

If I were going to spend $1K on new MB/CPU/RAM, I think I'd want more than a 50% improvement for my primary use case.

Edit: FYI, I've been reading that the 6700K only has 20 pci-e lanes, which would constrain you a bit further. There's also the 5820K with 28.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Last edited by quotidian February 20, 2016 at 10:29 AM
Joined Oct 2008
Why are you looking here?
722 Posts
138 Reputation
Original Poster
#5
Quote from quotidian View Post :

Edit: FYI, I've been reading that the 6700K only has 20 pci-e lanes, which would constrain you a bit further. There's also the 5820K with 28.
Exactly. That's why I was questioning if it was feasible. It's been something like 3 generations+ since the 980x which is usually indicative of a decent gain, at least concerning GPUs generations.
I briefly checked out a few reviews showing that a very high-clocked quadcore could outperform it solidly in gaming (particularly in SLI), but still seemed barely faster in encodes since it loses 2 cores.

I was looking at only 10-25% gains, tops. Does this look to be your opinion?
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
#6
Quote from mydecember1985 View Post :
Exactly. That's why I was questioning if it was feasible. It's been something like 3 generations+ since the 980x which is usually indicative of a decent gain, at least concerning GPUs generations.
I briefly checked out a few reviews showing that a very high-clocked quadcore could outperform it solidly in gaming (particularly in SLI), but still seemed barely faster in encodes since it loses 2 cores.

I was looking at only 10-25% gains, tops. Does this look to be your opinion?
I don't have any great answers. Intel really hasn't had competition at the high end in years, so the last few generations haven't been much of an improvement. Mostly I just wanted to point you to an encoding benchmark comparison, since you mentioned having trouble finding one. I'd agree that a highly clocked quad core is nearly always going to beat a lower clocked 6-core CPU for gaming.

Without a ton of benchmarks, it's hard to get a good feel. The 6700K seems to be about 50% faster on the first pass of an x264 encode, but only 20% faster on the 2nd pass.

The 5820K and 5930K are 6C chips, and look to be maybe 30 and 40% faster for x264 on both passes respectively. Gaming benchmarks seem to be harder to come by, since reviewers were using completely different GPUs and games back then.

If I were you, I'd probably sit tight until Intel or AMD does something interesting at the high end.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
#7
I would look at the PCGamer [pcgamer.com]recommendations before making any firm decisions.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Joined Oct 2008
Why are you looking here?
722 Posts
138 Reputation
Original Poster
#8
Quote from quotidian View Post :
I don't have any great answers. Intel really hasn't had competition at the high end in years, so the last few generations haven't been much of an improvement. Mostly I just wanted to point you to an encoding benchmark comparison, since you mentioned having trouble finding one. I'd agree that a highly clocked quad core is nearly always going to beat a lower clocked 6-core CPU for gaming.

Without a ton of benchmarks, it's hard to get a good feel. The 6700K seems to be about 50% faster on the first pass of an x264 encode, but only 20% faster on the 2nd pass.

The 5820K and 5930K are 6C chips, and look to be maybe 30 and 40% faster for x264 on both passes respectively. Gaming benchmarks seem to be harder to come by, since reviewers were using completely different GPUs and games back then.

If I were you, I'd probably sit tight until Intel or AMD does something interesting at the high end.
Well I usually do CQ encodes anyways, so it's already fairly fast. Ripbot 264 usually encodes CQ 22 at around 38-40FPS @ 720P. So it's fairly quick.
Like you say, HEAT. The P6X58 has ZERO space between the cards. I'm looking to get more room and lower heat output. I play modded skyrim or something... The bottom 780 is chillin at low 60s but the top is tapping the thermal threshold at 79 and rolling the clocks back. The CPU is great, no complaints, but I was looking at hopefully a 30% increase and breathing room for more gaming.
I will just chill out for a while. Maybe next tax season, I'll go crazy. I'm selling a lot of my records on eBay this summer/fall, so I'll definitely have the $ to play with
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Page 1 of 1
1
Join the Conversation
Add a Comment
 
Copyright 1999 - 2016. Slickdeals, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Copyright / Infringement Policy  •  Privacy Policy  •  Terms of Service  •  Acceptable Use Policy (Rules)  •  Interest-Based Ads
Link Copied to Clipboard