CPU speed difference

[Hyxgen]

Is there a noticeable difference between CPU clock speeds of 3.1 and 3.5 Ghz?

[Agent]

It's purely situational. Web, Word, Playing videos....no.

Encoding, Rendering, HPC stuff....maybe, depending on what you're doing.

Ghz speed isn't a measurement of power anyway. If you're comparing different chips from different ranges (or manufacturers), then the clock speed is not directly comparable as a source of performance.

Why don't you tell us all the details and we can help more?
What are you planning to do with the system? What chips exactly are you considering? Is cost an issue?

[Zak33]

Hyxgen..you've asked the right question and got the right man(Agent) to reply...

mine him for all the information you need...

concise accurate questions best with Agent... ask him....and he knows LOTS!

[kalniel]

Presume this is a continuation of your buying advise thread here:
http://forums.hexus.net/review-my-bu...-thoughts.html

In which case, the answer is the same as already given there really - it depends what you save/give up by going for a different CPU. If your tasks are CPU limited for the most part and they improve with going for a higher clocked CPU then that's a good use of money. But if you have to go for a slower GPU to get a faster CPU and you are primarily gaming then it's a bad idea.

[One2zerojigawat]

Presume this is a continuation of your buying advise thread here:

In which case, the answer is the same as already given there really - it depends what you save/give up by going for a different CPU. If your tasks are CPU limited for the most part and they improve with going for a higher clocked CPU then that's a good use of money. But if you have to go for a slower GPU to get a faster CPU and you are primarily gaming then it's a bad idea.

I like the way you think!

[Hyxgen]

Presume this is a continuation of your buying advise thread here:
http://forums.hexus.net/review-my-bu...-thoughts.html

In which case, the answer is the same as already given there really - it depends what you save/give up by going for a different CPU. If your tasks are CPU limited for the most part and they improve with going for a higher clocked CPU then that's a good use of money. But if you have to go for a slower GPU to get a faster CPU and you are primarily gaming then it's a bad idea.

Yes, this is for the CPU going in my rig. I just wanted to clarify on what would be best for it.

My GPU is high end, no worries there .

It's purely situational. Web, Word, Playing videos....no.

Encoding, Rendering, HPC stuff....maybe, depending on what you're doing.

Ghz speed isn't a measurement of power anyway. If you're comparing different chips from different ranges (or manufacturers), then the clock speed is not directly comparable as a source of performance.

Why don't you tell us all the details and we can help more?
What are you planning to do with the system? What chips exactly are you considering? Is cost an issue?

I'm mostly going to be doing gaming and rendering, but still a considerate amount of video playing, web surfing, and documenting. The games I play tend to usually just use 1-2 cores, and using the other 2 I will multitask. Maximum I'm willing to spend on a CPU right now is £160. And all the chips are from Intel, so comparison can be done.

Also, my GPU is pretty high end, and I want to be certain the CPU doesn't bottleneck it. I might be a bit too careful knowing, but I want to be 100% sure.

And I won't be overclocking.

[kalniel]

Also, my GPU is pretty high end, and I want to be certain the CPU doesn't bottleneck it. I might be a bit too careful knowing, but I want to be 100% sure.

If you're talking about the one from that thread, then no, the CPU (i5-4570, 3.6ghz) won't bottleneck the GPU.

[Hyxgen]

If you're talking about the one from that thread, then no, the CPU (i5-4570, 3.6ghz) won't bottleneck the GPU.

It's 3.2, but the thing is, there 5 CPUs, all with 100Mhz +/-. There is also a £35 difference between the fastest (4690 3.5) and the slowest (4440 3.1). Should I go for cost, speed, or balance?

[kalniel]

It's 3.2

Give the usage you described then it'll be running at 3.6ghz most of the time. It'll only be 3.2 if you fully load all of the cores and disable the motherboard options to run all cores at 3.6 anyway.

but the thing is, there 5 CPUs, all with 100Mhz +/-. There is also a £35 difference between the fastest (4690 3.5) and the slowest (4440 3.1). Should I go for cost, speed, or balance?

It's 3.9ghz and 3.3 really, and likewise, the onchip GPUs increase in speed through the range as well. But yes, there's little difference and it's more for systems builders to be able to offer a range at different price points.

But it's back to the point everyone has been making time and time again, can you spend the money elsewhere to improve the system? If no, then by all means go for the faster CPU. A 600mhz increase won't make any difference in terms of bottlenecking except for a very narrow window of opportunity some time in the future which will probably be completely missing by any game. But you might notice a fraction of a second's speed here and there, and rendering etc. will be done a touch quicker.

[Hyxgen]

Give the usage you described then it'll be running at 3.6ghz most of the time. It'll only be 3.2 if you fully load all of the cores and disable the motherboard options to run all cores at 3.6 anyway.

It's 3.9ghz and 3.3 really, and likewise, the onchip GPUs increase in speed through the range as well. But yes, there's little difference and it's more for systems builders to be able to offer a range at different price points.

But it's back to the point everyone has been making time and time again, can you spend the money elsewhere to improve the system? If no, then by all means go for the faster CPU. A 600mhz increase won't make any difference in terms of bottlenecking except for a very narrow window of opportunity some time in the future which will probably be completely missing by any game. But you might notice a fraction of a second's speed here and there, and rendering etc. will be done a touch quicker.

Alright, that gives me all the information I need. Cheers