3770K vs 3770S

vbimport

#1

Other than overclock capability, there are really performance differences between these two processors at stock frequencies?

If I’m not wrong, the S version is lesser power consuming (65W vs 77W).

Both processors have the 4000 HD graphic so they should have the same performance with quick sync.

Is the K version really worth the higher price? At 65W it should also be easier to cool the CPU.

@Dee: Can you say me approximately how much more performance do you get overclocking the 3770K compared to the stock values? 10% faster maybe?


#2

The 3770K is clocked at 3.5GHz with turbo 2 up to 3.9GHz (stock)
The 3770S is clocked at 3.1GHz with turbo 2 up to 3.9GHz (stock) which probably accounts for its lower TDP of 65W

HD4000 is the same on both CPU’s but you can also overclock the GPU on 3770K

I haven’t run many benchmarks yet, but here is Cinebench with the 3770K at stock (5th entry)
The 3rd entry is the 3770K clocked to 4.4GHz.

The 3770K doesn’t get hot at stock speeds, and even the Intel cooler supplied will keep it reasonably cool, but a third party cooler will do better, and be quieter.
I think you have an Arctic Freezer 13?
If so, that would do nicely at stock speeds on the 3770S, and would probably allow an overclock on the 3770K up to about 4.2 GHz.



#3

Thanks a lot [B]Dee[/B] :flower:

I didn’t know that the graphic card could be overclocked too :doh:


#4

[QUOTE=geno888;2633820]Thanks a lot [B]Dee[/B] :flower:

I didn’t know that the graphic card could be overclocked too :doh:[/QUOTE]Yep, on the K CPU the HD4000 can also be overclocked. I have mine at 1.5GHz at the moment, the stock frequency is around 1.1GHz.


#5

Can you run quick sync tests to compare stock and overclock? :flower:


#6

[QUOTE=geno888;2633829]Can you run quick sync tests to compare stock and overclock? :flower:[/QUOTE]I will. :wink:
But it will take some time, as I have a growing todo list.


#7

I’m looking forward :smiley:


#8

I don’t think the S version is worth getting if you want to save power. Money would be better spent on an efficient PSU.


#9

[QUOTE=eric93se;2633889]I don’t think the S version is worth getting if you want to save power. Money would be better spent on an efficient PSU.[/QUOTE]

Actually power saving was not the reason why I asked :slight_smile:

At the moment it seems that the S version is the only one easily found in local stores, and it also has a slightly lower price (that is welcome by my wallet :bigsmile: )

BTW, I think that when (and IF) I’ll be able to afford a new machine, the K version will be widely available in local stores too :slight_smile:


#10

Ya’know Ivory Bridge isn’t much of a step above Sandy bridge. If there are good deals on SB with a good Z77 MB in your area you might want to consider it.


#11

I’m looking forward for [B]Dee[/B]'s tests to get a real idea of performance :bigsmile:


#12

[QUOTE=geno888;2633968]I’m looking forward for [B]Dee[/B]'s tests to get a real idea of performance :bigsmile:[/QUOTE]Here is just a quick test.

Using an 8GB video, converted to MPEG4 1080P

I’m comparing Sandy Bridge to Ivy Bridge.

SB is a 2600K clocked to 4.4GHz
Ivy is a 3770K clocked to 4.4GHz

I used Cyberlinks Media Espresso for the conversion, as it supports Intel Quick Sync
SB = Quick Sync 1
IB = Quick Sync 2

Pic 1 is Sandy Bridge
Pic 2 is Ivy Bridge




#13

Amazing!!! :eek:

Thanks a lot [B]Dee[/B] :slight_smile:


#14

As a comparison
Here is another result, this time only using the CPU cores, with Quick Sync switched off

It states it still has about 1 hour 32 minutes to go. To long for me to wait. :slight_smile:



#15

Definitely amazing!!!

I want that CPU :sad:


#16

Why bother encoding prepackaged optical video media at all when you can download it?
Unless the video is Hi-DEF home videos or something personal like this-- mega processors don’t really have a killer desktop app these days. Can you think of many other uses for 4ghz o/c 6-12 core processors?


#17

[QUOTE=tmc8080;2633983]Why bother encoding prepackaged optical video media at all when you can download it?[/quote]Not everyone has a fast Internet connection. I can rip and encode a BD movie faster than I could download one. Plus I may want to watch a movie more than once, and I’d prefer to do that without having to pay for a second download.

Unless the video is Hi-DEF home videos or something personal like this-- mega processors don’t really have a killer desktop app these days. Can you think of many other uses for 4ghz o/c 6-12 core processors?
I can think of many applications that can take advantage of a fast multicore CPU.

Video encoding
3D modelling and rendering
Photoshop, and other complex graphic manipulation.
Folding

In any case.
Folks should first choose the application they want to use, then buy the hardware to suit.


#18

[QUOTE=tmc8080;2633983]Why bother encoding prepackaged optical video media at all when you can download it?
Unless the video is Hi-DEF home videos or something personal like this-- mega processors don’t really have a killer desktop app these days. Can you think of many other uses for 4ghz o/c 6-12 core processors?[/QUOTE]
These things are not available in my zone, and if someday will become available I’m afraid to think about prices… Italy is a nightmare for these things :Z

Moreover, internet connections are so unstable here that watching a movie in streaming is almost impossible :doh:

[QUOTE=Dee;2634001]Not everyone has a fast Internet connection.[/QUOTE]

Me not for sure :sad: At the moment the speed of my connection is pretty the same of an old 56k analog modem :doh:

I hope that on Monday someone will fix it :a


#19

Thank you to Dee for the analysis and opinons! Very helpful.


#20

Thank you Dee for analysis. It help me to determine the hardware. :slight_smile: