Intel Devil's Canyon: Core i7-4790K CPU Review

By Steve · 42 replies
Jun 24, 2014
Post New Reply
  1. misor likes this.
  2. theBest11778

    theBest11778 TS Addict Posts: 296   +125

    At the same clock speeds what're the temperature differences between the 4770K and the 4790K? I'm wondering if they really went back to the Sandybridge TIM (Solder,) or are using something else inferior. At this point it seems Intel is content with forgetting about OC on their budget platforms, and focusing on forcing people to the more expensive X79, soon to be X99, platform.
  3. Arris

    Arris TS Evangelist Posts: 4,731   +379

    Still nothing to encourage me to upgrade from my i7 2600k @ 4.7Ghz.
  4. Burty117

    Burty117 TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 3,150   +916

    I have a 4770K and it looks like it'll be around for another year before they release anything in a reasonable price bracket that beats it's performance a reasonable amount. My old 2600K (clocked up to 5GHz on a H100i) is still going very strong and the only difference performance wise I've found is how quickly Handbrake transcodes videos.
    Julio Franco and Jad Chaar like this.
  5. hellokitty[hk]

    hellokitty[hk] Hello, nice to meet you! Posts: 3,448   +145

    Could you test the TIM? That's the only tangible difference between the older generation, aside from stock clocks. Everyone already knows the performance of this processor the TIM is the only thing that's really different; it's the only thing that warrants a review.

    BTW when that intel representative said it should be able to reach 5ghz on air, they were actually using nitrogen vapor "air".
  6. VitalyT

    VitalyT Russ-Puss Posts: 3,671   +1,961

    TechSpot gave the lowest rating to both i7-4770K and i7-4790K amid everybody else who reviewed it.

    In the meantime, i7-4770K has been the best selling CPU ever.

    Whatever grudge TechSpot got with these CPU, it seems biased. i7-4770K has been the best CPU out there for a while now, it should have rating of 100, and not the measly 80.

    On NewEgg it's still is the Customer Choice Award Winner.
  7. Mieksr

    Mieksr TS Enthusiast Posts: 42   +8

    I'd rather just have them remove the graphics core from the chip. No real gamer uses that.
  8. VitalyT

    VitalyT Russ-Puss Posts: 3,671   +1,961

    Not only it does no harm, but it is perfect non-game PC-s. So why would Intel remove it? It makes no sense.
  9. You could use the space for other things, like extra transistor and cores that would increase CPU power. With same price you can get 4820k that does it and performs better than 4770k.
    Yeah, would be cool to see more options to go without integrated graphics, and maybe less cost..
  10. Steve

    Steve TechSpot Editor Topic Starter Posts: 2,869   +2,039

    A rating of 100 … really? I can’t wait to read your review if ours was biased. So often honesty is mistaken for prejudice, ahh well can’t please them all.

    Has it been the best-selling CPU ever or the best-selling Core i7 CPU or maybe just the best Core i7 Haswell CPU.

    Finally since when was a score of 80 out of 100 a bad score? We listed the reasons why we gave such a score in the conclusion and there is even a cons and pros section. Furthermore I am not sure how many reviews you have read but there are some more negative than ours.

    Well I'll be damned give it 100!
    GhostRyder likes this.
  11. Mieksr

    Mieksr TS Enthusiast Posts: 42   +8

    Replace it with more cores
  12. Steve

    Steve TechSpot Editor Topic Starter Posts: 2,869   +2,039

    But they have, it's called "Ivy Bridge-E".
  13. yRaz

    yRaz Nigerian Prince Posts: 2,340   +1,438

    One game I would have loved to see included in the tests is planetside 2. I have a 24/7 overclock on my 3770k of 4.6ghz and that game still gives it a run for it's money. However, I see no justifiable reason to upgrade from my 3770k. Heres to hoping the 5770k is a good bit faster.
  14. You didn't give enough info about temps !
    you could have run the new chip together with the old one at the same low clocks something like 3.6-4.0
    and see the temp difference there in idle and load
  15. Steve

    Steve TechSpot Editor Topic Starter Posts: 2,869   +2,039

    I agree, though please be aware we only got the processor the day of the release giving us very little time to get the article ready, as it was we spent 24 hours non-stop at it. Also as I mentioned for testing we only have an engineering sample of the 4770K and 4790K so I am not even sure how useful those results would be. Temps aside the overclocking results from around the Internet are now in and there is nothing unusual about our findings.

    You are right that is a seriously demanding game for the CPU. We have tried testing with Planetside 2 in the past but the very thing that makes it so demanding makes it virtually impossible to get accurate results with (loads of players).

    Certainly no need to swap out the 3770K yet and I also hope the 5770K makes a better case for that!
  16. cliffordcooley

    cliffordcooley TS Guardian Fighter Posts: 9,747   +3,712

    Even though I have a 2600K myself, this statement is getting a bit old. I'm almost wishing for the encouragement you are referring to.
    Arris likes this.
  17. yRaz

    yRaz Nigerian Prince Posts: 2,340   +1,438

    I usually upgrade every three generations, he has another good two years left in his 2600k. Especially depending on the games he plays. Newer games just aren't that CPU demanding. They keep finding ways to offload more work to the graphics card making a fast CPU less important.
    Arris likes this.
  18. Arris

    Arris TS Evangelist Posts: 4,731   +379

    I know, new shiny things are tempting, but the performance increase in games and applications isn't worth the cost and effort for me anyway.
  19. amstech

    amstech IT Overlord Posts: 1,936   +1,101

    I will upgrade when it makes sense. Still NO reason to upgrade from my i7 930 @ 4.0Ghz 24/7 for my resolution (1600p) when talking games. Only a 6 core / 12 thread CPU would even be worth it and even then game programming always seems to be years behind.
    You fools can keep upgrading every generation or two and pretend it's worth it, its only money right?
  20. the rate Intel is going, it'll be a 7770k or perhaps a 8770k? oO
  21. yRaz

    yRaz Nigerian Prince Posts: 2,340   +1,438

    it's not like AMD is giving them much reason to innovate. IIRC, Intel has what they call tick/tock cycles. One being a new architecture and the other being slight improvements on the previous architecture. I think this is one of their tock cycles improving on the previous generation. The 5770k will be a new architecture.
  22. Jad Chaar

    Jad Chaar Elite Techno Geek Posts: 6,515   +974

    Great review @Steve. I have a comment about the Photoshop benchmark though: it might be best to use Photoshop CC since it has numerous engine improvements over CS6. It may lead to more accurate/realistic/up-to-date benchmarks.

    Overall it looks like a nice chip, I think Intel has squeezed a lot out of 4 cores. It is time for more cores :D.
  23. GhostRyder

    GhostRyder This guy again... Posts: 2,198   +593

    Great review @Steve, enjoyed seeing your tests on the 4790K. Its very disappointing to see this chip was all hype since it seems to clock exactly the same as the 4770k but at a slightly lower temp. I have not seen some reviewer yet hit 5ghz on the chip on liquid let alone air so im a little sad because this seemed like we were about to see something truly special with this chip.

    I look forward to seeing the review of the 5930k and X99 because thats where I am headed :)
  24. yRaz

    yRaz Nigerian Prince Posts: 2,340   +1,438

    there aren't enough multi threaded applications that can take advantage of multiple cores. Intel's hyper threading is good enough. Neither Intel or AMD have a true 8core CPU, although AMD's version is closer than Intel's. AMD is a prime example that more cores does not equal faster.
  25. Jad Chaar

    Jad Chaar Elite Techno Geek Posts: 6,515   +974

    That is true but it will happen since it will be better to market more cores. Some people just look at cores and think, "wow, this has twice as many cores. It must be 2x as fast!"

Similar Topics

Add your comment to this article

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...