We are faced with the offer of intel for the highest range, the i7 4930K. Many seek to assemble a gaming kit at the lowest possible cost. For them we analyzed the Pentium G3258, the inexpensive option from intel for users who want a competent processor, with a good overclocking margin, and at a very competitive price. Now we have to see that it has intel at the other end of its catalog. If we recently analyzed the new i7 4790K, in this case we are faced with the i7 4930K, an Ivy Bridge architecture microprocessor, the previous iteration of Intel, manufactured at 22nm and with 6 cores.

The distribution of the die is identical to that of the 4960X:

We are facing a chip compatible with socket 2011 boards (X79 chipset), without integrated graphics (totally understandable given the range it is aimed at) and a price of around € 500 in most Spanish online stores.

Technical characteristics

i7-4930k in detail

We see the classic packaging from Intel, we notice that they have used their already typical blue color scheme in the box, since it is not an Extreme Edition processor, but the highest of its usual line.

Since it is a processor intended for powerful teams and enthusiastic users, they have kept the option that they started with their Sandy Bridge-E, that is, they do not include a basic heatsink with the processor, but leave the cooling to the user's choice. A change of course more than welcome, since in equipment of this range, the heatsink of stock tended to be an unnecessary expense that ended up not being used. The external appearance of the processor does not differ from the rest of the 2011 socket processors, with a really large die for what is usual to see in consumer processors (specifically we talk about 257 mm² that makes even a 980X look small), with 2011 contacts in its back:

The processor we are analyzing is a model that has been mounted for some time, and has been sanded with very fine-grain sandpaper to improve contact with the heatsink. In this series the cores are soldered to the IHS, so the delid would be counterproductive, and all the small performance gains possible through better contact with the heatsink go through polishing the IHS and the heatsink base, there are no other possibilities. Needless to say, this process voids our processor's warranty.

As we anticipated at the beginning of this review, we are faced with a 6-core processor with hyperthreading technology (that is, it appears before the OS as 12 process threads), with support for 4 channels of DDR3 memory (compared to 2 of the platforms socket 1150/1155), a whopping 40 lanes PCI Express 3.0 (vs. 16 + 4 for smaller sockets) and Ivy Bridge architecture.

It should be noted that with these processors we finally have official support for pciexpress 3.0, although in general with the vast majority of boards and chips, it was possible to enable it with processors of the previous generation without too much problem.

This particular processor is probably the option that most justifies the jump from mid / high range sockets to this enthusiastic platform, since the 4960X doubles the price with very few improvements, only beating the processor in question for 3Mb of L3 cache, and an irrelevant 100mhz frequency that can easily be supplied with overclocking (apart from a bineo, a priori, slightly more demanding, which does not have to translate into final overclocking capacity). Its younger brother, the 4820K, also has it quite complicated to show itself as a good option not only before it, but before socket 1150 processors such as the new 4790K, since it does not provide anything in terms of multi-thread power (since they are both 4-core processors) and forces us to jump to a generally more expensive platform. We should note that the support for quad channel memory and the pciexpress lanes do not give an appreciable advantage in the normal use of a computer, not even in games, except if perhaps top-of-the-range multigpu configurations for which we should also opt for the more powerful processor possible (and if not, we always have z97 boards with PLX bridge switches that give very good gaming performance even with 4 graphics cards).

Although used to the 70-90W of TDP in which most processors move, the consumption of the 4930K may seem in the high range a priori, it is a processor with a fairly contained consumption for the power it has, significantly improving the consumption compared to its predecessor, the already efficient i7 3930K, while also increasing its power very slightly to both 1-thread and multithreading.

As in its predecessors, we can see in the datasheet of this family of processors that some of Intel's recommendations are slightly relaxed, for example, the maximum allowable voltage for memory rises from 1.65V to 1.85V, and official support is given to RAM memories of up to 1866mhz (although it is a really conservative value, and even the first sandy ones do not usually have problems with memories that exceed 2000mhz, even with the weakest BMIs)

Testing equipment and performance tests

TESTING BENCH
Processor:	Intel i7 4930k
Base plate:	Asus Rampage IV Extreme
Memory:	G.Skills Trident X 2400mhz.
Heatsink	Liquid refrigeration
HDD	Samsumg EVO 250GB
Graphic card	2 x PNY GTX680
Power supply	Seasonic Platinum 1000w

Synthetic tests

We start the benchmark stack with a multi-threaded test that is an excellent representative of the overall performance of the CPU / RAM suite, the well-known Cinebench, based on Maxon's Cinema 4D software.

As we expected this is one of the most favorable scenarios to take advantage of a large number of cores, therefore the i7 4930K is the processor that tops the top of the table. The 4790K withstands the pull very well with its 4 cores, partly thanks to the high frequencies with which it already starts from stock. In summary, if we are going to devote ourselves to multithreading, image rendering, video editing, the 4930K is the way to go.

In the 7-zip benchmark we also see high performance values. This test uses the LZMA compression algorithm, and is also a benchmark that makes the most of all available threads, also being a true reflection of the performance that we can expect by compressing and decompressing files with any modern software. It should be noted that WinRar, although in its previous versions it was also limited to 1-2 cores, right now follows the same trend.

Games Tests

3DMark is probably the best when it comes to evaluating a team's gaming performance at a glance. It is a synthetic test, and as such it is not exempt from a certain controversy about its objectivity, but it is clear that it is a very good indicator of what we can expect from a team. We have used the Fire Strike test, which is the most comparable to the demands of the latest generation titles.

As we expected, it is the performance of the graph that is most decisive here. Even with an i5, the overall result would not have suffered too much. However, you can see a really good scaling in the result of physics, where a processor like the i7 4930K does stand out with the authority of cheaper options. Based on the results with and without overclocking, we see that for the calculation of physics, apart from the recommendation of the 6 cores that we just mentioned, there is very good frequency scaling, indicating that we would need even more powerful processors to squeeze these options. That, or technologies that take advantage of how well graphs defend themselves with calculations on large data sets, as nVidia is doing with its PhysX.

In real games, we see that the trend seen in 3DMark is maintained: The bottleneck in high-end equipment is still the graphic power. Even with an SLI of two quite powerful graphics, in these two titles in particular we can see how overclocking the processor provides very little gain to both the medium and minimum FPS (not listed), and we have a performance similar to what we would have in a socket 1150 platform.

We note that this is not the case for all titles, since in Crysis 3, or in the larger multiplayer maps of Battlefield 4, there is a very clear gain with processors with more cores, and a processor as powerful and popular as it is the i5 2500K can reach 100% use depending on which cases. At the moment, these cases are a minority, but it is expected that in the coming years the exception will become the norm, and it is increasingly common to see games in which the processors with more AMD cores outperform the pentium g3258, which is now It is itself a brutal value / price for an inexpensive gaming team and shows better results in many titles.

WE RECOMMEND AMD Athlon 200GE vs Intel Pentium G5400

Consumption and temperatures

As always with the most powerful processors, we expect to see consumption values in the highest range of the tables. However, let's see what the 22nm manufacturing process has brought at this point.

The values in load are the expected ones, perhaps somewhat lower, since it is usual that the TDP specified by the manufacturer is passed with margin in unrealistic tests such as the one we have used to load the processor 100%: Linpack (for through the IntelBurnTest program). What is surprising is to see a processor like the one in question consuming such a low amount with active C-states. The advantages of offset overclocking are evident here, making a really good result very slightly worse.

Overclocking, of course, brings a considerable increase in consumption. The loss in efficiency is not as severe as it might seem, since although the processor consumes more electricity, it also performs more operations at the same time, completing the same task in slightly less time than without overclocking.

The temperatures are very good, although it is a somewhat unfair assessment, since with a liquid circuit it is difficult to find a processor that has bad temperatures. I certainly expected more from a processor with the cores welded to the IHS and manufactured at 22nm. It can be said that, apart from a few advantages, the tri-gate distribution system of the intel transistors slows down the dissipation of the heat of the processor, and apart from the thermal adhesive, many are the ones that attribute part of the increase in temperature that this cause has been observed from Sandy Bridge. We will see how Broadwell behaves in this regard, and if, thanks to the improvements in the manufacturing process and consumption, we see processors in which 60º at full load is the norm and not the exception.

conclusion

The Intel Core i7 4930K is currently the second most powerful processor that can be mounted on a home computer, and without a doubt, given the price of its older brother the 4960X, the smart purchase for users who need multithreaded power in quantity, either for video editing, rendering, or the most demanding games that are optimized for it (such as, for example, Crysis 3).

We are not dealing with a cheap processor, but it is a safe bet to not have to update the computer components in a long time. Its biggest drawback is that it is really difficult to justify its acquisition if we already have an i7 3930K, which is likely if we had opted for this socket in the first place. The improvements compared to its predecessors are few, hovering around 10% extra power at best, there is only one clear leap to better in terms of consumption and energy efficiency (and the VT-x instruction support, which it lacked the C1 revision of the 3930K, this may be another of the few reasons to upgrade.)

In case of assembling a new equipment oriented to very demanding tasks, or updating an x79 platform in which we have a quad core, it is not only a good option, it is practically the only one in this range, the most powerful AMD alternatives compete in a much lower league (although we must say that they are also cheaper), and the alternatives of intel on socket 1150 are limited by having two less cores, although they have other advantages, such as consumption, power to 1 thread or the graph integrated.

ADVANTAGE	DISADVANTAGES
+ VERY GOOD PERFORMANCE, AS MULTI-WIRE AS 1 THREAD	- LITTLE IMPROVEMENTS ABOUT ITS PREDECESSORS THAT JUSTIFY THE UPDATE
+ WELDED CORES TO THE IHS, TO IMPROVE TEMPERATURES AND FACILITATE OVERCLOCK	- THE X79 PLATFORM ACCUSES AGE, THE Z87 / Z97 MID-RANGE CHIPSETS ARE MUCH MORE COMPLETE (6 SATA3 NATIVES, USB3…)
+ OVERCLOCK CAPACITY, SUPPORT FOR MULTIPLE BCLK AND UNLOCKED MULTIPLIER	- PRICE ABOUT 500 €, WITH HASWELL-E AROUND THE CORNER
+ MEASURED CONSUMPTION FOR THE POWER OF THE PROCESSOR. CONSUMPTION IN LOW IDLE.