Intel Core i5-4460 vs. Intel Core i5-4690K Specs & Speed
| Product | Core i5-4460 | Core i5-4690K |
| Brand | Intel | Intel |
| Street Price (Approx) | ~ $180 Search low Core i5-4460 price (Amazon) |
~ $315 Search low Core i5-4690K price (Amazon) |
| # CPU Cores | 4 | 4 |
| Frequency (GHz) | 3.2 GHz | 3.5 GHz |
| Cache (MB) | 6 | 6 |
| TDP (Watts) | 84 W | 88 W |
| Product Segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Status | Released | Released |
| Announced On | 2014-03-01 | 2014-03-01 |
| Technicals | Core i5-4460 | Core i5-4690K |
| Dimensions (2D) | 37. |
37.5×37.5 mm |
| Conflict Free? | 1 | 1 |
| # CPU Cores | 4 | 4 |
| Threads/Core | 4 | 4 |
| Frequency (GHz) | 3.2 GHz | 3.5 GHz |
| Turbo Frequency (GHz) | 3.4 GHz | 3.9 GHz |
| Cache (MB) | 6 | 6 |
| Instructions Width (bits) | 64 | 64 |
| Instructions Extensions | SSE4.1/4.2, AVX 2.0 | SSE4.1/4.2, AVX 2.0 |
| Lithography Process (nm) | 22 nm | 22 nm |
| TDP (Watts) | 84 W | 88 W |
| Max RAM | 32 GB | 32 GB |
| RAM Types | DDR3-1333/1600, DDR3L-1333/1600 @ 1.5V | DDR3-1333/1600, DDR3L-1333/1600 @ 1.5V |
| # Memory Channels | 2 | 2 |
| Memory Bandwidth (GB/Sec) | 25.6GB/s | 25.6GB/s |
| Max CPU / Package | 1 | 1 |
| PCI-E Version | 3 | 3 |
| PCI-E Configurations | Up to 1×16, 2×8, 1×8+2×4 | Up to 1×16, 2×8, 1×8+2×4 |
| PCI-E Max Lanes # | 16 | 16 |
| Compatible Sockets | FCLGA1150 | FCLGA1150 |
| Intel Turbo Boost Version | 2 | 2 |
| Intel V-Pro | No | No |
| Intel Hyper-Thread | No | No |
| Intel Virtualization (VTX) | Yes | Yes |
| Intel Directed I/O (VTD) | Yes | Yes |
Intel Ext. Page Tables (EPT) |
Yes | Yes |
| Intel TSX Sync. Extensions | No | No |
| Intel 64 | Yes | Yes |
| Intel MyWiFi | Yes | Yes |
| Idle States | Yes | Yes |
| Thermal MonitoringTech. | Yes | Yes |
| Intel ID Protect | Yes | Yes |
| Intel SIPP | No | No |
| Intel SMB Advantage | Yes | |
| Intel AES New Instructions | Yes | Yes |
| Intel Secure Key | Yes | Yes |
| Intel OS Guard | Yes | Yes |
| Trusted Execution | No | No |
| Execution Disable | Yes | Yes |
Intel Core i5-4460 vs. Intel Core i5-4690K Specs & Speed Benchmarks
Intel Core i5-4460 vs. Intel Core i5-4690K Specs & Speed Benchmarks
Geekbench 4 Multi
Higher is better
Geekbench 4 Single
Higher is better
Memory Bandwidth (GB/Sec)
Higher is better
Geekbench 4 Multi / Price (Market)
Higher is better
Intel Core i5-4460 vs Intel Core i5-4690K Benchmarks, Specs, Performance Comparison and Differences
|
|
|
|
|
Intel Core i5-4460 vs Intel Core i5-4690K
Comparison of the technical characteristics between the processors, with the Intel Core i5-4460 on one side and the Intel Core i5-4690K on the other side.
The first is dedicated to the desktop sector, It has 4 cores, 4 threads, a maximum frequency of 3,4GHz. The second is used on the desktop segment, it has a total of 4 cores, 4 threads, its turbo frequency is set to 3,9 GHz. The following table also compares the lithography, the number of transistors (if indicated), the amount of cache memory, the maximum RAM memory capacity, the type of memory accepted, the release date, the maximum number of PCIe lanes, the values obtained in Geekbench 4 and Cinebench R15.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above.
This page contains references to products from one or more of our advertisers. We may receive compensation when you click on links to those products. For an explanation of our advertising policy, please visit this page.
Specification comparison:
| Processor | Intel Core i5-4460 | Intel Core i5-4690K | ||||||
| Market (main) | Desktop | Desktop | ||||||
| ISA | x86-64 (64 bit) | x86-64 (64 bit) | ||||||
| Microarchitecture | Haswell | Haswell | ||||||
| Core name | Haswell-DT | Devil’s Canyon | ||||||
| Family | Core i5-4000 | Core i5-4000 | ||||||
| Part number(s), S-Spec |
BX80646I54460, |
BXC80646I54690, |
||||||
| Release date | Q2 2014 | Q2 2014 | ||||||
| Lithography | 22 nm | 22 nm | ||||||
| Transistors | 1. 400.000.000 |
1.400.000.000 | ||||||
| Cores | 4 | 4 | ||||||
| Threads | 4 | 4 | ||||||
| Base frequency | 3,2 GHz | 3,5 GHz | ||||||
| Turbo frequency | 3,4 GHz | 3,9 GHz | ||||||
| Bus speed | 5 GT/s | 5 GT/s | ||||||
| Cache memory | 6 MB | 6 MB | ||||||
| Max memory capacity | 32 GB | 32 GB | ||||||
| Memory types |
DDR3-1333/1600, |
DDR3-1333/1600, |
||||||
| Max # of memory channels | 2 | 2 | ||||||
| Max memory bandwidth | 25,6 GB/s | 25,6 GB/s | ||||||
| Max PCIe lanes | 16 | 16 | ||||||
| TDP | 84 W | 88 W | ||||||
| Suggested PSU | 600W ATX Power Supply | 600W ATX Power Supply | ||||||
| GPU integrated graphics | Intel HD Graphics 4600 | Intel HD Graphics 4600 | ||||||
| GPU execution units | 20 | 20 | ||||||
| GPU shading units | 160 | 160 | ||||||
| GPU base clock | 350 MHz | 350 MHz | ||||||
| GPU boost clock | 1100 MHz | 1200 MHz | ||||||
| GPU FP32 floating point | 352 GFLOPS | 352 GFLOPS | ||||||
| Socket | LGA1150 | LGA1150 | ||||||
| Compatible motherboard | Socket LGA 1150 Motherboard | Socket LGA 1150 Motherboard | ||||||
| Maximum temperature | 72. 7°C |
72.7°C | ||||||
| CPU-Z single thread | 337 | 485 | ||||||
| CPU-Z multi thread | 1.364 | 1.923 | ||||||
| Cinebench R15 single thread | 125 | 157 | ||||||
| Cinebench R15 multi-thread | 453 | 603 | ||||||
| Cinebench R20 single thread | 309 | 368 | ||||||
| Cinebench R20 multi-thread | 1.158 | 1.415 | ||||||
| Cinebench R23 single thread | 840 | 1.086 | ||||||
| Cinebench R23 multi-thread | 3. 093 |
4.243 | ||||||
| PassMark single thread | 1.886 | 2.186 | ||||||
| PassMark CPU Mark | 4.785 | 5.593 | ||||||
| (Windows 64-bit) Geekbench 4 single core |
3.713 | 4.891 | ||||||
| (Windows 64-bit) Geekbench 4 multi-core |
10.533 | 14.236 | ||||||
| (SGEMM) GFLOPS performance |
202,1 GFLOPS | 268,9 GFLOPS | ||||||
| (Multi-core / watt performance) Performance / watt ratio |
125 pts / W | 162 pts / W | ||||||
| Amazon | ||||||||
| eBay |
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above.
We can better compare what are the technical differences between the two processors.
Suggested PSU: We assume that we have An ATX computer case, a high end graphics card, 16GB RAM, a 512GB SSD, a 1TB HDD hard drive, a Blu-Ray drive. We will have to rely on a more powerful power supply if we want to have several graphics cards, several monitors, more memory, etc.
Price: For technical reasons, we cannot currently display a price less than 24 hours, or a real-time price. This is why we prefer for the moment not to show a price. You should refer to the respective online stores for the latest price, as well as availability.
We see that the two processors have an equivalent number of cores, the turbo frequency of Intel Core i5-4690K is bigger, that the PDT of Intel Core i5-4460 is lower. Both were produced in the same year.
Performance comparison with the benchmarks:
Performance comparison between the two processors, for this we consider the results generated on benchmark software such as Geekbench 4.
| CPU-Z — Multi-thread & single thread score | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core i5-4690K |
485 1.923 |
| Intel Core i5-4460 |
337 1.364 |
In single core, the difference is 44%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 41%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
CPU-Z is a system information software that provides the name of the processor, its model number, the codename, the cache levels, the package, the process. It can also gives data about the mainboard, the memory. It makes real time measurement, with finally a benchmark for the single thread, as well as for the multi thread.
| Cinebench R15 — Multi-thread & single thread score | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core i5-4690K |
157 603 |
| Intel Core i5-4460 |
125 453 |
In single core, the difference is 26%.
In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 33%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
Cinebench R15 evaluates the performance of CPU calculations by restoring a photorealistic 3D scene. The scene has 2,000 objects, 300,000 polygons, uses sharp and fuzzy reflections, bright areas, shadows, procedural shaders, antialiasing, and so on. The faster the rendering of the scene is created, the more powerful the PC is, with a high number of points.
| Cinebench R20 — Multi-thread & single thread score | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core i5-4690K |
368 1.415 |
| Intel Core i5-4460 |
309 1.158 |
In single core, the difference is 19%.
In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 22%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
Cinebench R20 is a multi-platform test software which allows to evaluate the hardware capacities of a device such as a computer, a tablet, a server. This version of Cinebench takes into account recent developments in processors with multiple cores and the latest improvements in rendering techniques. The evaluation is ultimately even more relevant.
| Cinebench R23 — Multi-thread & single thread score | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core i5-4690K |
1.086 4.243 |
| Intel Core i5-4460 |
840 3.093 |
In single core, the difference is 29%.
In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 37%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
Cinebench R23 is cross-platform testing software that allows you to assess the hardware capabilities of a device such as a computer, tablet, server. This version of Cinebench takes into account recent developments in processors with multiple cores and the latest improvements in rendering techniques. The evaluation is ultimately even more relevant. The test scene contains no less than 2,000 objects and more than 300,000 polygons in total.
| PassMark — CPU Mark & single thread | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core i5-4690K |
2.186 5.593 |
| Intel Core i5-4460 |
1.886 4.  785 |
In single core, the difference is 16%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 17%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
PassMark is a benchmarking software that performs several performance tests including prime numbers, integers, floating point, compression, physics, extended instructions, encoding, sorting. The higher the score is, the higher is the device capacity.
On Windows 64-bit:
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Windows 64-bit | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core i5-4690K |
4.891 14.236 |
| Intel Core i5-4460 |
3.713 10.533 |
In single core, the difference is 32%.
In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 35%.
On Linux 64-bit:
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Linux 64-bit | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core i5-4690K |
5.030 13.222 |
| Intel Core i5-4460 |
3.461 8.426 |
In single core, the difference is 45%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 57%.
On Android 64-bit:
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Android 64-bit | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core i5-4690K |
4.085 11.380 |
| Intel Core i5-4460 |
3.615 10.215 |
In single core, the difference is 13%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 11%.
On Mac OS X 64-bit:
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Mac OS X 64-bit | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core i5-4690K |
4.642 13.652 |
| Intel Core i5-4460 |
3.942 11.200 |
In single core, the difference is 18%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 22%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
Geekbench 4 is a complete benchmark platform with several types of tests, including data compression, images, AES encryption, SQL encoding, HTML, PDF file rendering, matrix computation, Fast Fourier Transform, 3D object simulation, photo editing, memory testing. This allows us to better visualize the respective power of these devices.
For each result, we took an average of 250 values on the famous benchmark software.
Equivalence:
Intel Core i5-4460 AMD equivalentIntel Core i5-4690K AMD equivalent
See also:
Intel Core i5-4460SIntel Core i5-4460T
Intel Core i5-4690Intel Core i5-4690S
inexpensive retro monster for GECID.com games.
::>Processors
>2022
> Test Intel Core i5-4460 vs. Core i5-4690K: an inexpensive retro monster for games This time we will understand how the frequency of the cores affects the quad-core Haswell processors from 7 years ago. There are quite a lot of them on the used market, which may make someone think — or maybe buy a PC on the LGA1150 or assemble a cheap system from scratch yourself? So let’s compare the Core i5-4460, which does not have overclocking, with the Core i5-4690K, to which we will raise the frequencies. Will he become a gaming retro monster after that? Let’s find out on the example of heavy benchmarks and live games, where these processors will converge side by side.
You can find such stones on the cheap, and even with a big guarantee, from our friends tera-flops.com.ua. By the way, here is another joint hardware to fully assemble a retro PC from proven and tested components.
Processor introduction
- Intel Core i5 4430 — 3.0 GHz (up to 3.2 GHz), 4 cores, 4 threads, L3 cache=6MB, TDP 84W, Intel HD Graphics 4600
- Intel Core i5 4440 — 3.1GHz (up to 3.3GHz), 4 cores, 4 threads, L3 cache=6MB, TDP 84W, Intel HD Graphics 4600
- Intel Core i5 4460 — 3.2 GHz (up to 3.4 GHz), 4 cores, 4 threads, L3 cache = 6 MB, TDP 84 W, Intel HD Graphics 4600
- Intel Core i5 4570 — 3.2 GHz (up to 3.6 GHz), 4 cores, 4 threads, L3 cache=6 MB, TDP 84 W, Intel HD Graphics 4600
- Intel Core i5 4590 — 3.3GHz (up to 3.7GHz), 4 cores, 4 threads, L3 cache=6MB, TDP 84W, Intel HD Graphics 4600
- Intel Core i5 4670 — 3.4GHz (up to 3.8GHz), 4 cores, 4 threads, L3 cache=6MB, TDP 84W, Intel HD Graphics 4600
- Intel Core i5 4670K — 3.
4GHz (up to 3.8GHz), 4 cores, 4 threads, L3 cache=6MB, TDP 84W, Intel HD Graphics 4600 - Intel Core i5 4690 — 3.5 GHz (up to 3.9 GHz), 4 cores, 4 threads, L3 cache=6 MB, TDP 84 W, Intel HD Graphics 4600
- Intel Core i5 4690K — 3.5 GHz (up to 3.9 GHz), 4 cores, 4 threads, L3 cache=6 MB, TDP 84 W, Intel HD Graphics 4600
So, what is interesting about the Core i5-4690K, unlike the same Core i5-4460? If you look again at the list of CPUs with dry characteristics, then it seems to be nothing. There are 4 cores in 4 threads, 6 MB L3 cache, support for DDR3 RAM at the recommended frequency of 1600 MHz and PCIe version 3.0 for the video card. The only difference is that the Core i5-4460 does not support overclocking and operates at a maximum frequency of up to 3.4 GHz. And the Core i5-4690K boosts up to 3.9 GHz, which is 500 MHz more. This is where some of the differences between the older Haswell are revealed.
Intel updated this line in every possible way — it released Haswell Refresh with slightly increased frequencies and models code-named Intel Devil’s Canyon: Core i5-4690K and Core i7-4790K.
Their feature is optimization for overclocking. Under the lid, they have the best thermal interface, plus the power circuit has been optimized. So they should be a little colder than the same Core i5-4670K and it is better to take high frequencies.
We will check all this a little further, plus we will overclock the RAM and see what maximum increase we can squeeze out. But first of all, let’s get acquainted with the test system.
Under what conditions tested
The motherboard is just for overclocking — ASRock Z97 Extreme6. Supports memory acceleration up to 3200 MHz, the processor is powered by a powerful 12-phase scheme.
Will cool the CPU three-section liquid cooling system Be quiet! Pure Loop 2FX 360mm. It is interesting for the double isolation of the PWM pump, which gives quiet operation and a minimum of vibrations. The latter, among other things, are reduced by damping the pump, that is, the forced damping of unwanted vibrations.
RAM was chosen by our favorite G.Skill Trident X DDR3-2400 — 2 modules of 8 GB each. In the stock state of the processors, it worked at a frequency of 1600 MHz.
The most powerful video card in the radius of the planet Earth was taken — ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 3090 Ti OC Edition, so that the processors do not rest against anything. Among other things, it has excellent cooling with Axial-tech fans — the central one spins in the opposite direction to reduce air turbulence.
The operating system, benchmarks and a small part of the game were installed on a 512 GB Kingston KC600. It is made using 3D TLC NAND technology and features support for a comprehensive security package that includes 256-bit hardware encryption.
The main pool of games was launched from a 960 GB Kingston A400. Read and write speeds for drives in the region of 500 MB / s.
The power supply was paired with the video card and for potential overclocking of the top processors of the LGA1150 platform — 850-watt Seasonic Prime PX-850.
This is one of the best blocks for high-performance systems due to the high voltage accuracy — for all three lines the discrepancy is no more than half a percent.
All hardware is housed in a well-ventilated Cougar MX660 Mesh RGB case.
A full-length power supply cover that hides the cables allows for a very neat design of the system. To make it pleasing to the eye through a massive tempered glass panel. In addition, instead of coarse screws, neat metal frames are used here, with which the glass is attached.
Overclocking Core i5-4690K
Let’s start with the most delicious — overclocking the older processor. For this we:
- Set core multiplier to x46;
- Activated the XMP profile of the RAM, which overclocked it to a frequency of 2400 MHz;
- And fixed the CPU voltage at around 1.35 V;
- And also switched to the second level of CPU Load Line Calibration.
After that, the Core i5-4690K worked stably at 4600 MHz or +18% bonus.
We got the same speed when we drove this processor in 2014 — a normal, stable result for the masses.
The temperature rose by only 9°C, from 53°C to 62°C. So this Haswell is chasing great and almost free. Even under air cooling of some medium tower, you can and should try to get additional megahertz.
However, it should be taken into account that complex and deep overclocking of the system with an increase in the memory frequency can only be produced on motherboards based on the Z87 and Z97 chipsets. For younger H81, B85, Q85 and others, the CPU and RAM itself will operate at standard frequencies, which will provide a slightly lower result.
Comparison in synthetics and games
First, let’s compare test processors with modern analogs. Based on Cinebench, we see that the Core i5-4460 is slightly better than the 6-core AMD FX-6300, which we also recently tested. However, somewhere twice as weak as the Ryzen 3 3100.
But the Core i5-4690K, especially after overclocking, leaves the «young» AMD FX-8350 far behind the 8-core idol and almost catches up with the Core i3-10100. We like the first impression. Now let’s go to compare the heroes of the review among themselves in more detail.
In 3DMark Time Spy, the stock 500 MHz difference at max clock gave the Core i5-4690K a 13% CPU Score advantage. And after overclocking, its lead increased to 41%!
Approximately the same difference in CPU-Z: between stock CPUs — 15% -16%, and compared to overclocked — 37-42%.
The PCMark 10 complex benchmark turned out to be the least sensitive to the increase in frequency. Without overclocking, the difference between the brothers is only 8-10%, and after raising the frequency of the older one, together with the acceleration of the RAM, the result improved to 22-28%.
Considering all workload simulation options, there is an average of 9% difference between processors at factory frequency.
In this scenario, the Core i5-4690K has a 500 MHz or 15% bonus, which is weakly correlated with the benchmark results. Therefore, if overclocking is not planned, then there is not much difference for work tasks — you can take any i5 of the 4000 series from those you find.
Well, if the motherboard has a good multi-phase power supply with heatsinks on the VRM and other system components are not opposed to overclocking, it is better to opt for an older processor.
After increasing the frequencies, it is 22% better than itself in stock. And 33% superior to the ability of the Core i5-4460.
Now it’s interesting to see how the 1200 MHz difference will boost games.
Assassin’s Creed Valhalla tested on ultra-high graphics settings. In this case, both processors at 200 MHz fall short of the declared 3400 MHz and 3900 MHz, respectively. But after overclocking, the senior stably holds the Core i5-4600, thus creating an abyss between the participants at 1.
4 GHz. But, despite this, the problem with loading assets and blunts has not disappeared. Even with an «overclocked» CPU, the benchmark sometimes stops completely for a second. You can treat this drawback by limiting the frame rate using vertical synchronization — this will reduce the load on the processor. As for the results, without overclocking, the advantage of the Core i5-4690K is not significant, but with it — we have from 28% to 56%!
Cyberpunk 2077 launched at maximum settings, but without ray tracing. At the standard frequencies of both processors, the benchmark passed with fairly good smoothness. Only at the end there were twitches in large open locations, but it didn’t come to critical subsidence. Resetting the graphics quality to the minimum values did not particularly affect the result. At the same time, the difference between the processors is only 5-11%. But after overclocking the older one, the frame rate jumps by 35-42% compared to the younger one.
That busy scene is now much smoother, a net benefit of the 1.5GHz boost.
Benchmark Far Cry 6 was also run with maximum image quality and without rays. In stock, both processors provide good average frame rates — 53 and 59 fps. But very rare events hang around 20. In principle, for an offline game, this is not bad, if you do not pay attention to small dullness. There were hopes that the acceleration of 4 Haswell cores would make the gameplay much cooler, but no. Only the average frequency has grown strongly — by 47% compared to the processor without the K index, and very rare events have remained at the level of 24th. Lowering the graphics settings will help improve the situation somewhat.
In Forza Horizon 5 , you can even set extreme settings. It looks like 4 cores with 7 years of age is more or less enough for this game. There were no problems with loading assets. Of the minuses, only slight twitching of the video sequence with both processors, including when the older one was overclocked.
By the way, in stock the difference between the «pebbles» is 11-25%, and after acceleration — 43-59%.
And finally, the hardest benchmark Total War Saga: Troy with ultra graphics. Simulation of historical idiocy, from which lessons have not yet been learned, showed a good level of power for both processors. But of course, there are problems with smoothness. At the factory frequency, the performance is very close — the difference is from 6 to 12%, but after overclocking, the Core i5-4690K flies forward by 39% in terms of 0.1% low and by 51% in terms of the average value. Minor slowdowns — this does not completely eradicate, but it makes the video sequence noticeably smoother.
In total, according to the results of all benchmarks, we have from 2 to 11% advantage of the Core i5-4690K while operating at standard frequencies. After overclocking, the older processor overtakes itself by 27-38%, and the younger one by 35-41%.
A very, very good result, which you should definitely use if the rest of the hardware allows.
Core i5-4460 vs Core i5-4690K: 10 live games
Well, we have considered overclocking, now we want to return to the more popular mode of these processors. The guys from Teraflops say that it is the Core i5-469 that is very popular on the used market.0 without index K. Probably from the above-mentioned features of the chipsets. To comprehensively drive such a CPU, you need a board based on Z87 or Z97, and they are quite expensive. People usually take models on lower chipsets and are limited to the usual Core i5-4690 with a maximum frequency of 3.9 GHz.
So let’s see how this option will show itself in 10 live games. And what a bonus the stock 500 MHz will give the difference compared to the Core i5-4460 and are they worth the overpayment.
U Apex Legends at maximum graphics settings, the comparison turned out to be relative, because it was not possible to get on the same maps.
As a result, the Core i5-4460 went to Olympus, and the Core i5-4690K went to Kings Canyon. In any case, both «stones» gave a comfortable gameplay with occasional slight twitches. The average frequency for both was above a hundred fps, and 0.1% Low was not lower than 50.
Battlefield 2042 has only low graphics settings and only hardcore mode for 128 players. Unfortunately, here, too, it was not possible to get on the same cards, but this did not change the general trend. So, it is difficult for both CPUs — there are both minor and more serious slowdowns. Probably, in the future we will write a book «Classification of slowdowns in PC hardware» and will give it to our sponsors. Plus, there is hope for a mode with half the number of soldiers, which theoretically loads processors less.
CoD: Warzone sweetens the tablet a bit with maximum picture quality. With the Core i5-4460, the video sequence lacks smoothness in places.
What is treated with this unfortunate difference of 500 MHz in the case of the Core i5-4690K. He has almost no such problems. Although, if we ignore the comparison and exclude monitoring, so as not to distract, then you can comfortably play with both processors.
Dota 2 improved and tinted to Very High 4 out of 4 graphics mode. Very High 4 out of 4 graphics mode started for Dota 2. Different matches again, and we evaluate the overall picture in live conditions. Both retro beauties can be a bit slow at the start, but this quickly translates into hassle-free smooth gameplay. On average we have 100 fps with very rare events 34-39fps.
Fortnite asked to fight with epic picture settings in the DX12 API. In general, our impressions of the processors are the same — most of the time it is pleasant to play. Unless in the same places there are not critical subfreezes.
If you burn expensive 95th gasoline in Grand Theft Auto V , then only on the maximum graph.
There is no stable 60 fps either on the right or on the left, but it still plays well with both CPUs. But with the older a little better and nicer. And if you measure the passed section of the city with a ruler and photo fixation, then the Core i5-4690k gave about 20% more fps.
The «fragmentation» map in multiplayer Halo Infinite was also made as beautiful and neat as possible. Both test participants give comfortable gameplay with approximately the same frame rate. I don’t want to get bogged down in the little things.
But before PUBG , you still have to find fault. Regular viewers probably already understood why. Processors twitch, which we often see in tests of retro hardware and which is little affected by graphics settings. Although both do not work at full strength, as can be seen from the frequency of the cores and their load. Perhaps, here the matter is already in the subtle matters of the architecture, the lack of the L3 cache, or simply the number of threads.
Fortunately, the older processor feels much better — and the frame rate is higher and the jambs in the video sequence come out less often.
Red Dead Redemption 2 and ultra graphics, all in the same 1080p. And there and there it is played relatively comfortably. But the younger Core i5-4460 demonstrates that it is more difficult for him than his older brother, which sometimes manifests itself in drawdowns and slowdowns. The Core i5-4690K just smiles silently — it has much fewer such problems.
And finally, the eternal beauty game — Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six: Siege . There are no questions here and there can be no — we start, we twist the picture to the maximum, if the video card allows, and we run with an average frequency of 200 fps and drawdowns — above 100. It’s even nice to say it.
Conclusions
What is the result? Does it make sense to chase higher frequencies with four Haswell cores? To some extent, yes.
If the motherboard is not based on the Intel Z87 or Intel Z97 chipset, and other components are not very friendly with overclocking, you can aim towards the Core i5-4690 without the K index. 9% advantage in work tasks and 2-11% in games. It doesn’t seem like much, but our test in live games showed that sometimes this is the difference that significantly improves the gameplay, reduces the number of twitches and minor flaws. Although the younger Core i5-4460 is also not bad.
If the motherboard and other system components support overclocking, the Core i5-4690K provides much better performance. Especially if you overclock not only the CPU itself, but also the RAM. In this case, you can get a 33% bonus in work tasks compared to the Core i5-4460. Well, in games, the older processor is already 35-41% better than the younger one! However, this does not make him an uncompromising retro monster. Somewhere there are small twitches, somewhere you need to limit the frame rate to vertical synchronization, and somewhere the problems are not solved and you just have to be patient.