Overclock.net banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
97 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I'm looking to upgrade my rig to Intel and I can't decide between the 6600k or the 6700k. Which one would be the best for gaming, and the occasional video encoding? I play a lot of CPU bound games so would the i7 really give me a lot better performance than the i5?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
801 Posts
I'd say 6700k if you are doing some video stuff too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
71 Posts
Comes down to 5820k vs 6700k. I faced the same dilemma and read through the existing 50+ page topic about this, ended up going with the 5820k for the extra cores. The 6700k is 5-8% better in games, but you'll never be cpu bound so its a non issue. In everything else the 5820k is better.

Edit: If you know you will never need it for anything more intensive than gaming, 6600k is an excellent choice as well for the cost.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
730 Posts
I faced the same problem last year ended up with the xeon(budget constraints), it is still an amazing upgrade over my 8320.
But if I was to upgrade now the 5820k would be my pick.
 

·
...when you walked in
Joined
·
6,439 Posts
As already mentioned, the real choice should be 5820K or 6700K.

The 6700K ST performance is greater and will OC farther on average, making a decent gain for gaming/ST performance. The 5820K will be better in everything else though and X99 should be getting Broadwell-E(maybe?) for a slight ST boost, unless Broadwell E OC's as bad as the mainstream Broadwell did.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
97 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atikin View Post

Comes down to 5820k vs 6700k. I faced the same dilemma and read through the existing 50+ page topic about this, ended up going with the 5820k for the extra cores. The 6700k is 5-8% better in games, but you'll never be cpu bound so its a non issue. In everything else the 5820k is better.

Edit: If you know you will never need it for anything more intensive than gaming, 6600k is an excellent choice as well for the cost.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iinversion View Post

As already mentioned, the real choice should be 5820K or 6700K.

The 6700K ST performance is greater and will OC farther on average, making a decent gain for gaming/ST performance. The 5820K will be better in everything else though and X99 should be getting Broadwell-E(maybe?) for a slight ST boost, unless Broadwell E OC's as bad as the mainstream Broadwell did.
Would the 5820k or the future Broadwell equivalent really be worth it even if I only do a little bit of encoding? There are very minimal budget constrains with the upgrade so anything could be an option as long as its not too crazy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
71 Posts
Well the thing is, in almost all scenarios you won't notice any difference between the two. In gaming you'll be gpu not cpu bound. The only time you'll notice any real world difference will be in cpu heavy tasks like rendering and encoding, where the 5820k is quite a bit faster.
 

·
...when you walked in
Joined
·
6,439 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by turntuptonebone View Post

Would the 5820k or the future Broadwell equivalent really be worth it even if I only do a little bit of encoding? There are very minimal budget constrains with the upgrade so anything could be an option as long as its not too crazy.
If you're only doing minimal encoding from time to time, then I'd probably get the 6700K. With a ~7-10% IPC advantage and more overclocking headroom you will end up with better FPS in anything that is CPU bound.

Most people will probably tell you to get the 5820K, and honestly if you plan on keeping the system for 3+ years then that is the better investment. Since maximizing ST/gaming performance is your main goal though, the 6700K has my vote. You also will have Kabylake as a drop in for 1151.

The Broadwell IPC difference over Haswell is like 2%, unless it OCs very well (doesn't on mainstream 1150) then I don't see anyone upgrading to it on X99.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
187 Posts
Save up and wait for Zen/Kaby Lake. I got a dud of an fx 8350 myself right now that constantly bottlenecks my gtx 970 and blue screens at stock clocks. Since Zen is 8 cores 16 threads, you might see Intel get the hint, and release 8 thread i5's and so on.
 

·
New to OCN?
Joined
·
26,919 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickRossBigBoss View Post

Save up and wait for Zen/Kaby Lake. I got a dud of an fx 8350 myself right now that constantly bottlenecks my gtx 970 and blue screens at stock clocks. Since Zen is 8 cores 16 threads, you might see Intel get the hint, and release 8 thread i5's and so on.
kaby lake is skylake refresh.
 

·
Guru
Joined
·
1,079 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickRossBigBoss View Post

It is but Intel might opt for octo thread i5 Kaby lake refreshes.
There is zero sense in doing that. AMD is now suffering because of their decision to choose an easy road and more or less make 1 chip from 2 normal ones as opposed to improving the actual architecture and efficiency. There is no potential in continuously working on an relatively old architecture, regardless of how much money you throw at it. Plus you're left with no room for making server/enthusiast chips later on.

After the release of a thuban X6 1100T I see no real development from AMD other than tweaking, squeezing and manipulating the numbers. FX8350 and FX8370 are actually the only somewhat decent CPUs that can at least match 1100T for single threaded performance which wasn't even exceptionally good to begin with and is based on super old Phenom II family architecture.
AMD hasn't improved their ST performance back from 2010, which at the time equaled to Intel ST performance of chips introduced in 2008.

That's right, current single threaded performance from the flagship AMD FXes equals to ST performance of Intel chips back from 2008-2009 (QX9770 ; i7-860) with the exception that those Intel chips actually overclocked much better than the current AMD ones.

So if you want a chip for gaming, you will most likely won't benefit at all coming from something like LGA771 Xeon X5460 or very early LGA1156 i7 chip to an AMD FX83x0.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
66 Posts
Later today, if the shipping estimate is correct, my OC'ed Phenom II x4 970 will be replaced by a 6700k. I looked at x99, but the platform is significantly older, with fewer options for next-gen storage, in particular, and even more expensive in Canada. In the end, after going back and forth, I opted for the i7 essentially as the compromise solution: better performance in cpu-intensive tasks than a 6600k, but cheaper than a 5820k.
 

·
Guru
Joined
·
1,079 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by prickly007 View Post

Later today, if the shipping estimate is correct, my OC'ed Phenom II x4 970 will be replaced by a 6700k. I looked at x99, but the platform is significantly older, with fewer options for next-gen storage, in particular, and even more expensive in Canada. In the end, after going back and forth, I opted for the i7 essentially as the compromise solution: better performance in cpu-intensive tasks than a 6600k, but cheaper than a 5820k.
In games 6600 and 6700K will perform better than 5820K.

And you gotta keep in mind that if you buy 5820K and keep it at stock speeds then that's literally your money down the drain. There is nowhere near enough performance gain with it to justify its price compared to 6700K or overclocked X5650 otherwise.
decent overclock on X5650 = stock 5820K.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top