-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
1366 X58 Xeon 5650
- Thread starter Flashheart
- Start date
I'll wade into the 6700K debate having now 'upgraded' from my X5650 @ 4.2 (210bclk).
For me i'm largely GPU limited as i game at 4K so knew there wouldn't be massive gains to be had so was realistic about possible improvements moving platforms. So around £700 lighter (6700k, Asus Gaming Pro, Samsung 951 nvme, NH-D15, 32gb ddr4) and the net result is everything is pretty much the same.
Of all the games i've tried (Dirt Rally, 7 Days, Thief, Tomb Raider, GTV V, Grid series, PC, AS etc.) the results are either identical or close to it. The exception is the Grid series which were built for consoles so they are core capped and offload a lot of typical gpu functions on the cpu. The Grid results almost doubled in speed which is impressive but more a sign of the nerfed gaming engine i suspect.
So gaming feels about the the same and most gaming benchmarks bear that out with the odd exception. I've not tried CPU intensive gaming like Cities or RTS's yet which i hope would see actual improvements due to the calculations the processor has to do.
Also despite moving from a SATA2 based controller to a shiny new SM951 256gb M2 which Crystal Disk benchmarks at 2200/1200 really even overall workstation type operations aren't night / day different (tbf wasn't expect them too either).
So my 6700K clocked to 4.6Ghz, 4100 NB, 32gb DDR4 @ 2800Mhz 15/15/15/1T is nice, shiny and new. It is not however worth throwing a chunk of money on unless opportunity arises (as in my case) or you have a very specific reason why a new platform will bring benefits to you imo.
Sold my chip, board, memory, cooler on MM for what i consider very reasonable money and putting that is perspective of what i gained moving up i'd say was a bloody bargain!
TLDR: Unless you have money to burn or specific reason to the X5650 platform with a capable GPU for gaming and general use is still as relevant today as any other modern platform.
For me i'm largely GPU limited as i game at 4K so knew there wouldn't be massive gains to be had so was realistic about possible improvements moving platforms. So around £700 lighter (6700k, Asus Gaming Pro, Samsung 951 nvme, NH-D15, 32gb ddr4) and the net result is everything is pretty much the same.
Of all the games i've tried (Dirt Rally, 7 Days, Thief, Tomb Raider, GTV V, Grid series, PC, AS etc.) the results are either identical or close to it. The exception is the Grid series which were built for consoles so they are core capped and offload a lot of typical gpu functions on the cpu. The Grid results almost doubled in speed which is impressive but more a sign of the nerfed gaming engine i suspect.
So gaming feels about the the same and most gaming benchmarks bear that out with the odd exception. I've not tried CPU intensive gaming like Cities or RTS's yet which i hope would see actual improvements due to the calculations the processor has to do.
Also despite moving from a SATA2 based controller to a shiny new SM951 256gb M2 which Crystal Disk benchmarks at 2200/1200 really even overall workstation type operations aren't night / day different (tbf wasn't expect them too either).
So my 6700K clocked to 4.6Ghz, 4100 NB, 32gb DDR4 @ 2800Mhz 15/15/15/1T is nice, shiny and new. It is not however worth throwing a chunk of money on unless opportunity arises (as in my case) or you have a very specific reason why a new platform will bring benefits to you imo.
Sold my chip, board, memory, cooler on MM for what i consider very reasonable money and putting that is perspective of what i gained moving up i'd say was a bloody bargain!
TLDR: Unless you have money to burn or specific reason to the X5650 platform with a capable GPU for gaming and general use is still as relevant today as any other modern platform.
Last edited:
hehe no worries, i'll probably get burned at the stake by the 6700K crowd but that's how it panned out for me. I don't need to justify the costs of the upgrade in my head so looking at it as objectively as i can for me anyway in real terms i'm not seeing much of any difference with what i do.
Other's mileage may vary though
Other's mileage may vary though
that's fair enough, say it how it is and if that's the case then that's your opinion.
i wanted to upgrade for ages just for the fun of building a new system but i never have the funds for a new mobo\cpu\ram.
a CPU and AIO is a lot cheaper and will keep me gaming with low budgets for that little longer.
May get a x5650 at the end of the month when i get paid if anyone has one going cheap?
i wanted to upgrade for ages just for the fun of building a new system but i never have the funds for a new mobo\cpu\ram.
a CPU and AIO is a lot cheaper and will keep me gaming with low budgets for that little longer.
May get a x5650 at the end of the month when i get paid if anyone has one going cheap?
what do you use your current system for?
your current I7 will have 4 cores and 8 threads and the I5 will have 4 cores and 4 threads.
Hehe, yes I expect Dave2150 to be along some time and tell you that you must be mistaken as "Skylake demolishes X5650's in games".
I have LLC enabled also for 4.6Ghz on my X5670. There's nothing deleterious about it you just have to check the voltages as LLC can give it more boost than normal.
Yeah i hear the pitchforks off in the distance nowHehe, yes I expect Dave2150 to be along some time and tell you that you must be mistaken as "Skylake demolishes X5650's in games".
just games, its does nothing more, will be adding either a GTX1060 of 1070
if I'm going to gain a few fps and that's it , maybe its not worth thinking about
general rule is I5 for gaming and I7 for video editing.
to be honest I don't think you will see much for gaming side of things unless the game can use the extra cores and threads.
I have the I7 950 @ 3.6ghz, 4GB of ram and use a 390
I do some video editing too so that is why im considering the X5650
this was posted on the previous page and may help you decide what to do
x5650 @ nearly 4.6ghz must close the gap more than 4.2ghz.
Shall be joining the X58 + Xeon x5670 club very soon.
Current rig is a Q9650 @3.6ghz with 6GB DDR2 and a R9 280 Dual X
Hoping for some decent gains.
I have coming Asus Rampage X58, X5670, 12GB trippple channel XMP ram + Noctua NHD14 dual.
Not built a rig for years so quiet looking forward to the new challenges
Current rig is a Q9650 @3.6ghz with 6GB DDR2 and a R9 280 Dual X
Hoping for some decent gains.
I have coming Asus Rampage X58, X5670, 12GB trippple channel XMP ram + Noctua NHD14 dual.
Not built a rig for years so quiet looking forward to the new challenges
Last edited:
Very interesting. I'm on 34" UW so suspect the same. Thanks for the honest write up.
If you get the Xeon to 4ghz+ and I think most people do, you'll see significant gains.
hehe no worries, i'll probably get burned at the stake by the 6700K crowd but that's how it panned out for me. I don't need to justify the costs of the upgrade in my head so looking at it as objectively as i can for me anyway in real terms i'm not seeing much of any difference with what i do.
Other's mileage may vary though
I agree with you to an extent, but my minimum FPS has definitely improved a lot since upgrading to Skylake. Granted, if I had a better clocking board I probably wouldn't have made the jump!
I'm interested to see how the x5650 compares to the 6600k in Overwatch as thats a very CPU heavy game.
I have a 34" UW and overwatch runs constant triple figures with everything maxed. Suspect it's not a CPU heavy game it's just so GPU light that the CPU can become a bottleneck.
Vsync on at 60hz with 150% scaling (11 megapixels? Lol) I'm only at 70-80% GPU usage.
Vsync on at 60hz with 150% scaling (11 megapixels? Lol) I'm only at 70-80% GPU usage.
But why? In video, downscaling from high resolution sources looks better because of differences in compression artefacts. When it's pure RGB what exactly is the benefit of rendering an higher resolutions compared to simply using MSAA, etc.?