• 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.

8600k or 8700k

kirkmeister

kirkmeister

kirkmeister

Associate
Joined
27 Jun 2006
Posts
5
Hi,

I’m on the edge of buying a 8600k but keep reading of the enthusiasm for the 8700k.
I am a BF 1/3/4 player with the occasional FPS. Also encoding video files a few times a week.
Currently on a 2500k, good for games, poor for encoding.

So, is the 8700k worth the 40% premium over a 8600k?
I can’t find any comparitive reviews.

Most likely going for a ASUS Prime A mobo, 16gb of RAM, and a Corsair M2 SSD. Already have a 1060 GTX card.

Thanks in advance
 
As mentioned, the 8700k is the easy choice if you're encoding. In terms of gaming, their isn't a huge difference currently, but the 8700k will last you a good year or too longer on future games.
 
Not so much time critical, but takes an hour to do a one hour ‘mkv’ to ‘mp4’ episode, so for a eight episode series takes all cores running at max to complete for a working day. Kinda hoping I could reduce this.
 
Both would give you a significant encoding boost. I'd personally just go for the 8600 and put the money saved into something else.
 
Each HT thread is like roughly the performance of a half-core, so effectively 9 cores for the extra. Tbf I'd probably go for it!

I'm pondering a switch to mITX (8700k), but a part of me is wanting to wait for the 8c/16t Intel's out later this year...
 
Personally I dont think its massively worth over £100 extra just for 12 threads. I went for the 8600K personally, and its far more than ill ever need if im honest. I am not a gamer so cant recommend on a gaming front. But looking at your previous processor the 2500K then either is a great upgrade. I went from a highly clocked i5 4670K and its got so much more grunt.

However i bought my 8600K over black friday week from America for £235 delivered & tax's, the 8700K was near or more than £400 at the time. If it would have been available for £350 locally i might have made the decision to go the 8700K but in all honestly its total overkill for what i need and the 8600K suits me just fine.
 
Also, remember if you are not overclocking, save yourself some cash and just get an 8700 (if you can find a good deal on one) as it is essentially exactly the same performance at stock.
 
If you can afford the 8700K, get the 8700K. It'll last longer and be faster. Furthermore when it comes to sell up and upgrade you'll get a good chunk of the price difference back.
 
I'll just assume you have looked at the R7 and dismissed it? because for encoding that is your winner winner chicken dinner right there.
 
pick the 8700k.better in bf1 for a start.better for editing video encoding.will last you probaby 1/2 years extra.it seems dearer but in the long run cheaper.
 
8700k is in general a better idea. Unless you really need the fastest, coolest single threaded performance you can get. In my case I went for a delidded 8600K and have it sitting happily at 5.3ghz. Its great for flight sims which are cpu bound. To be clear I dont encode or stream or really play anything else so it fits my requirement and was far cheaper than the equivalent delidded, binned 8700k.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom