• 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.

CPU Question For Someone Out Of The Loop

i totaly respect and appreciate your opinion bud, but iv done a lot of research on both processors and i am only putting my point across i don't have to be called a fool because of it, depending on what your using your computer for the 5820k might well be the processor that you need... but this guy states hes building a gaming computer... and im sorry to offend all you x99/5820k users.... but the i7 6700k simply outperforms the 5820k on gaming benchmarks.... but of course doesn't have a leg to stand on when it comes to video editing/rendering.
 
My advice with current chips, for single card gaming the 6600k is the ideal choice. 6700k for dual card sli/xfire, useful for other tasks too such as encoding/rendering. For two or more cards in a multi gpu configuration, X99 all the way. In modern games there will be so little between them. Heck you could save a fortune in cash and buy a 4690k/4790k and still have a gaming cpu that will last years. Performance has stagnated so much that even a sandybridge 2***k chip is still a powerful gaming cpu. As someone who has owned i5 3570k, i7 3770k, i7 4770k and several i7 4790k's im speaking, (well typing) from experience.
 
PatZ1989 said:
Hello, as someone who hasn't kept up with "the scene" for quite some time now, I am looking to upgrade my PC after a long time of it sitting on its i7 920, however just a bit confused about what to go for, Skylake seems to be all the rage now is this the best CPU to be buying right now?

the PC is just used for gaming really
Click to expand...

If you update your bios and grab a xeon x5650 (or higher) they can often match a 5820k on stock speeds when overclocked (Which should be a piece of cake if you have a decent motherboard).

The link was posted earlier in the thread, but here it is again, some good info and benchmarks inside: http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18618052

If you're on an x58 platform, there's really no need to sink £500+ on a new setup right now when you can just drop a 6 core Xeon into your board and up the clock speed. That is unless you need new features such as m.2 ssd's and pcie v3 etc.

If you really need to spend money, then its gotta be the 5820k or 6600k, budget depending. I'd personally go for the 5820k and be done with cpu upgrades for the next 5 years or so (barring an AMD miracle).
 
thesuperlouis said:
heres a useful link about how the 6600k and 6700k are performing on the gaming front.

http://www.cnet.com/uk/news/intels-new-skylake-core-i-series-chips-tested/
Click to expand...

The linked article proves nothing as they benched PC's that had wildly different configs outside of CPU's mainly in the GPU's employed.

i.e. single GTX980, GTX980sli and a GTX980ti sli totally pointless comparing gaming scores from that article...quelle surprise the PC with the 980ti's came out tops in Metro although cnet appear to have not realized that the 980ti has 6gb on memory on board and not 4gb.

Yes all in all a quality article to prove a point (/not)

Here's the specs from the linked article.... I have underlined the GPU's

 
Last edited:
This superlouis guy posts with such conviction. He's so sure he knows everything now. He's gone from someone smart enough to choose a corsair psu to the new *go to* guy on skylake. He's read a bunch of benchmarks and now just spouts his "knowledge" at people.

The mind boggles. He hasn't even built a pc yet and he is talking to people like he's an expert.

Right or wrong a normal person doesn't start preaching on something when they have zero hands on experience with something.

It's insane.
 
thesuperlouis said:
theaetrix.... why cant you put your point across in a civilized manner? there is absolutely no need for the name calling, why dont you go back to computer school and do some research... you are one of them absolute idiots that think the 2 extra cores mean something? in gaming terms they mean nothing, the architecture of the i7 6700k is far more advanced than the 5820k which makes sense as its new technology... the more i contintue to post on this sight the more i realise that its full of spammers like u trying to sell the 5820k to everyone... is it any coincidence though... considering that the skylake processors are out of stock and overpriced on this website tho?
Click to expand...

You just contradicted yourself there 'mate'.
"why cant you put your point across in a civilized manner?"
"you are one of them absolute idiots that think the 2 extra cores mean something?"

Also, I have an 8320, so I am from a single viewpoint, but the point is, what benchmarks are you reading?
a lot of benchmarks online, shows the same thing, the 5820k beats the 6700k in various games, Witcher 3 GTA, the usual benchmarked games, at every resolution and as you move towards 4k, the tiny difference starts to become a few FPS as the extra cores are slightly more utilized.
I am making my recommendations based off of the price for performance, and the lifespan of the item.
Once games start utilizing the extra cores, his initial investment will pay off, big time.
 
thesuperlouis said:
heres a useful link about how the 6600k and 6700k are performing on the gaming front.

http://www.cnet.com/uk/news/intels-new-skylake-core-i-series-chips-tested/
Click to expand...

This is a link to a crap article with 4 different PCs being tested. Is this the kind of stuff your research leads you to believe is gospel?

I dont think Ive ever seen anyone on ocuk list Cnet as a site to use for hardware analysis.

At the very least you would expect all PCs to be on the same operating system.
 
PatZ1989 said:
Sorry I should clarify, I have been updating the graphics card periodically its just the rest lagging behind, i have a 780 currently and will perhaps upgrade it when the new ones come out next year, but the 920 with 4gb of memory is where im putting some money now, it seems the i7 6700k looks like the best choice?

Though prices seem a lot higher now then a few months ago
Click to expand...

I upgraded from a i7 920 12gb ram system (bought december 2008) to a 6700k system a few months ago on release and couldn't be happier.

It's over twice the performance in benchmarks, uses much less electricity, runs much cooler and the chipset (motherboard) features it offers are really nice.

I'd only consider X99 (Haswell-E) if you a professional video editor or streamer, otherwise the additional CPU cores just go to waste.

No games need a 6 or 8 core - and no games show a tangible performance benefit. The 6700k is pretty much the fastest gaming CPU out there, for those using 1-2 GPU's.
 
It just comes down to price I think. The 6700k is best gaming cpu but its demanding a silly price right now. £334 is about the lowest I see. I think the 6600k at £200 is the best Skylake choice.

5820k can be had around £270 so its bang in the middle but would have a larger outlay for the motherboard.

At this end of the market i think difference will only be noticed in benchmarks anyway. The GPU is gonna be the key.
 
Dave2150 said:
I'd only consider X99 (Haswell-E) if you a professional video editor or streamer, otherwise the additional CPU cores just go to waste.
Click to expand...

The point with going x99 (if buying new, right now) is it has the greatest shot at being a very long term cpu, with absolutly no need to upgrade it for yonks.

If not prepared to buy into x99 then there is little point in buying new.

Just buy second hand, preferably a decent intel K.
 
I'd go x99. Better chance of cpu lasting much longer. Extra 2 cores. Which playing witcher 3, 4 cores get used heavily 70% ish. The other 2 are at about 30% So you can't say they don't get used for gaming. Faster multi-threading tasks. Can overclock easily to 4.5-4.7ghz without much issue. Same price as 6700k. Makes sense to go X99.
 
Last edited:
tyler_jrb said:
I'd go x99. Better chance of cpu lasting much longer. Extra 2 cores. Which playing witcher 3, 4 cores get used heavily 70% ish. The other 2 are at about 30% So you can't say they don't get used for gaming. Faster multi-threading tasks. Can overclock easily to 4.5-4.7ghz without much issue. Same price as 6700k. Makes sense to go X99.
Click to expand...

6700k is £334 on a quick google and I got my 5820k for £261 but the price is maybe offset in that I had to buy a motherboard at £210
 
Dave2150 said:
I upgraded from a i7 920 12gb ram system (bought december 2008) to a 6700k system a few months ago on release and couldn't be happier.

It's over twice the performance in benchmarks, uses much less electricity, runs much cooler and the chipset (motherboard) features it offers are really nice.
Click to expand...
All true, although it's only that much faster in benchmarks due to the i7-920's low stock clock. You'd be looking at an ~80% increase in performance assuming both are clocked sensibly (4 GHz i7-920 & 4.5 GHz i7-6700K).

Dave2150 said:
I'd only consider X99 (Haswell-E) if you a professional video editor or streamer, otherwise the additional CPU cores just go to waste.

No games need a 6 or 8 core - and no games show a tangible performance benefit. The 6700k is pretty much the fastest gaming CPU out there, for those using 1-2 GPU's.
Click to expand...
This is all true but assumes X99 has a price premium. Right now it doesn't really because Skylake prices are mental. Also remember that despite there being a minor hit in single-threaded performance now, X99 is more likely to last longer than Skylake (and thus save even more money in the long term) - just look at the longevity of X58!
 
Last edited:
The Core i7 6700K is a ripoff as the most expensive consumer socket Core i7 made for years. Its die size is around the same as that of a SB Core i3 2100,yet it costs many more times than that CPU.

The Haswell Core i3 CPUs were larger too than the Core i7 6700K in die area.

In comparison the Core i7 5775C is made on the same 14NM process and is a FEW TIMES larger in die area due to the large IGP and L4 cache. It even has a more complex package.

The Core i7 6700K could be far cheaper,if Intel are making a profit on the Core i7 5775C which is the same ballpark price.

The Core i7 5820K is also a much bugger die too made on a 22NM process.

The whole point of Skylake Core i7 CPUs seems to be for improving Intel profit margins.

If Intel can get away with charging £300 for a smaller chip which is Core i3 sized,then wave goodbye to expecting any more cheap 6 core chips under £300.

Even the Core i5 6600K is now like £200,meaning Kaby Lake Core i5 K series chips might be £200+ at this rate.

The Core i7 5820K is a no-brainer in comparison,and heck if you really need ST performance,the Core i5 6600K will be good enough at £100 to £130 cheaper than the overpriced Core i7 6700K.

HT is not going to give you 60% better framerates or improved frametimes,and even then in such an instance a Core i7 5820K will be better.
 
Last edited:
Exactly how long will a 5820k longevity last? Im in the same boat considering an upgrade for long term from, a 2700k and it looks like Im gona hold on, an ivybrige would help for PCI gen 3 but short of MM which I dont have access to they are hard to find especially brand new as a short term upgrade on Z77 to utilise a second 980ti. However long term I would like to see a processor that would handle 3 screens at 4k each gaming in a few years when GPU"s can realistically manage that. Would a 5820K be capable then? If not then if i was buying now ild go for 6700k just for the best there is now cause I would need to replace the 5820k anyway at some point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom