• 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.

Digital Foundry - 6700k vs 5820k vs 5960x Gaming Shootout

Would be cool if they'd included a 5775C, I know nobody will probably ever buy one but it beats a 6700k in quite a few tests that have already been done by a few others, would have been interesting to see them test it. Also a cheaper upgrade for the 1150 guys than moving to Skylake if they wanted to.
 
Would have loved more detail on minimum frame rates and frame times too. That's where CPU upgrades make their impact.

Pity there aren't any DX12 or Vulkan tests.
 
bfar said:
Would have loved more detail on minimum frame rates and frame times too. That's where CPU upgrades make their impact.

Pity there aren't any DX12 or Vulkan tests.
Click to expand...

Yeah big shame they didn't do the minimum frame rates.

Arguably this (and frame rate stability) is more important for VR than average frame rate.
 
/me facepalms

They open with a spiel about how the x99 system can handle more graphics cards better and how that's an advantage then decide to run test with only one card. By the end of that paragraph they should have had an 'oh, wait' moment, realising that 'making the bottleneck be CPU' isn't always such a good idea regardless of if you're comparing CPUs or GPUs.

Besides anything else, being totally GPU bound and thus the CPUs drawing is also a legit outcome, never mind there is no opportunity for the higher-end stuff to actually flex it's legs.

DigitalFoundry should have thought of this and run a more likely setup for the CPUs - sure, have one set of tests be one card if you really want, but at a higher resolution, also try 2 / 3 / 4 card options as that's where the biggest difference lies. Also lacking minimum framerates is idiotic, it's been highlighted as the most important measurement for a while (though framereate graphs / frametime graphs are better yet to give an idea of if it's a brief dip in one particular loading area or a frequent problem)
 
Last edited:
At least when broadwell-e comes out everyone and their mother will be reviewing it, and obviously comparing the bottom 6 core with the 6700k.

So someone out of all the review sites will end up doing a clock-for-clock and minimum frame rate comparison between those two at least.
 
David Bisset said:
Besides anything else, being totally GPU bound and thus the CPUs drawing is also a legit outcome, never mind there is no opportunity for the higher-end stuff to actually flex it's legs.

DigitalFoundry should have thought of this and run a more likely setup for the CPUs - sure, have one set of tests be one card if you really want, but at a higher resolution, also try 2 / 3 / 4 card options as that's where the biggest difference lies.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, but how many of their readers or prospective buyers are likely to run a system like that?
 
David Bisset said:
...then decide to run test with only one card....

Besides anything else, being totally GPU bound and thus the CPUs drawing is also a legit outcome, never mind there is no opportunity for the higher-end stuff to actually flex it's legs.

DigitalFoundry should have thought of this and run a more likely setup for the CPUs - sure, have one set of tests be one card if you really want, but at a higher resolution, also try 2 / 3 / 4 card options as that's where the biggest difference lies.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? They make the test as CPU bound as possible by using a very powerful GPU (overclocked Titan X) at a low screen res (1080p).

A higher res would make it less CPU bound.

Further down are 980 SLI results.
 
I may actually consider a 6700k in a month or two, gotta wait to see what broadwell-e holds. I sort of wish they would just go for skylake-e mind.

Any news on broadwell-e? Last I heard it's march ish so I'm expecting it soon.
 
joeyjojo said:
What are you talking about? They make the test as CPU bound as possible by using a very powerful GPU (overclocked Titan X) at a low screen res (1080p).

A higher res would make it less CPU bound.

Further down are 980 SLI results.
Click to expand...

One of the biggest advantages x99 has over skylake is ability to handle many GPUs so avoiding the scenario is avoiding the time they should really shine. Skylake can do 2 GPUs then runs out of lanes - and I'd imagine most of those getting a 5960X for gaming are likely to be trying some quad graphics card fun.

Edit: To me quad cards sounds a horrible idea, but then I'd also not get a 5960X. Looking at the benchmark threads on here and there are a few who do use this combo.

To repeat: Avoiding involving the GPUs to test 'only the CPU' isn't testing how well the CPU will do in a real situation where it has to feed the GPUs. CPU-only benchmarks have always been a poor measure of gaming performance. If games are totally GPU-bound then two CPUs drawing is the *right* outcome for which is the right purchase - don't massage the scenario into the realms of fantasy to try and make up a difference.

bfar said:
Fair enough, but how many of their readers or prospective buyers are likely to run a system like that?
Click to expand...

Not many. But then, how many people are buying the 5960X for gaming in the first place? I'd imagine those two small numbers would overlap heavily, though I can't prove it either way.


Edit: Comparing the 5820k / 6700k on single GPU/2 GPUs is fair enough as they were price-comparable and both credible options for systems. I still disagree with the attempt to unrealistically shift bottlenecks however, as it still will give weird and useless results.
 
Last edited:
David Bisset said:
One of the biggest advantages x99 has over skylake is ability to handle many GPUs so avoiding the scenario is avoiding the time they should really shine. Skylake can do 2 GPUs then runs out of lanes - and I'd imagine most of those getting a 5960X for gaming are likely to be trying some quad graphics card fun.

Edit: To me quad cards sounds a horrible idea, but then I'd also not get a 5960X. Looking at the benchmark threads on here and there are a few who do use this combo.

To repeat: Avoiding involving the GPUs to test 'only the CPU' isn't testing how well the CPU will do in a real situation where it has to feed the GPUs. CPU-only benchmarks have always been a poor measure of gaming performance. If games are totally GPU-bound then two CPUs drawing is the *right* outcome for which is the right purchase - don't massage the scenario into the realms of fantasy to try and make up a difference.



Not many. But then, how many people are buying the 5960X for gaming in the first place? I'd imagine those two small numbers would overlap heavily, though I can't prove it either way.
Click to expand...

The reviewer owns a 5960x, so that explains why it was included. Dual GPU setups were tested, and the 6700k ironically won that test. Useful info for the small number of users in that space.

As for 3 or 4 card setups, the vast majority of us in the real world couldn't give a monkey's which CPU is better. We need tests and benchmarks that represent the kind of PCs that we'll actually build and use in practice.
 
I'd better start overclocking my 5820K given those results, I'm still running at stock. Have to say I'm surprised that 6700k won by that much, thought it would be much closer. Strange that no-one else has done this test before with both at the same clockspeed.
 
There are reviews that say this is better. That is better. But none of them seem similar.

Original link I doubt though a full 30% performance on gta v, FC4 for a chip 4 cores vs 4 cores. Where the overall performance upgrade is 5-10% at best. Even some games on there being slower with an overclocked chip Doesn't seem right to me.
 
DX12 could turn all of this on it's head with multi GPUs.

In the AOTS bench with 2 cards a 5960X gets a very big advantage over 4 and 6 core CPUs.

For single GPU use there is not much difference between 4, 6 or 8 core CPUs.

How this works in DX12 with other games I don't know though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom