-
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.
i5 6600k or Xeon X5660
- Thread starter Skyforger
- Start date
That's simply an exaggeration (at best). I have tested mine with a GTX970 on Rise of the Tomb Raider at very high settings at 1080p and there was absolutely NO difference in my frame rate (Between either a 3930k @5Ghz & a Xeon 1650 @ 5.1Ghz). So unless you've got some empirical data to back up that "destroy in games" then...
Last edited:
...and a big hole in your wallet. But you know that since it gets told to you all the time.
Also, how much cooler? Not sure who would care about a warranty for a CPU part costing £30 net.
I bet it doesn't destroy the Xeon at anything approaching high resolution where you're GPU bound. Maybe if you're running a couple of 980ti yes but not a 670
Also it could not be any easier of a decision. Get on eBay, spend 50 quid, see it it works for you, if not sell it on and hook yourself up with the 6600. To not try it out is madness. Probably get 4.2 with minimal effort.
Also it could not be any easier of a decision. Get on eBay, spend 50 quid, see it it works for you, if not sell it on and hook yourself up with the 6600. To not try it out is madness. Probably get 4.2 with minimal effort.
He's obviously not going to running high resolution with a 670, hence at low resolution the massive IPC gain of Skylake over X58 crap would be a huge asset.
Not to mention he'll gain native SATA3, M.2, USB3.1, PCI-E V3, a much quieter and more power efficient system to boot.
Skylake clocks easily to 4.6-4.7Ghz on a cheap cooler, really is a no-brainer.
Those extra cores do absolutely nothing for gaming.
Still waiting for qualification, even the smallest piece of evidence for the "destroy" part. Surely you have some numbers...
Come on Dave, we're waiting...
My Xeon is only clocked at 3.6ghz but seeing gtx970 benchmarks with a 5960x @ 4.4ghz the results aren't hugely different. Not enough to justify the price.
Sata3, usb3.1, m.2... Yes they're great features to have but honestly what are you gaining aside from shaving 3 seconds off your boot times and a handful of USB 3.1 devices.
It's been argued to death, and the conclusion is always that a Xeon is a great upgrade for current x58 users. Who cares about warranty when the part cost you 50 quid or so. If the motherboard dies then that gives you a better reason to upgrade but you'll lose nothing on the chip as it'll still sell.
Sata3, usb3.1, m.2... Yes they're great features to have but honestly what are you gaining aside from shaving 3 seconds off your boot times and a handful of USB 3.1 devices.
It's been argued to death, and the conclusion is always that a Xeon is a great upgrade for current x58 users. Who cares about warranty when the part cost you 50 quid or so. If the motherboard dies then that gives you a better reason to upgrade but you'll lose nothing on the chip as it'll still sell.
Associate
- Joined
- 19 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 1,644
- Location
- Southwell
If you already have the board, get the xeon.
Dave, where are you? Surely you're not one of those people with an agenda that just says things off the top of their heads without any direct proof?
Gaming these days still only uses 1-4 cores, even for AAA titles.
Skylake has 30-40% increased IPC compared to these old xeons.
Also the reason you don't find loads of youtube videos/reviews comparing Haswell/Skylake to these Westmere-EP chips is simply because they get destroyed in gaming.
99% of modern games only use 1-4 cores, meaning a CPU with 30-40% increased performance per core will win without question.
When combined with the fact these X58 chips don't even have modern features such as native USB3, SATA3, PCI-E M.2, PCI-E V3, shows why there's only a 'cult' interest in these chips. There's hardly any videos/info on them, apart from threads on enthusiast forums such as this one.
As I see it, these chips are great for a workstation PC on a budget. They are very popular with eastern European enthusiasts for that reason, they allow them to get some work done on a very small budget.
How much faster are you suggesting skylake would be in games compared to a Xeon? Its certainly not going to be 30-40%.
Dave, I'm glad you eventually decided to give a reply but part of me wishes you'd been the 'strong, silent' type.
So when I ask for some direct proof of your...
Basically you appear to be saying if one postulates a theory but then can not find any evidence or research to support that theory, then that proves the theory is correct! (Your Maths and Science teachers would be probably be ashamed of you right now
)
You seem to be trying to extrapolate IPC improvement to games which is frankly nonsense. You should have been around long enough to know this is not the case. Contrary to what you appear to believe but most AAA games (i.e GTA V, Fallout 4, Metal Gear Solid V, Call of Duty BOps 3, The Witcher 3, Rise of the Tomb Raider, The Division etc etc) are GPU bound at the resolutions that most gamers use i.e. HQ 1440p/1080p. This means that even CPU's with a wide gap in IPC processing power will be fairly close together when it comes to gaming performance. Here is an older chart using a 7970 but it demonstrates the point and it still holds true.
I'll save your best till last...
I've been working as an IT Consultant/Engineer in of all places, yes, Eastern Europe for the past 8 years (spending a good amount of my time there), my long term girlfriend is Eastern European our son is half Eastern European and I speak fairly well an Eastern European language. So, I can talk with a small amount of confidence when I say, that statement is really pure and utter nonsense. Xeon X5650 are far, far more popular here in the U.K and in States (btw my Dad lives in the US).
I can see that trying to use evidentiary reasoning with you is a waste of time so probably my last words to you on this are; 'jums nezini neko, Janis Sniegs.'
So when I ask for some direct proof of your...
you amazingly come back with...
Really! REALLY! You have to be kidding me. The reason that there are no video's etc might just be because the Xeon chips have never been mainstream cpu's they are old server cpu's. So, by your reasoning because there are no video's etc. of my Xeon E5 1650 @ 5.1Ghz must mean it will get destroyed in games by a 6600K! OK.
Basically you appear to be saying if one postulates a theory but then can not find any evidence or research to support that theory, then that proves the theory is correct! (Your Maths and Science teachers would be probably be ashamed of you right now
)You seem to be trying to extrapolate IPC improvement to games which is frankly nonsense. You should have been around long enough to know this is not the case. Contrary to what you appear to believe but most AAA games (i.e GTA V, Fallout 4, Metal Gear Solid V, Call of Duty BOps 3, The Witcher 3, Rise of the Tomb Raider, The Division etc etc) are GPU bound at the resolutions that most gamers use i.e. HQ 1440p/1080p. This means that even CPU's with a wide gap in IPC processing power will be fairly close together when it comes to gaming performance. Here is an older chart using a 7970 but it demonstrates the point and it still holds true.
I'll save your best till last...
Ok, where to start...
I've been working as an IT Consultant/Engineer in of all places, yes, Eastern Europe for the past 8 years (spending a good amount of my time there), my long term girlfriend is Eastern European our son is half Eastern European and I speak fairly well an Eastern European language. So, I can talk with a small amount of confidence when I say, that statement is really pure and utter nonsense. Xeon X5650 are far, far more popular here in the U.K and in States (btw my Dad lives in the US).
I can see that trying to use evidentiary reasoning with you is a waste of time so probably my last words to you on this are; 'jums nezini neko, Janis Sniegs.'
Last edited:
I think the biggest thing here is that the X56xx is an amazing upgrade for those of us that are not quite willing to shell out on another PC yet. The ability to increase our current performance for £50 is what we actually care about while we continue to evaluate our options and wait for the new CPUs in Q2.
If nothing else it is a fun little learning exercise for us
If nothing else it is a fun little learning exercise for us
Haha. Good post
Ironically I'm currently playing tomb raider at 1080p on SLI 970s so may well be held back by the CPU. But I'm also quids in so who cares
Over the past week or so I thought I would do some empirical data gathering myself and so I asked my many computer savvy Eastern European friends (and got them to ask there computer enthusiast friends) as to how many of them
a) Owned or new anybody that owned a X58 motherboard.
b) Had ever heard of the Xeon 5650 etc
I got 68 replies in total and of that amount only 1 had a X58 motherboard
and non had heard of the Xeon 5650 etc.
Dave's statement that they were popular in Eastern Europe appears to be pure fabrication. X58 motherboards were relatively expensive when they came out and would never have been popular due to the cost. My policeman friend back at the time when X58 out was earning 300 euro's (£230) a MONTH. Most computer enthusiasts simply could not afford a high spec quad core and they either had lower cost dual cores or used laptops.
I think the biggest thing here is that the X56xx is an amazing upgrade for those of us that are not quite willing to shell out on another PC yet. The ability to increase our current performance for £50 is what we actually care about while we continue to evaluate our options and wait for the new CPUs in Q2.
If nothing else it is a fun little learning exercise for us
Agreed.
Associate
- Joined
- 8 Dec 2006
- Posts
- 1,299
- Location
- Bromley
I went from a x5660 at 4.2 to a 5820k at 4.5ghz with the same graphics card and seem to be getting the same FPS in the games I play so I also find this "destroy" comment rather comical after having real world experience.