i5 6600k or Xeon X5660

[Dave2150]

​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...
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.'

Any recent game will be GPU bound using a 7970 - do you realize that's a 4 year old GPU? Try again with a FuryX or a 980ti, the Xeon will have much lower minimum FPS than a Haswell/Skylake would have.

At the end of the day, if your happy with these Xeons then that's all that matters. They are not for everyone, certainly the insane power consumption, mediocre gaming performance, lack of connectivity, lack of warranty put off the majority of people. If none of those matter to you, then the Xeons are a good buy..

 

[wam7]

Any recent game will be GPU bound using a 7970 - do you realize that's a 4 year old GPU? Try again with a FuryX or a 980ti, the Xeon will have much lower minimum FPS than a Haswell/Skylake would have.

At the end of the day, if your happy with these Xeons then that's all that matters. They are not for everyone, certainly the insane power consumption, mediocre gaming performance, lack of connectivity, lack of warranty put off the majority of people. If none of those matter to you, then the Xeons are a good buy..

Dave you should give your inane blurb a rest now. We get it, you love your Skylake CPU so go enjoy it and leave the fact, experience based discussion and sharing to the rest of us.

Why have you not come back with some figures for the

...destroy in games...

or maybe some anecdotal reference for the...

They are very popular with eastern European enthusiasts for that reason, they allow them to get some work done on a very small budget.

You must realised by now that even when you may have a coherent point, mixing it with fabrication and exaggeration might only serve to make some people think everything you say is cods wallop. I'm sure it isn't but you really don't do yourself any favours.

PS. Have a look at what GPU the OP has in his sig... which equates to 7970 not a 980TI etc.