Intel i7 5820K vs. i7 5930K [In Overclocking]

[MRE Teck]

Most people say that the Intel i7 5820K is superior but the i7 5930K from what it is looks like the i7 5930K is *WAY-BETTER* in overclocking so post your opinions on if you still think about the prossecors and if the i7 5820K is still worth the money

[Raudi_]

Its better for the price, but its not superior.

[TheUnnamedNewbie]

Most people say that the Intel i7 5820K is superior but the i7 5930K from what it is looks like the i7 5930K is *WAY-BETTER* in overclocking so post your opinions on if you still think about the prossecors and if the i7 5820K is still worth the money

 

What is your source on this? From what I know, they are pretty much the same die, the 5820 might just be a slightly worse bin, and just has the PCIe lines crippled.

[runit3]

All 5xxx 2011-v3 CPU's have roughly the same OC range. 5960x's tend to come in a bit lower, but respectable averages are in the 4.3-4.6 range with a few amazing samples getting into their little 4 core brother's 4.7+range, usually on DICE or LN2.

 

They are all on the same architecture, OCing should be roughly the same across all chips in the Haswell-E line. Similar to the FX series, although the binning has a much narrower scope.

[MRE Teck]

What is your source on this? From what I know, they are pretty much the same die, the 5820 might just be a slightly worse bin, and just has the PCIe lines crippled.

If you look around, the OC is better and has a higher margin from the stock:

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i7-5930K-vs-Intel-Core-i7-5820K

[hitsu1]

The difference between the 5820k and 5930k is in the PCIE lanes available (24 vs 40, respectively). They both have 6 cores. The 5820k has a base clock of 3.3 and the 5930k has a base clock of 3.5. Your ability to OC will depend on the silicon lottery. I had a 5820k but got a m2 drive and a third graphics card so I moved on to the 5930k. In 99% of the case unless you are building a work station or are building a station just to benchmark then none of the Haswell E chips makes a whole lot of sense to buy.  

[Mush Brain]

4.7 on NHD-15 here.

[runit3]

If you look around, the OC is better and has a higher margin from the stock:

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i7-5930K-vs-Intel-Core-i7-5820K

Oh FFS. DO NOT USE CPU BOSS. The reason those results look skewed is ONLY from the difference in base clock. Base clock has NOTHING to do with overclocking when comparing the same architecture. It is only a relative framework for the binning process i.e.- completely meaningless.

 

If Intel did the same thing as AMD and had a 5930k v2 that had a .4GHz higher base clock, then yes, some comparison could be drawn between the relative overclockability as there is a factual correlation with higher binned chips inherently being more stable at a higher clock, but that still does not exclude the ability of a 5820k to OC higher than a 5930k.

 

If you want a real source for OC results use this:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1510388/haswell-e-overclock-leaderboard-owners-club

[hitsu1]

 

If you want a real source for OC results use this:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1510388/haswell-e-overclock-leaderboard-owners-club

 

Nice link! I am glad they included the cooling method. I can only imagine some poor guy trying to hit a 5.8 OC using air and frying his RIG.

[MRE Teck]

Oh FFS. DO NOT USE CPU BOSS. The reason those results look skewed is ONLY from the difference in base clock. Base clock has NOTHING to do with overclocking when comparing the same architecture. It is only a relative framework for the binning process i.e.- completely meaningless.

If Intel did the same thing as AMD and had a 5930k v2 that had a .4GHz higher base clock, then yes, some comparison could be drawn between the relative overclockability as there is a factual correlation with higher binned chips inherently being more stable at a higher clock, but that still does not exclude the ability of a 5820k to OC higher than a 5930k.

If you want a real source for OC results use this:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1510388/haswell-e-overclock-leaderboard-owners-club

Difference in Stock: 0.2

Difference in OC: 0.29

Also they probably dissabled cores on the OC.net because that would be impossible other wise!

[runit3]

Nice link! I am glad they included the cooling method. I can only imagine some poor guy trying to hit a 5.8 OC using air and frying his RIG.

HWBot also has an insane amount of ranking data, it's just slightly harder to navigate

http://hwbot.org/hardware/processors#key=core_i7_5820k 5820k

http://hwbot.org/hardware/processors#key=core_i7_5930k 5930k

http://hwbot.org/hardware/processors#key=core_i7_5960x 5960x

[MRE Teck]

Difference in Stock: 0.2

Difference in OC: 0.29

Also they probably disabled cores on the OC.net because that would be impossible other wise!

[runit3]

Difference in Stock: 0.2

Difference in OC: 0.29

Also they probably dialed cores on the OC.net because that would be impossible other wise!

1) there's no link to where exactly they are pulling that data from (unless you can parse it out yourself)

2) it's patently false if you look at HWBot or Overclock.net data

3) CPUBoss is shit for comparing anything other than basic factual data pulled directly from Intel's ARK database

[JustCallMeVlad]

My 5820K topped out at 4.8ghz, my 5960X at 4.7. All will max out around this speed