Method

After more testing and playing more games, it does appear my FE crashes with no manual overclock. MSI afterburner is set to 0 across the board, and I can consistently crash in COD multiplayer after about 5 minutes. GPU temp really doesn't go up much, maybe 60c, so I think it does boost very close to 2ghz and eventually crashes. Setting -50 in Afterburner seems to keep the gpu at 1950mhz and so far has been stable.

After more testing and playing more games, it does appear my FE crashes with no manual overclock. MSI afterburner is set to 0 across the board, and I can consistently crash in COD multiplayer after about 5 minutes. GPU temp really doesn't go up much, maybe 60c, so I think it does boost very close to 2ghz and eventually crashes. Setting -50 in Afterburner seems to keep the gpu at 1950mhz and so far has been stable.

Following other users is a great idea! As for changing username, features like that are coming. That's part of the "navigation fixes" in milestone 1.

Hoping this is allowed, as I really need feedback on this. I've reached out to teksyndicate and paulshardware and they both said the project looks interesting but never got back to me in detail and as far as I can tell, never really used it once. Other reviewers I reached out to never got back to me.
 
I have some bigger plans for this project, if it ends up that it's useful for tech reviewers or heavy benchmarkers/overclockers. Without further ado, here's the site: https://comparebench.com
 
Right now, it supports 3DMark Ultra (the 4k one), Cinebench (you type in the number itself) and Unigine Heaven html export files. All benchmarks require you submit a CPU-Z validation file. This is to get hardware info about your system for further comparisons.
 
Basically, the idea is you create a "benchmark profile", which contains a bunch of info about your build, and as many benchmarks results as you have. This will create a single "profile" of sorts that you can then compare with _another_ profile. Doing it this way makes it easy to compare with an upgrade you just completed, or with a friend. All benchmarks are stored so you don't have to worry about fumbling around with various benchmark files.
 
Once you've created a benchmark profile, you can then compare that with another. Right now the easiest way to do this is with profiles on your own account. You _can_ technically compare with the other public benchmarks in the "browse" section, but that's very early stages and doesn't work very well.
 
The process of getting benchmark information via cpu-z or 3dmark requires the use of a web crawler, which at the moment _also_ is a bit finicky at times.
 
You can check out an example comparison here: https://comparebench.com/compare/35 It's very early days so the format and how this page looks will evolve for sure.
 
Disclaimer, I realize the graphs are comically disproportionate. I'm working on closing the gap between metrics.
 
Sidenote: If anyone has interest in contributing to this project, feel free to pm me. I'd ask that you already have decent experience in python or javascript, and be at least 18. Biggest thing I need is someone to work on UI/UX. Discussion here: https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/895743-looking-for-a-javascriptui-developer
 
Discord: https://discord.gg/V3nRgYA
 

I can increase password limit, figured 15 would be long enough but, welp. 
 
As for proper profile system, totally. Technically you can't even log out lol. The arrow next to name is supposed to drop down but that isn't working. /logout works but no button to actually push that front-end wise. I had another project that had that more fleshed out that I've been grabbing bits and pieces from, user profile system is one of those things that's been on the backburner for a while.
 
As a general update also, I'm going to be changing benchmark creation a bit. It'll no longer require a CPU-Z validation url, but instead a CPUZ html export. A couple reasons for this. 
Requiring a cpuz validation url means that creating benchmarks hinges on that website staying online. Crawling that page is cumbersome, both infrastructurally and logically. The html export can be scraped for data much, much faster, so no waiting around for the cpuz crawler to do its job. I'm also going to be putting up a roadmap page on the site itself, and be posting updates regularly to the twitter account.

Fixed now, surprised this didn't show up sooner. Basically the html file we send to your email, the location for it was incorrect. Try logging in now.

Hoping this is allowed, as I really need feedback on this. I've reached out to teksyndicate and paulshardware and they both said the project looks interesting but never got back to me in detail and as far as I can tell, never really used it once. Other reviewers I reached out to never got back to me.
 
I have some bigger plans for this project, if it ends up that it's useful for tech reviewers or heavy benchmarkers/overclockers. Without further ado, here's the site: https://comparebench.com
 
Right now, it supports 3DMark Ultra (the 4k one), Cinebench (you type in the number itself) and Unigine Heaven html export files. All benchmarks require you submit a CPU-Z validation file. This is to get hardware info about your system for further comparisons.
 
Basically, the idea is you create a "benchmark profile", which contains a bunch of info about your build, and as many benchmarks results as you have. This will create a single "profile" of sorts that you can then compare with _another_ profile. Doing it this way makes it easy to compare with an upgrade you just completed, or with a friend. All benchmarks are stored so you don't have to worry about fumbling around with various benchmark files.
 
Once you've created a benchmark profile, you can then compare that with another. Right now the easiest way to do this is with profiles on your own account. You _can_ technically compare with the other public benchmarks in the "browse" section, but that's very early stages and doesn't work very well.
 
The process of getting benchmark information via cpu-z or 3dmark requires the use of a web crawler, which at the moment _also_ is a bit finicky at times.
 
You can check out an example comparison here: https://comparebench.com/compare/35 It's very early days so the format and how this page looks will evolve for sure.
 
Disclaimer, I realize the graphs are comically disproportionate. I'm working on closing the gap between metrics.
 
Sidenote: If anyone has interest in contributing to this project, feel free to pm me. I'd ask that you already have decent experience in python or javascript, and be at least 18. Biggest thing I need is someone to work on UI/UX. Discussion here: https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/895743-looking-for-a-javascriptui-developer
 
Discord: https://discord.gg/V3nRgYA
 

I think you misunderstand how it works. I'll give a rundown here and maybe add it to my op.
 
Basically, when you add a benchmark, you're creating a single benchmark profile for your entire build that shows its performance at that moment. Think of it as a snapshot of your rigs performance. That profile will show specs, cinebench score, 3dmark scores, etc. 
 
So, lets say you're upgrading your gpu. You create a benchmark profile before putting in the new gpu. You run 3dmark and whatnot to get scores and you have a "before upgrade" profile. Then, you install your gpu and create a whole new benchmark profile after re-running those benchmarks on the new gpu.
 
At this point, you have 2 benchmark profiles, a before and after. You can then use the Compare tool to compare your existing benchmark profiles. See image below.
 

 
Once you fill that out and hit Submit, you'll get a comparison page.
 

 
As you can see however, some of the labels aren't accurate. The GPU labels still show cpu. Bits of polish like that are sort of in the works. 
 
Thats basically how the tool works. Eventually (and maybe I'll put a roadmap together) this comparison page will be more fleshed out to show more comparable metrics, and options to embed certain graphs or other data elsewhere (along with sharing links etc)

Found the problem and fixed it. Should be good to go  

You know those glass paperweight things that have insects or other random objects inside them? I bought a G3258 a while ago and never really had much of a real use for it. I still think its a really cool product, so I want to keep it around. The only thing I've been able to find is companies offering custom laser engraving on glass paperweights. I want to get this cpu placed inside a glass paperweight. Anyone have any idea on where I can go/ship this to have this done?

You know those glass paperweight things that have insects or other random objects inside them? I bought a G3258 a while ago and never really had much of a real use for it. I still think its a really cool product, so I want to keep it around. The only thing I've been able to find is companies offering custom laser engraving on glass paperweights. I want to get this cpu placed inside a glass paperweight. Anyone have any idea on where I can go/ship this to have this done?

Ahhh yes. "riser cards" or "daughter boards" are what they're typically referred as. "back in the day", you would see those in the form of extra PCI connections and making them right-angle to support more server chassis's. That's definitely more proprietary to Super Micro as well. 

I have the EVGA x99 FTW K board, really nice. No rgb, and the led strip for the audio section of the PCB can be disabled. 

If this is anything to go by, http://wccftech.com/intel-skylake-e-lga-3647-hexa-channel-memory/ it'll be a pretty good improvement over broadwell-e. Not mind blowing but, expected. 6 channels of ddr4 will certainly be nice too. 
 
Get a xeon if you need the features it comes with, but if overclocking is a main concern for you, xeon isn't the way to go. If it comes down to 5820k vs 6800k, I would (and did) go with the 6800k if you can afford it. If cost is the only issue, get the 5820k. Either way, you'll be happy with it. 

Manual adjustment. I'll be giving a go at higher clocks in a bit here, and I'll write back
 
H100i V2 from Corsair. I'm not sure if I'll be able to get to 4.5 but, I'll see what I can get to with this cooler

If we're talking gaming only, sure. 6700k all the way. In fact, some benchmarks show 6700k as being faster than 6950x purely because of it's single threaded performance. Different workloads for different folks.

I know this isnt related to your question but, $1400 is way too much for that...I would think 800 at the most. For that amount of money, I would have just bought a new setup with x99.
 
In any case: A little hard to say by the pictures (though Im surprised you were even able to get that close) Though it looks like theres a single pin thats bent down a little too far. I've repaired pins like this a couple of times, with varying degrees of success. I would say try it, run some benchmarks. It will likely post but if that pin isn't making contact, youll probably crash. If so, take the cpu back out and very carefully with the smallest flathead you can find (something out of an iFixIt kit should work) and pry the pin upwards gently. Even if it's higher than all the others, that's fine. 

Linksys WRT routers won’t block open source firmware despite FCC rules.
 
Original post: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/05/linksys-wrt-routers-wont-block-open-source-firmware-despite-fcc-rules/
 
From the article:
 
We like hating on companies that do stupid things like TPLink blocking open source firmware, so I hope we can show Linksys/Cisco some love. If you're in the market for a new router, take a look at Linksys.

Linksys WRT routers won’t block open source firmware despite FCC rules.
 
Original post: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/05/linksys-wrt-routers-wont-block-open-source-firmware-despite-fcc-rules/
 
From the article:
 
We like hating on companies that do stupid things like TPLink blocking open source firmware, so I hope we can show Linksys/Cisco some love. If you're in the market for a new router, take a look at Linksys.

Linksys WRT routers won’t block open source firmware despite FCC rules.
 
Original post: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/05/linksys-wrt-routers-wont-block-open-source-firmware-despite-fcc-rules/
 
From the article:
 
We like hating on companies that do stupid things like TPLink blocking open source firmware, so I hope we can show Linksys/Cisco some love. If you're in the market for a new router, take a look at Linksys.

Linksys WRT routers won’t block open source firmware despite FCC rules.
 
Original post: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/05/linksys-wrt-routers-wont-block-open-source-firmware-despite-fcc-rules/
 
From the article:
 
We like hating on companies that do stupid things like TPLink blocking open source firmware, so I hope we can show Linksys/Cisco some love. If you're in the market for a new router, take a look at Linksys.

Looks like it might have finally released:
 
https://www.google.com/shopping/product/9962565706670747347?q=asus+z170-ws&safe=off&es_sm=93&biw=1920&bih=965&prds=hsec:online&sa=X&ved=0CIEBEL4kahUKEwjKitCgqpHJAhXNth4KHTM-AOY
 
http://www.amazon.com/LGA1151-I7-4DIMM-64GB-DDR4/dp/B017HKIGM4/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1447552803&sr=8-1&keywords=asus+z170-ws

if you're asking this question, you arent the right person to do this.

I agree that z170 makes a lot of sense for new builds.  Yes, you can maybe find a deal on z97 parts, but its old tech now.  And for a long term build, I would suggest the 6700k.  That extra bit of clock speed and HT will carry your system's life a little further.  
 
Getting the i5 and planning to upgrade the CPU within one to two years is not an efficient plan.  By the time a worthy successor to the i5 comes out, you'll need a new motherboard to go with it.  Better to get the i7 and expect it to last a full 5 years. 
 
Another way to look at it is price per year of use.  Price out an i5 system that you'd be happy with, then do the same with an i7 system.  Assume the i5 will provide acceptable performance for 4 years, and the i7 for 5 years.  In both cases, you may decide to overclock in the final year just to keep performance at an acceptable level.  Divide the price by number of years and compare the two.  You may want to play with the assumed lifespan a bit.
 
For motherboard, can you wait a month or two for more selection?  Give the the big board companies time refine their lineup a little.