980 TI with cpu upgrade FX 9590 or i7 Skylake?

[NEMESlS]

I own a Pentium, which is the lowest haswell you can get. I am not salty. Just objective. I fully intend on getting a Skylake chip too, because there is plenty room for improvement on the 1151 platform, and the features are amazing. I provided sufficient evidence to support my claim. Perhaps you can give me a few more video's to support yours?

I have more than enough proof, i5 decimates the older gen i5's... it even ties with the 4790k.

 

But i guess your reviews only reviewed the 6700k which is obviously going to be GPU bound vs other i7's.

[i_build_nanosuits]

All Haswell owners are this salty though so nothing new.

haha you're funny...a sandy-bridge or ivy-bridge core i5 processor is all you need for gaming, even with a GTX 980ti. Anything above that will perfom only marginaly better and will not be a game changer in terms of overall gaming experience. That's all i have to say about this.

[MageTank]

I have more than enough proof, i5 decimates the older gen i5's... it even ties with the 4790k.

 

But i guess your reviews only reviewed the 6700k which is obviously going to be GPU bound vs other i7's.

I provided benchmarks of 720p and 1080p benchmarks. At resolutions this low, the GPU bottleneck is removed from the equation. How do you not understand this?

[NEMESlS]

LOL 6600K>>>>>>>>>>>4790k in gaming.

[NEMESlS]

I provided benchmarks of 720p and 1080p benchmarks. At resolutions this low, the GPU bottleneck is removed from the equation. How do you not understand this?

You posted i7's i posted i5's.. 6600k matches the 4790k in gaming.. where the 4690k does not... 

[NEMESlS]

And yeah the video uses an OC'd TITAN X at 200mhz more on teh core and 400mhz more on memory, it also has all chips OC'd.

[DarkSmith2]

Yup,

Skylake > Haswell / Devils Canyon

in everything, temps, effiency, chipset, ipc, performance.

Not by much. But indeed fact.

 

maybe except:

price

[MageTank]

You posted i7's i posted i5's.. 6600k matches the 4790k in gaming.. where the 4690k does not... 

I am going to educate you on how this works my friend. I said it before, and i will repeat myself. Games do not scale that well with more cores. Whether they are physical or logical, beyond 4 cores, you rarely ever see an improvement. The 6600k is a quad core, like the 4790k. The lack of Hyperthreading is NOT detrimental to its gaming performance. The only factors that change now, are the IPC performance and the clock rates themselves. Going by your logic, the 4690k matches the 4790k in gaming too.

 

[NEMESlS]

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-intel-skylake-core-i5-6600k-review

[NEMESlS]

I am going to educate you on how this works my friend. I said it before, and i will repeat myself. Games do not scale that well with more cores. Whether they are physical or logical, beyond 4 cores, you rarely ever see an improvement. The 6600k is a quad core, like the 4790k. The lack of Hyperthreading is NOT detrimental to its gaming performance. The only factors that change now, are the IPC performance and the clock rates themselves. Going by your logic, the 4690k matches the 4790k in gaming too.

 

Talking down to me because your idiocy shows through will not work.

[NEMESlS]

With the new i5 comparing favourably to its predecessors, we thought we'd go one step further, pitting the new chip against the last two generations of mainstream i7s - the epic Devil's Canyon Core i7 4790K and the still-worthy Core i7 3770K, hailing from the Ivy Bridge generation. We've also factored in the new chip running with the 4.5GHz overclock in place. The end results are impressive: average frame-rates at stock speeds beat the 3770K on all but two titles - Crysis 3 and The Witcher 3. The 6600K is also faster than the 4790K in Call of Duty and GTA 5, though its wins in Battlefield 4 and Ryse are margin of error stuff. The i5's performance increases still further with the 4.5GHz overclock in place, beating the stock i7s on all titles. However, on some games that utilise more than four threads, there is the suggestion that the i7s stutter less.

[MageTank]

Talking down to me because your idiocy shows through will not work.

You've yet to prove me to be an idiot. I am talking down to you because you are uninformed, yet are spreading misinformation. Skylake and Haswell perform on par with each other. In some cases, Skylake has shown a slight performance loss depending on the game, because its FPU is 6% slower. The IPC increase offsets this in most cases, but not all of them. You wanted proof, i gave you plenty of proof. You are the only person in denial here.

[NEMESlS]

You've yet to prove me to be an idiot. I am talking down to you because you are uninformed, yet are spreading misinformation. Skylake and Haswell perform on par with each other. In some cases, Skylake has shown a slight performance loss depending on the game, because its FPU is 6% slower. The IPC increase offsets this in most cases, but not all of them. You wanted proof, i gave you plenty of proof. You are the only person in denial here.

You own a Pentium.

You have proven nothing.

I have proven the i5 to be a larger gain in performance than you give credit for, so please do downplay it more mr Haswell crap 2 core CPU owner.

[MageTank]

With the new i5 comparing favourably to its predecessors, we thought we'd go one step further, pitting the new chip against the last two generations of mainstream i7s - the epic Devil's Canyon Core i7 4790K and the still-worthy Core i7 3770K, hailing from the Ivy Bridge generation. We've also factored in the new chip running with the 4.5GHz overclock in place. The end results are impressive: average frame-rates at stock speeds beat the 3770K on all but two titles - Crysis 3 and The Witcher 3. The 6600K is also faster than the 4790K in Call of Duty and GTA 5, though its wins in Battlefield 4 and Ryse are margin of error stuff. The i5's performance increases still further with the 4.5GHz overclock in place, beating the stock i7s on all titles. However, on some games that utilise more than four threads, there is the suggestion that the i7s stutter less.

 

4.5ghz 6600k vs a 4ghz 4790k? You call this a fair fight? You are going to OC a chip that already has an IPC advantage and pit it against a stock chip? No wonder you are delusional. You put your faith in a lackluster testing methodology, lol.

[NEMESlS]

4.5ghz 6600k vs a 4ghz 4790k? You call this a fair fight? You are going to OC a chip that already has an IPC advantage and pit it against a stock chip? No wonder you are delusional. You put your faith in a lackluster testing methodology, lol.

Buy a K series chip not to OC, your IQ... hilarious.

[MageTank]

You own a Pentium.

You have proven nothing.

I have proven the i5 to be a larger gain in performance than you give credit for, so please do downplay it more mr Haswell crap 2 core CPU owner.

My personal rig is a Pentium, this is because i use it as a stop-gap. This does not mean i am inexperienced in different CPU's. I have machines with the i5 4690k, FX 8320, Phenom II 965 BE, etc, all in my home running as we speak. I have overclocked all of them. I built all of them. I know how they run and how they perform. The fact that i use a Pentium does not change what i know about these CPU's. Face it friend, you do not know what you are talking about. Leave the advice giving to the professionals.

[NEMESlS]

My personal rig is a Pentium, this is because i use it as a stop-gap. This does not mean i am inexperienced in different CPU's. I have machines with the i5 4690k, FX 8320, Phenom II 965 BE, etc, all in my home running as we speak. I have overclocked all of them. I built all of them. I know how they run and how they perform. The fact that i use a Pentium does not change what i know about these CPU's. Face it friend, you do not know what you are talking about. Leave the advice giving to the professionals.

So you are now a Professional? could you be any more of a dick?

And still 6600k>>>>>>>>>>all i5's...

 

Want to tell me cheese is bad vs marmite?

 

Cheese install base vs marmite install base.

[MageTank]

Buy a K series chip not to OC, your IQ... hilarious.

The 4790k is a K series chip. How dense are you? You just specifically showed me that the 6600k is overclocked, going against stock i7's. You just completely shot yourself in the foot. 

 

 

With the new i5 comparing favourably to its predecessors, we thought we'd go one step further, pitting the new chip against the last two generations of mainstream i7s - the epic Devil's Canyon Core i7 4790K and the still-worthy Core i7 3770K, hailing from the Ivy Bridge generation. We've also factored in the new chip running with the 4.5GHz overclock in place. The end results are impressive: average frame-rates at stock speeds beat the 3770K on all but two titles - Crysis 3 and The Witcher 3. The 6600K is also faster than the 4790K in Call of Duty and GTA 5, though its wins in Battlefield 4 and Ryse are margin of error stuff. The i5's performance increases still further with the 4.5GHz overclock in place, beating the stock i7s on all titles. However, on some games that utilise more than four threads, there is the suggestion that the i7s stutter less.

Yeah, you have to have a low IQ not to OC a K series chip. Unless you are trying to make Skylake look better, then its perfectly okay, right? After all, that's your logic, not mine.

[NEMESlS]

The 4790k is a K series chip. How dense are you? You just specifically showed me that the 6600k is overclocked, going against stock i7's. You just completely shot yourself in the foot. 

 

 

Yeah, you have to have a low IQ not to OC a K series chip. Unless you are trying to make Skylake look better, then its perfectly okay, right? After all, that's your logic, not mine.

But Skylake is hilariously and alarmingly better, why do you have nothing good to say about it?

[DarkSmith2]

ah well, most benchmarks out there were made wrong, they are still bottlenecked by GPU not CPU.

Its proven in many showcases how much faster Skylake is compared to Haswell. (about 7-12%)

 

All Benchmarks wrong made showing variants in GPU margin of error performance. Sad the sites dont take enough time to do there tests good.

The Eurogamer.net video and review showing really close to reality results. The problem is, there are not real world. They needed to run the games on specific settings to test the CPU performance difference. Without any bound to GPU relevants.

 

Therefore yes, Skylake is the fastest for games. BUT as mentioned on other threads as it gets to GPU binding the Broadwell beats them all for some reasons. But its nothing that couldnt be changed with drivers.

 

Some of the reviews linked in this thread are also comparing a skylake platform with fast ddr3 vs slowest ddr4

[NEMESlS]

"1. DDR4 is not exactly mature yet. 

 

What i mean by this, is that the speeds are not exactly where DDR4 is rated to be able to handle, and they are not the best modules. Some amazing modules do exist, but at a VERY expensive price point. For example: GeIL has a 64gb 3000mhz CL13 DDR4 kit, which would absolutely crush most DDR3 kits, but the 64GB kit is $1000. You could get a 3400mhz kit and cut it down to 3000mhz, but you will only be able to achieve CL14 based on reports of the current modules available."

 

 

Rule 1, when you own Haswell mention what everyone else knows then downplay some random ass shit.

[Nena Trinity]

FX-9590 is a horrible idea!

 

Why not wait for Zen?

[MageTank]

But Skylake is hilariously and alarmingly better, why do you have nothing good to say about it?

Nothing good?

 

 

Skylake would offer a stronger advantage in gaming, if gaming is your end goal. The FX 9590 is just a highly binned FX 8350, and is not exactly an upgrade over the FX 6300 as far as gaming goes. Gaming in general does not scale well with more cores at the moment, and the FX series has a weak IPC. No matter how much you OC the core, you will be fighting an uphill battle to even match stock Intel CPU's.

 

Skylake in general is not exactly impressive, when you compare it to current Haswell CPU's, but the Z170 platform is absolutely amazing. USB 3.1 support, 20 PCI-E lanes (Meaning you can run SLI AND an M.2 SSD at the same time, or 4 way crossfire and an M.2 SSD), better SATA controllers, and Skylake is rumored to support VISC. Couple this with DDR4 support in the future, having speeds upwards of 4000mhz, and native 64GB support on consumer grade ATX boards (supporting 16GB modules per DIMM) or 32GB on consumer grade ITX boards, you have one hell of an enticing platform upgrade.

 

This does come with a few drawbacks.

 

1. DDR4 is not exactly mature yet. 

 

What i mean by this, is that the speeds are not exactly where DDR4 is rated to be able to handle, and they are not the best modules. Some amazing modules do exist, but at a VERY expensive price point. For example: GeIL has a 64gb 3000mhz CL13 DDR4 kit, which would absolutely crush most DDR3 kits, but the 64GB kit is $1000. You could get a 3400mhz kit and cut it down to 3000mhz, but you will only be able to achieve CL14 based on reports of the current modules available.

 

2. Motherboard choice and overclocking.

 

With FIVR moved back on to the board, your choice of board will be critical for achieving high overclocking. Similar to how it is now with AMD, and how it used to be for Intel, you will need to pay attention to the power delivery of certain boards to ensure you can reach the OC you are looking to reach. Not every board will be capable of the same OC's. 

 

That being said, Skylake would make an amazing upgrade over the FX 6300 in both raw performance, and features. The platform is solid, and what you get for the price is great. If you are not patient, upgrading to a Haswell i5 or i7 with a Z97 board will give you the same performance as Skylake chips, but you will be missing some of the better Z170 platform features that i mentioned above. Good luck in your build.

 

[NEMESlS]

Nothing good?

 

Let us not take into account the amount of subtle negativity done in this post.

[MageTank]

ah well, most benchmarks out there were made wrong, they are still bottlenecked by GPU not CPU.

Its proven in many showcases how much faster Skylake is compared to Haswell. (about 7-12%)

 

All Benchmarks wrong made showing variants in GPU margin of error performance. Sad the sites dont take enough time to do there tests good.

The Eurogamer.net video and review showing really close to reality results. The problem is, there are not real world. They needed to run the games on specific settings to test the CPU performance difference. Without any bound to GPU relevants.

 

Therefore yes, Skylake is the fastest for games. BUT as mentioned on other threads as it gets to GPU binding the Broadwell beats them all for some reasons. But its nothing that could be changed with drivers.

The GPU is only a bottleneck when it becomes taxed to the point in which it holds the rest of the system back. When people test games at 720p, the GPU bottleneck is completely removed. This puts the ball in the CPU's court. This is how people effectively test CPU's against each other.