4790k vs....

[undelt]

I mainly game, but do very little video editing, and recording. I was considering a 4790k for my next build. But i was wondering how long a 4core cpu will be able to play games for in the future. I am able to afford a x99 chipset and that stuff but was t sure if I'm gonna need it. What do you guys think? X99 or z97

[Br3tt96]

Most game don't even utilize all 4 cores...

[TheSLSAMG]

My opinion that buying a 4790K now is a bit daft considering a new platform is upon us and it offers some performace gains with a small price bump. Z97 is a dead platform, there's no use buying into it. As for the problem at hand, a quad-core (and especially a strong quad-core) should be fine for the near to distant future. We can't predict that future though.

[007agentHP]

go ahead and jump on the z97 platformk and grab plenty of DDR3 memory while its cheap. its not worth the price bump for skylake with DDR4 memory

[Jacktastic-Mofo]

If you can afford the 4790k you can probably afford to get the 6700k and stay on the latest platform.

[bomerr]

if you have ddr3 ram and you want to save that cost then getting a z97-4790k makes sense. (although you could reuse DDR4 ram in future builds). word of advice, do it now as the z97 mobos are being discontinued. 

 

but since you can afford x99 5820k I'd hop on it as a 5820k can be bought for as much or even less than a 6700k right now.

 

to answer your question a 4 core cpu is near bottlenecking right now at 1080p. at 1440p or 4k however there is still room for more fps. DX12 will help alleviate this issue and bring new life into 4 cores. But a 6 core is definitely more future-proof. 

[undelt]

If i have the money should i just hop on the x99 train? A 6700k or 5930k or something? I got the funds to get whatever i need...

[bomerr]

If i have the money should i just hop on the x99 train? A 6700k or 5930k or something? I got the funds to get whatever i need...

5820k is best bang for the buck if you are purchasing DDR4 ram.

 

6600k is 250 MSRP

6700k is 350 MSRP

5820k is 390 on Newegg  / 320 at microcenter.

 

So 100 dollars extra gets you 2mb of cache and hyper threading while 40 extra gets you 7mb of cache and 2 extra cores. 

 

Also the TIM on skylake CPUs is worse than Haswell so out of the box OCs will be lower than 4790k unless you delid the CPU.

 

6600k/6700k/5820k are all limited to 8X SLI while the 5930k can do 16x SLI. IMO it's not wroth the extra 200 or so dollars.  

[othertomperson]

There's like £50 difference between a build with a 6700k and an equivalent build with a 5820k.

 

Makes the 6700k a bit of a weird purchase atm. The i5 makes the most sense for gaming imo, but for any workstation use that would actually benefit from hyperthreading... well for just £50 more you get two additional cores as well as hyperthreading.

[undelt]

So now its down to a 5930k vs 4790k, which one and why?

[PDArm]

DDR4 isn't worth the switch. Who the hell wants higher latencies? An DDR3 performs the same as DDR4 at lower latencies. So unless you want 64-128gb of ram and a skylake processor  which overheats worse than it's predecessors stick to DDR3, 4790k and Z97. Till either zen or intel gets their ass in gear and actually releases something relevant to the hype surrounding it.

It makes very little difference what you go for at this point and countless threads about it just gets annoying. 

[Bensemus]

Games still want stronger cores over more so jumping on x99 for a gaming build with 1 gpu doesn't make sense. By the time games need more then 4 cores/threads x99 will most likely be outdated.