4670k vs 6600k price/perf comparison

[KenJimmY]

#1 i5 4670k + Asus Z87 Pro =  317 Euro

vs

#2 i5 6600k + Gigabyte GA-Z170-HD3 = 385 Euro

 

(i only care about the OC features and how close they are to one another performance wise , once overclocked to .. say 4.5Ghz and probably will delid the cpu for better/even better temps anyway ; i have a NH-D14)

[WereCat]

4670k is better price/performance.

You get newer features on Z170 though but that depends on you if you think they are worth €60 extra. For me they don't.

[Stardar1]

in USD, if you are looking at the 4790k, and a gigabyte gaming 5 board with 8GB of RAM, it is only an extra 50 USD to go to the 6600k, the gaming 5 Z170 and 8GB DDR4

 

EDIT: I MADE A TYPO, I MEANT THE 4690k I5

[Majestic]

4670k is better price/performance.

 

http://pclab.pl/zdjecia/artykuly/radek/2015/skylake/charts/def/b4.png

 

97.8 fps @ 385 euro vs. 83.5 fps @ 317.Price/performance is actually pretty much the same (0.254 fps/euro vs. 0.263 fps/euro). Check sig for more benchmarks, skylake is however much newer and would be the preferred system to go for.

[arvark]

50 more USD to get an i5? lol @Stardar1

[arvark]

http://pclab.pl/zdjecia/artykuly/radek/2015/skylake/charts/def/b4.png

 

97.8 fps @ 385 euro vs. 83.5 fps @ 317.Price/performance is actually pretty much the same (0.254 fps/euro vs. 0.263 fps/euro). Check sig for more benchmarks, skylake is however much newer and would be the preferred system to go for.

One game... LOL. Most game have little to no difference.

[Biggerboot]

Yeah the 4690k (devil's canyon) is a better bang for the buck right now, you're mostly paying for the newer shinier architecture, which can pay off if you plan on upgrading the CPU down the road.

[Majestic]

One game... LOL. Most game have little to no difference.

 

Learn to read, i said check sig for more benchmarks. Games not having differences is due to most benchmarks being ran on non-intensive games, indoors and in single player. These have larger contrast, sure, but they're more accurate.

[Stardar1]

50 more USD to get an i5? lol @Stardar1

for the 6600k vs the 4690k

[Biggerboot]

Oh, and to answer the OP more directly, the overclocking headroom on both are about the same (about 4.5ghz without much issue).

[arvark]

for the 6600k vs the 4690k

He wrote 4790k.

[KenJimmY]

thank you all for replying n_n

[Stardar1]

He wrote 4790k.

shoot! i made a typo, meant the 4690k

[arvark]

Np. Just didn't check America's Prices so I actually thought you could buy an i7 for that price.

[WereCat]

http://pclab.pl/zdjecia/artykuly/radek/2015/skylake/charts/def/b4.png

97.8 fps @ 385 euro vs. 83.5 fps @ 317.Price/performance is actually pretty much the same (0.254 fps/euro vs. 0.263 fps/euro). Check sig for more benchmarks, skylake is however much newer and would be the preferred system to go for.

That's one game. Also BF4 is known to perform better with faster RAM which may be also a big factor in this benchmark.

You won't see difference in most games however.

So the price/performance will be different for each game and overall better for 4690k.

Edit:

I haven't seen your signature as they don't show for me on phone but from benchmarks I have seen they were about the same performance in most games... Few exceptions for Skylake being faster.

[Majestic]

You won't see difference in most games however.

 

That says more about the games than the CPU. The Skylake CPU is significantly faster in games where it matters, and those are the games you should look at when determining value for money, not the games where it doesn't matter anyway.

 

Here is the signature link

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/443567-lets-put-this-to-rest-build-%C3%BCber-4k-pc-now-or-wait-for-pascal-arcitc-island-direct-x12-vs-mantle/page-4#entry5946965

[i_build_nanosuits]

#1 i5 4670k + Asus Z87 Pro =  317 Euro

vs

#2 i5 6600k + Gigabyte GA-Z170-HD3 = 385 Euro

 

(i only care about the OC features and how close they are to one another performance wise , once overclocked to .. say 4.5Ghz and probably will delid the cpu for better/even better temps anyway ; i have a NH-D14)

option #2 is worth the extra $ mate.

it will be relevant longer.

[WereCat]

That says more about the games than the CPU. The Skylake CPU is significantly faster in games where it matters, and those are the games you should look at when determining value for money, not the games where it doesn't matter anyway.

Here is the signature link

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/443567-lets-put-this-to-rest-build-%C3%BCber-4k-pc-now-or-wait-for-pascal-arcitc-island-direct-x12-vs-mantle/page-4#entry5946965

Interesting. Who is source for these benchmarks?

Though I would still argue that pouring that extra €60 into GPU would give you better performance benefit than putting it into CPU.

[Majestic]

Interesting. Who is source for these benchmarks?

Though I would still argue that pouring that extra €60 into GPU would give you better performance benefit than putting it into CPU.

 

pclab.pl, though the digitalfoundry video will show the same results.

 

And that depends on the pricepoints. If you can already afford a 970 or 390, adding 60 euro doesn't really do much.