i7 920 vs i5 6600k

[booty_jose]

hello everyone i just wanted to start a conversation about something me and my friend were talking about. I have a i7 920 OC at 4 ghz while my friend has a i5 6600k at stock, we both want to know whos processor would win in a "fight" so i decided to see what you guys would think. I'm not looking for answers like "you have a higher frequency so you would win" I'm looking for answers about the 6 generation gap between them and has that really helped the 6600k. i would greatly appreciate everyones answers and opinions on this because i would love to know the answer.  

[Chasem121]

The 6600k would crush the 920, the ipc difference between the two is gigantic

[007agentHP]

he would win

6 generations

minimum 5% improvement

he has a minimum 30% improvement

realisticaly we are talking 50-60%

[Godlygamer23]

Straight up, frequency when it comes to chips is a meaningless metric when comparing two CPUs unless they're the same architecture with other similar specs. I think in a lot of scenarios, the 6600K would win(due to the vastly superior architecture), but in highly multi-threaded scenarios, even if the 6600K would win, the 920 would still be able to at the very least be competitive.

[Philcat101]

The newer one would be faster.

Single threaded scores would still be amazing on the i5 compared to the i7.

By 6 generations, a 15% improvement each generation would be 2 times better.

[jcw150]

Do a cinebench test 

[booty_jose]

The 6600k would crush the 920, the ipc difference between the two is gigantic

me and him were both wondering about ipc and i kinda figured his would be better

[Godlygamer23]

me and him were both wondering about ipc and i kinda figured his would be better

Skylake is a vastly superior architecture, both in IPC and also power efficiency.

[booty_jose]

Do a cinebench test 

yeah i guess we should have

[AlwaysFSX]

Do a cinebench test 

this

[PlayStation 2]

6600K, and significantly. The 920 is based off of the general Core 2 Duo architecture while the i5 6600K is still built on the Core i-series architecture.

[booty_jose]

now a different question is should i upgrade to a 6600k myself, i dont really like to spend alot of money so thats why most of my stuff is used but would it be worth it?

[Godlygamer23]

now a different question is should i upgrade to a 6600k myself, i dont really like to spend alot of money so thats why most of my stuff is used but would it be worth it?

My question for you is this: do you think you need to upgrade?

[runit3]

5-15% IPC depending on the application per generation of chip. Clock for clock, core for core (each processor at X speed) would result in 30-90% improvement due to IPC alone. You then need to take into account the difference from Hyperthreading on the i7, which can shoot the gap (according to Intel) by roughly 20-30%, and this would only apply to cases in which Hyperthreading was fully utilized.

 

The Skylake will wreck an i7-920 in every conceivable test. A good place to look for results ->

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1sxzGshuqVtFe_2zgRhN3gXCraR7d8p-NazJ6z0nsGGc/edit#gid=1868502473

 

i5-6600k at 3.5GHz = 599

i7-920 at 4.0 GHz = 584

 

Wins at a .5GHz and 4 thread deficit.

[alpenwasser]

This isn't for for the clock speeds you're running, but to give you some numbers and a general idea:

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/47?vs=1543

(not that much info out there on a direct comparison probably due to the large age difference between the chips)

[booty_jose]

My question for you is this: do you think you need to upgrade?

seriously idk, im still running games nicely and i would like to go another 3-4 years with the 920 but with all the new processors coming out the games i would want to play wont be optimized for the old chipset so right now im kinda stuck 

[Godlygamer23]

seriously idk, im still running games nicely and i would like to go another 3-4 years with the 920 but with all the new processors coming out the games i would want to play wont be optimized for the old chipset so right now im kinda stuck 

I mean if games are running nicely for you and you see no reason to actually upgrade, you can save your money unless you're just itching for an upgrade.

[GloriousPain]

OP the 6600k's probably better at well everything besides being a space heater.
If memory serves me right,the generational gaps make it something like if ...
Nahalem-1
Westmere-1.1 (+10%)
Sandybridge-1.49(+35%)
Ivybridge-1.64(+10%)
Haswell-1.8(+10%)
Broadwell-1.89(+5%)
Skylake-2.08(+10%)
and with the turbo being 3.9Ghz on 6600k... theoretically using my  above numbers representing a rough estimate of IPC
6600k SkylakeIPC*Clockrate*ThreadCount  (2.08*3.9*4)=32.448
920 NahalemIPC*Clockrate*ThreadCount    (1*4*8)=32

and that's assuming hyper threaded cores really are DOUBLE the strength of non hyperthreaded cores... then again I also made rough rough assumptions on IPC

6600K, and significantly. The 920 is based off of the general Core 2 Duo architecture while the i5 6600K is still built on the Core i-series architecture.

Can you please explain this more? 

[PlayStation 2]

 

Can you please explain this more? 

920 is... Nehalem or Bloomfield, if I remember correctly. 6600K is Skylake, which is a nice improvement over Sandy Bridge, which still comfortably pummels the old i7s.

[LokiFire]

Naaa i7 920's competitor was the Phenom II x6.

[GloriousPain]

920 is... Nehalem or Bloomfield, if I remember correctly. 6600K is Skylake, which is a nice improvement over Sandy Bridge, which still comfortably pummels the old i7s.

920 is Nahalem, Bloomfields the chipset if I remember correctly or something like that... I'm still just curious about the phrasing "is bassed of the Core i series architecture" despite the fact the 920 is still a Core i series part... 

[PlayStation 2]

920 is Nahalem, Bloomfields the chipset if I remember correctly or something like that... I'm still just curious about the phrasing "is bassed of the Core i series architecture" despite the fact the 920 is still a Core i series part... 

I mean the Sandy Bridge-on architecture. I know it's an entirely different layout than pre-Sandy, but I don't think it ever got an official name.

[xiej]

OP the 6600k's probably better at well everything besides being a space heater.

If memory serves me right,the generational gaps make it something like if ...

Nahalem-1

Westmere-1.1 (+10%)

Sandybridge-1.49(+35%)

Ivybridge-1.64(+10%)

Haswell-1.8(+10%)

Broadwell-1.89(+5%)

Skylake-2.08(+10%)

and with the turbo being 3.9Ghz on 6600k... theoretically using my  above numbers representing a rough estimate of IPC

6600k SkylakeIPC*Clockrate*ThreadCount  (2.08*3.9*4)=32.448

920 NahalemIPC*Clockrate*ThreadCount    (1*4*8)=32

and that's assuming hyper threaded cores really are DOUBLE the strength of non hyperthreaded cores... then again I also made rough rough assumptions on IPC

Can you please explain this more? 

 

Hyperthreading is about 50% better, GENERALLY, DON'T QUOTE ME

[sgtheadhole]

6600K, and significantly. The 920 is based off of the general Core 2 Duo architecture while the i5 6600K is still built on the Core i-series architecture.

No whey bro, Core i7 is the first of a new generation, Nehalem, not based Core 2 Duo

[DunePilot]

hello everyone i just wanted to start a conversation about something me and my friend were talking about. I have a i7 920 OC at 4 ghz while my friend has a i5 6600k at stock, we both want to know whos processor would win in a "fight" so i decided to see what you guys would think. I'm not looking for answers like "you have a higher frequency so you would win" I'm looking for answers about the 6 generation gap between them and has that really helped the 6600k. i would greatly appreciate everyones answers and opinions on this because i would love to know the answer.  

Buy a X5675 or a W3680 or 90. If you have a 1366 platform you have zero reason to upgrade right now unless you plan on running triple SLI or have extremely heavy multi-threaded workloads for a business. The i7 920-60 crap is slow but the Xeons are extremely fast and overclockable and best of all very very cheap, buy a good used one and spend the rest of your money upgrading the GPU.

 

A X5675 at 4.3 is about the equivalent of a 4790k at 4.9. Not exactly but in my humble opinion that is a fair enough comparison.