Which is better for gaming 6700k or 5960x

[radnaxela]

which is better for gaming 6700k or 5960x? i understand that 5960x has allot of cores which makes it harder for games to utilize it, but I also understand that it is more expensive so I want to know with how expensive it is can it handle gaming well even better than 6700k as well as it being a video editing beast? Bec. What I want is good for gaming if the 5960x is good at video editing as well as better for gaming than the 6700k but if the 6700k is better for gaming hands down then forget it.

[Amazingasian]

5820K is a very good middle ground between fast cores and more cores.  It is the same price as the 6700K and has 6 cores instead of 4.

[Glenwing]

1 minute ago, radnaxela said:

which is better for gaming 6700k or 5960x? i understand that 5960x has allot of cores which makes it harder for games to utilize it, but I also understand that it is more expensive so I want to know with how expensive it is can it handle gaming well even better than 6700k as well as it being a video editing beast? Bec. What I want is good for gaming if the 5960x is good at video editing as well as better for gaming than the 6700k but if the 6700k is better for gaming hands down then forget it.

Depends on the game. The 6700K will win in single-threaded performance since it runs at a higher frequency and has slightly more performance per cycle. If the 5960X is overclocked it won't be far behind though. In games that utilize many CPU cores (which is a fair amount of games these days) the 5960X should win outright.

[stealth80]

1 minute ago, Glenwing said:

Depends on the game. The 6700K will win in single-threaded performance since it runs at a higher frequency and has slightly more performance per cycle. If the 5960X is overclocked it won't be far behind though. In games that utilize many CPU cores (which is a fair amount of games these days) the 5960X should win outright.

Pretty much this. Also consider the fact that 3x/4x SLI or Crossfire can only be done on X99, which if you want "the ultimate" gaming machine should be thought about. not just core/IPC/Speed

[pokechat8978]

2 minutes ago, stealth80 said:

Pretty much this. Also consider the fact that 3x/4x SLI or Crossfire can only be done on X99, which if you want "the ultimate" gaming machine should be thought about. not just core/IPC/Speed

Well X99 and some Z170 boards that have PLX chips on them.

[cortexcortex]

5 minutes ago, Glenwing said:

Depends on the game. The 6700K will win in single-threaded performance since it runs at a higher frequency and has slightly more performance per cycle. If the 5960X is overclocked it won't be far behind though. In games that utilize many CPU cores (which is a fair amount of games these days) the 5960X should win outright.

True, my 5960x OC'd actually has better single core performance than a 6700k @ 4GHz. Anyways, I do believe that putting down $1000 for a solely gaming CPU is ridiculous.

[Enderman]

the 6700k is better

not only is it clocked higher, but skylake core performance is MUCH better than haswell

 

also less than 0.01% of games can actually use more than 8 threads, making the extra 8 threads on the 5960x practically useless

[radnaxela]

3 hours ago, Glenwing said:

 

[cortexcortex]

1 minute ago, Enderman said:

the 6700k is better

not only is it clocked higher, but skylake core performance is MUCH better than haswell

 

also less than 0.01% of games can actually use more than 8 threads, making the extra 8 threads on the 5960x practically useless

If it's solely for gaming, I would opt for a i5, though. Anyways, getting a Haswell-E (X99) based CPU would be better for (future) games, which will be supporting DirectX 12.

[Siman]

What do you plan on doing with your computer? 1080p, 1440p, 4k, 4k+...

 

IMHO the 6700 is good for 1440p entry 4k, the 5960X is 4k+ with more PCI-e lanes you can have more GPUs or bandwidth to gpus I should say... If you plan on multi-tasking or doing video editing rendering and the sort the 5960X will be the better of the two.

 

AMD 860K + Nvidia GTX 950/960 or 380x = 1080p

Intel I5 46xxK/6600k or AMD FX + AMD 390X or GTX 970 = 1080p-1440p

Intel I7 47xxK/6700k + x2 AMD 390X or x3 980Ti = 1440p & entry 4k

Intel I7 Extream + x3 or x4 high-end cards (lots of VRam) = 4k and 4k+

 

Of course CPUs that are in-between can kinda do both like the I7 5820 is more of a lower end but is aimed at people that want to do both gaming and some video editing but not get too ridiculous.

 

[cortexcortex]

1 minute ago, Siman said:

What do you plan on doing with your computer? 1080p, 1440p, 4k, 4k+...

 

IMHO the 6700 is good for 1440p entry 4k, the 5960X is 4k+ with more PCI-e lanes you can have more GPUs or bandwidth to gpus I should say... If you plan on multi-tasking or doing video editing rendering and the sort the 5960X will be the better of the two.

 

AMD 860K + Nvidia GTX 950/960 or 380x = 1080p

Intel I5 46xxK/6600k or AMD FX + AMD 390X = 1080p-1440p

Intel I7 47xxK/6700k + x2 AMD 390X or x3 980Ti = 1440p & entry 4k

Intel I7 Extream + x3 or x4 high-end cards (lots of VRam) = 4k and 4k+

 

Of course CPUs that are in-between can kinda do both like the I7 5820 is more of a lower end but is aimed at people that want to do both gaming and some video editing but not get too ridiculous.

 

As long as the CPU can handle the GPU power, it's alright. An i5 can do 4k no problem, haha. It's one of the best CPU's for solo gaming.

[HelplmChoking]

If you can afford the 5960x, do it. Yes the 6700k has slightly better per core performance, but not by enough to improve gaming performance. Neither will bottleneck a 980ti or Titan X, so you're fine. The 5960x will allow for better multitasking, as well as better SLI support and allows for multithreaded tasks to be performed much better.

[Siman]

3 minutes ago, cortexcortex said:

As long as the CPU can handle the GPU power, it's alright. An i5 can do 4k no problem, haha. It's one of the best CPU's for solo gaming.

Yeah it can but your starting to get to the top end of the CPUs cash for the GPU overhead.

[arout77]

Following up on the 5820k recommendation -- from the benchmarks I've seen, it's pretty even between the 5820k and the 6700k. Some games one cpu is slightly better than the other, but there's rarely a significant difference either way. With that being the case, I think the 5820k is the better overall choice, since it will smoke the 6700k in most other aspects. So..logically then, if you can afford it, the 5960x is an even better choice. If you look over at hwbot's hall of fame, the top 100 benchmarks in gaming, every single entry in the top 100 except for about 5 or 6, is running a 5960x....and the few that are not using it are running a 5930k.

[Siman]

imho Id take into account the whole computer... the less you spend on a CPU the more you have for other things...

[arout77]

7 minutes ago, Siman said:

imho Id take into account the whole computer... the less you spend on a CPU the more you have for other things...

If he's considering a 5960x as a possibility, budget is likely a non-factor. Besides...the CPU and an SSD will take care of all other performance considerations outside of gaming; I don't think getting the best CPU possible as a starting point for new builds is ever a bad idea. If my assumption is wrong and budget is a factor, then yeah, definitely agree the 5960 is a bad move

[Siman]

Just now, arout77 said:

If he's considering a 5960x as a possibility, budget is likely a non-factor. Besides...the CPU and an SSD will take care of all other performance considerations outside of gaming; I don't think getting the best CPU possible as a starting point for new builds is ever a bad idea. If my assumption is wrong and budget is a factor, then yeah, definitely agree the 5960 is a bad move

well yeah but then why ask about a 6700? Really we need to know what GPUs he plans to run...

[sgtheadhole]

5 hours ago, Enderman said:

the 6700k is better

not only is it clocked higher, but skylake core performance is MUCH better than haswell

 

also less than 0.01% of games can actually use more than 8 threads, making the extra 8 threads on the 5960x practically useless

Lol

 

Evidence to show how much better Skylake is vs Haswell-E?

[Enderman]

18 minutes ago, sgtheadhole said:

Lol

 

Evidence to show how much better Skylake is vs Haswell-E?

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9483/intel-skylake-review-6700k-6600k-ddr4-ddr3-ipc-6th-generation/9

 

 

 

[sgtheadhole]

Thats the most pathetic Evidence ive ever seen, %1 gaming difference in metro? fair comparison as though its SAME clockspeed vs archecture but pathetic significance....

 

PCmark worthless comparison, stock clocks

 

IF thats all you can find for non difference, and they arent actually statistically significant then your claim of "MUCH better than hasswell" is rediculous and you should retract the statement coz its so ignorant

 

Also i noticed your PC is shitter than mine, therefor you're incorrect totally

 

[sgtheadhole]

10 minutes ago, Enderman said:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9483/intel-skylake-review-6700k-6600k-ddr4-ddr3-ipc-6th-generation/9

 

 

 

 

 

 

You probably dont know but Geekbench is one of the best CPU performance benchmarks around

 

 

That is the difference between stock 6700k and 4790k

 

shown in absolute numbers, the real application performance varies, but there is an overall CPU difference shown there of less than %5

 

There is no big difference betwene Haswell Refresh & Skylake

 

Haswell-E is better than Haswell Refresh...

 

[Enderman]

2 minutes ago, sgtheadhole said:

 

You probably dont know but Geekbench is one of the best CPU performance benchmarks around

 

 

actually, real world programs are far better than synthetic benchmarks you telling you what performance you actually get

personally i use programs and play games, i dont run synthetic benchmarks on a daily basis

[sgtheadhole]

1 minute ago, Enderman said:

actually, real world programs are far better than synthetic benchmarks you telling you what performance you actually get

personally i use programs and play games, i dont run synthetic benchmarks on a daily basis

Real world and synthetic difference in architecture is almost non existance

[Enderman]

9 minutes ago, sgtheadhole said:

Real world and synthetic difference in architecture is almost non existance

clearly you didnt look at the real world benchmarks that i posted, or the video linus made...

[sgtheadhole]

Just now, Enderman said:

clearly you didnt look at the real world benchmarks that i posted, or the video linus made...

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1543?vs=1260

 

 

 

??????