I5 6600k vs i7 6700k

[Chimras]

Hi, im either going with the i5 6600k or the i7 6700k, which one give the best performance for gaming and for the money

[Swndlr]

6600K

All the 6700K is, is the 6600K with hyperthreading  This will not really affect your gaming performance by much and if you game mostly compared to video work or whatever, it isnt worth the extra $100 or so.

[Bigheart]

performance to money is probably the i5

the i7 will give you better all around performance, and may be viable for a longer period of time. 

[N64CUBE]

I mean, the i7 6700k is obviously better, but not worth it at all. 100% go for the i5.

[Chimras]

Thanks everyone

 

[RAAL4]

i7 will give you 10 fps more than i5

 

[N64CUBE]

Just now, RAAL4 said:

i7 will give you 10 fps more than i5

 

That's a big generalization man.

[RAAL4]

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/gkyhnQ

 

this is my pc, 

my brother has the exact same pc except he has an i5 6600k, i always have around 10 fps higher than him

[Andrewh3153]

I'd go with the i5 for the preformance for that price, but if you are willing to spend that much more, the i7 is the best.

[porina]

If you overclock both to the same clocks, the differences are minimal outside of some cases where HT makes a difference like Cinebench. I actually run a 6700k with HT off as some other stuff I do actually gets slowed down by it!

7 minutes ago, RAAL4 said:

my brother has the exact same pc except he has an i5 6600k, i always have around 10 fps higher than him

Is the 6600k overclocked? I would guess the clock speed is making most of the difference.

[Chimras]

Just now, porina said:

If you overclock both to the same clocks, the differences are minimal outside of some cases where HT makes a difference like Cinebench. I actually run a 6700k with HT off as some other stuff I do actually gets slowed down by it!

Is the 6600k overclocked? I would guess the clock speed is making most of the difference.

where does hyper threading make a difference in gaming or outside gaming?

[porina]

9 minutes ago, Chimras said:

where does hyper threading make a difference in gaming or outside gaming?

In the best case scenarios I've seen, a "HT" core is worth half of a real one. So in these cases, a quad core with HT has about the equivalent power as a 6 core without HT. Cinebench shows some improvement but I don't experiment with that much. Last time I tried it on my main system to get a HT on/off baseline set the CPU test scored 31% higher with HT on and no other changes. Other cases I've seen a 50% improvement is a long disappeared distributed computing project called LifeMapper. Sieve tasks on prime finding projects also show a big boost but I don't think it was the full 50%.

 

I haven't done 1st hand testing, but I believe in some cases where people used i3 processors in gaming boxes, leaving HT on was able to show an improvement in gaming performance presumably as 2 cores without was CPU limiting, and any boost helped. But this didn't seem to help with quads (for now).

 

Where I've seen a performance decrease from HT is in compute tasks that do not benefit from HT at all. HT uses spare parts of the core to handle more, but some tasks already utilise the processor to the max there is nothing for HT to give, except additional management overhead and thus a small decrease in performance. Windows scheduling doesn't help either, if I run 4 tasks with HT on, you can see them wander around all 8 processor threads, and I think they're tripping over themselves for typical 10% drop in performance. If I either set affinity so they only run on one thread per physical core, or turn off HT altogether, that 10% loss goes away.

[Chimras]

Just now, porina said:

In the best case scenarios I've seen, a "HT" core is worth half of a real one. So in these cases, a quad core with HT has about the equivalent power as a 6 core without HT. Cinebench shows some improvement but I don't experiment with that much. Last time I tried it on my main system to get a HT on/off baseline set the CPU test scored 31% higher with HT on and no other changes. Other cases I've seen a 50% improvement is a long disappeared distributed computing project called LifeMapper. Sieve tasks on prime finding projects also show a big boost but I don't think it was the full 50%.

 

I haven't done 1st hand testing, but I believe in some cases where people used i3 processors in gaming boxes, leaving HT on was able to show an improvement in gaming performance presumably as 2 cores without was CPU limiting, and any boost helped. But this didn't seem to help with quads (for now).

 

Where I've seen a performance decrease from HT is in compute tasks that do not benefit from HT at all. HT uses spare parts of the core to handle more, but some tasks already utilise the processor to the max there is nothing for HT to give, except additional management overhead and thus a small decrease in performance. Windows scheduling doesn't help either, if I run 4 tasks with HT on, you can see them wander around all 8 processor threads, and I think they're tripping over themselves for typical 10% drop in performance. If I either set affinity so they only run on one thread per physical core, or turn off HT altogether, that 10% loss goes away.

Made my mind, going to buy the 6600k, and im going to OC the CPU what motherboard might be a good choice to OC that CPU. Thinking of either the Sabertooth Mark 1 Z170 or the Asus Z170 A

[porina]

32 minutes ago, Chimras said:

Made my mind, going to buy the 6600k, and im going to OC the CPU what motherboard might be a good choice to OC that CPU. Thinking of either the Sabertooth Mark 1 Z170 or the Asus Z170 A

Hard for me to recommend any specific boards as I've only used two: Asus Maximus Hero VIII - I like it, not cheap. MSI Gaming Pro - got two of these, and they behave differently from each other when OC. One works great, the other is fussy, even after swapping bits between them to confirm it is the mobo and not other component. I also found some other similar reports on MSI's forums with odd behaviour with them. On that basis I wouldn't recommend it.

[Qwerty2323]

Best for money might be i7 6700 with stock cooler and h170 motherboard :-D 

 

[Tech Deals]

3 hours ago, Bigheart said:

performance to money is probably the i5

the i7 will give you better all around performance, and may be viable for a longer period of time. 

^ This...

 

There are a select few cases where the i7 does indeed show improvement over the i5, but those are the exceptions that prove the rule.

 

Fallout 4, GTA V, ARMA III and other CPU bound games can be faster on the i7.  That being said, unless you're gaming with a 144hz monitor, it won't matter since you can easily exceed 60 fps (thus 60hz) with the i5 chip.

 

Almost everything else, there is zero difference between the i5 and i7 in gaming.