6100 vs 6600k or 6700k

[silverjay928]

Hello guys I am building a mini itx system for travel purposes and right now I just put together a temporary 860k cpu with a88x mobo system but for an upgrade should I buy a i3 and use the extra money for a GPU or go for the 6600k or 6700k and save up for a new gpu right now I'm rocking a 560ti 448 LE core and plan to get a 480. This system will be my all around gaming and content creation 

[EuphoricLlama]

If it's mainly gaming you'll be doing, i5 6600k all the way. The 6700k is overkill unless you are also doing intensive 3d modeling ect. I would stay away from an i3 personally because they might bottleneck more cpu intensive games + it has no overclocking support. 

[TheOnlyNexus]

For gaming the 6600k would definitely be enough. For content creation (video editing,..) I would rather tend to the 6700k. Considering you will only be using it as a travel pc, you might want to stick with the 6600k or use the 6700, on which my system is running on.

[pcshme33]

16 minutes ago, EuphoricLlama said:

If it's mainly gaming you'll be doing, i5 6600k all the way. The 6700k is overkill unless you are also doing intensive 3d modeling ect. I would stay away from an i3 personally because they might bottleneck more cpu intensive games + it has no overclocking support. 

You can't really say that. Because some games benefit from hyper threading. That is just like saying dont get a Lamborghini if you aren't a pro racer. 

[EuphoricLlama]

Just now, EnemySp0tt3d said:

You can't really say that. Because some games benefit from hyper threading. That is just like saying dont get a Lamborghini if you aren't a pro racer. 

It won't help as barely any games use more than 4 cores which the i5 6600k already has, negating the need for hyper threading 

[pcshme33]

2 minutes ago, EuphoricLlama said:

It won't help as barely any games use more than 4 cores which the i5 6600k already has, negating the need for hyper threading 

you do understand what hyper threading is, correct?

[EuphoricLlama]

1 minute ago, EnemySp0tt3d said:

you do understand what hyper threading is, correct?

Games rarely use more than 2-3 cores, so the extra hyperthreads are largely irrelevant.
A hyperthread uses residual cycles of the main cores to allow another thread to do useful work.
The effective capability of a hyperthread is perhaps 1/4 of a full core.
This is of advantage in an app that can dispatch many threads. Video rendering might be an example.
But, a game usually depends on faster threads. That is one reason that the faster intel threads are better for gaming than the more numerous but slower AMD threads.
If a game can direct the os to dispatch it's critical work on a main thread, that is good.
If a game is ignorant about the presence of hyperthreading, important work may get directed to a slower hyperthread.

[zJordan]

15 minutes ago, EuphoricLlama said:

Games rarely use more than 2-3 cores, so the extra hyperthreads are largely irrelevant.
A hyperthread uses residual cycles of the main cores to allow another thread to do useful work.
The effective capability of a hyperthread is perhaps 1/4 of a full core.
This is of advantage in an app that can dispatch many threads. Video rendering might be an example.
But, a game usually depends on faster threads. That is one reason that the faster intel threads are better for gaming than the more numerous but slower AMD threads.
If a game can direct the os to dispatch it's critical work on a main thread, that is good.
If a game is ignorant about the presence of hyperthreading, important work may get directed to a slower hyperthread.

It really depends on the game, Frostbite (engine) will use all the threads you throw at it, same for simulation-based games like Cities: Skylines, etc.

 

Most modern engines will use hyper-threading efficiently, I still think an i7 for gaming is a little overkill right now.