i7 6700 k vs non k?

[Devin92]

Hello guys,

 

I just run into choice between the two cpu mentioned in the title. The non k 6700 have a significant slower freq than 6700k, like 3.4Ghz vs 4.0Ghz. What is the reason behind this? and if 6700k is not oced, will the performance between the two be vary significantly? Not in gaming, but say video editting and staff.

 

Thanks!

[themctipers]

Xeon is better if you're not going to be overclocking. 

Also iirc the non k is ~3.6 and turbos to 4 and the k has 3.6 and turbos to 4.2 

[tlink]

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1543?vs=1554

[Imakuni]

1 minute ago, Devin92 said:

The non k 6700 have a significant slower freq than 6700k, like 3.4Ghz vs 4.0Ghz.

Small correction: the 6700 runs at 4.0/3.9/3.8/3.7 VS the 6700k's 4.2/4.0/4.0/4.0

3 minutes ago, Devin92 said:

What is the reason behind this?

Probably to keep within the 65w TDP, whereas the 6700k has a much higher rating of 91w.

4 minutes ago, Devin92 said:

and if 6700k is not oced, will the performance between the two be vary significantly? Not in gaming, but say video editting and staff.

That's such a weird question... why would you not overclock the 6700k? It's not fair (not to say pointless) to compare a CPU made for OC without actually using it's main feature.

 

But generally, the difference wouldn't be that noticeable. ~200mhz isn't very much.

[Devin92]

2 minutes ago, themctipers said:

Xeon is better if you're not going to be overclocking. 

Also iirc the non k is ~3.6 and turbos to 4 and the k has 3.6 and turbos to 4.2 

care to provide a xeon model has the same level of performance?

from pcpartpicker: i7 6700 3.4 turbo to 4.0   i7 6700k 4.0 turbo to 4.2

[WoodenMarker]

The difference in performance between the two is solely due to clock speed. 

The 6700k when not oc'ed performs better than the 6700 due to the higher clock speed. The reason for the clock speed difference is probably to get more people buying the 6700k which should be more expensive.

@Imakuni also brings up the TDP which makes sense.

[porina]

2 minutes ago, themctipers said:

Xeon is better if you're not going to be overclocking. 

Also iirc the non k is ~3.6 and turbos to 4 and the k has 3.6 and turbos to 4.2 

6700 is 3.4 base to 4.0 turbo, 6700k is 4.0 base 4.2 turbo.

 

Be aware Skylake Xeons need a server chipset mobo unlike recent previous generations which can share consumer chipset.

[stevenchoi56]

It is better to get the 6700k especially when they become around the same price because of the resale value. You can get the 6700k even if you don't oc it just think of it as a investment for when you upgrade your cpu next time and you can sell it for more than the 6700 down the road. 

[Devin92]

4 minutes ago, Imakuni said:

That's such a weird question... why would you not overclock the 6700k? It's not fair (not to say pointless) to compare a CPU made for OC without actually using it's main feature.

 

But generally, the difference wouldn't be that noticeable. ~200mhz isn't very much.

 

5 minutes ago, WoodenMarker said:

The difference in performance between the two is solely due to clock speed. 

The 6700k when not oc'ed performs better than the 6700 due to the higher clock speed. The reason for the clock speed difference is probably to get more people buying the 6700k which should be more expensive.

@Imakuni also brings up the TDP which makes sense.

okay. well, this is for a friend whos pretty lazy and probly wont care the headache of going thru ocing the cpu lol. i guess non k it is. dont think he will do much cpu intensive job.

[Nena Trinity]

If you have no plans to buy a Z170 or even OC at all then get the non-K model!

[Devin92]

3 minutes ago, Nena360 said:

If you have no plans to buy a Z170 or even OC at all then get the non-K model!

well, tats the plan, if my friend wont oc, no point wasting money on z170, when h170 is so much cheaper!

[Nena Trinity]

2 minutes ago, Devin92 said:

well, tats the plan, if my friend wont oc, no point wasting money on z170, when h170 is so much cheaper!

There is also B150!