i3 6100, good enough for Battlefield 1?

[XenosTech]

2 minutes ago, smokefest said:

they all say that until im in front of the computer and show them the lag

well only game that lags on my computer is league of legends

[smokefest]

1 hour ago, XenosTech said:

well only game that lags on my computer is league of legends

Say no more

[XenosTech]

2 minutes ago, smokefest said:

Say no more

700+ fps with no v-sync is a ton of tearing and stuttering

[Princess Luna]

2 hours ago, smokefest said:

All i5's r struggeling in like 4 maps. other maps are ok

If you just want to play the Single Player campaign then even the i3 6100 would be enough?

[smokefest]

2 hours ago, Princess Cadence said:

If you just want to play the Single Player campaign then even the i3 6100 would be enough?

Yes probably. Campaign is mostly GPU intense

[smokefest]

2 hours ago, Princess Cadence said:

If you just want to play the Single Player campaign then even the i3 6100 would be enough?

I was having 0 problems with my i5 in campaign mode I was like yeahhh my cmoputer still a beast  until I hit the big maps in multiplayer

 

[Apache Protocol]

On ‎29‎/‎11‎/‎2016 at 1:00 AM, SirFlamenco said:

YES, got any proof 6600k is better performance?

Hope this can help a little

 

[SirFlamenco]

10 hours ago, Apache Protocol said:

Hope this can help a little

 

AH! You see, I now got 2 videos as proof that 6700 non k is better than 6600k

 

[Apache Protocol]

1 hour ago, SirFlamenco said:

AH! You see, I now got 2 videos as proof that 6700 non k is better than 6600k

 

6700 is still better but I think paying for that price of how much boost you get in game performance, but if your only reasoning is that 6700 is better then your right. but is it worth it if your building in a budget. Cost Per Dollar

[smokefest]

9 minutes ago, Apache Protocol said:

6700 is still better but I think paying for that price of how much boost you get in game performance, but if your only reasoning is that 6700 is better then your right. but is it worth it if your building in a budget. Cost Per Dollar

Why argue on performance when talkin of a budget build ???

The point was performance, not budget.

And people have to stop watchin only FPS... cpu usage , if stuck at 100% in a game, will create suttering ( lag spikes )

 

and an i5 is and will be stuck at 100% in some games... rise of the tomb raider. bf1. these 2 games will have some stuttering here and there with an i5.

IMO : 6700k is worth it  A LOT. good value, and futur proof.


couple years ago, i7 was useless. i5 was enough for any games.

Nowadays... i5 is enough for probably 95% of games, but I do play BF1 A LOT, and at very HIGH end graphics setting, and an i5 simply can't handle it. 

 

What in 2 years ? Can't say, but I see that hyper threading is becoming more and more relevent.

[SirFlamenco]

1 hour ago, Apache Protocol said:

6700 is still better but I think paying for that price of how much boost you get in game performance, but if your only reasoning is that 6700 is better then your right. but is it worth it if your building in a budget. Cost Per Dollar

Actually 6700k with a h110 motherboard and a cheap cooler would be equal to the price of a z170+good cooler+6600k.

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, SirFlamenco said:

Actually 6700k with a h110 motherboard and a cheap cooler would be equal to the price of a z170+good cooler+6600k.

yup. Just went through this myself. 

 

The Z170 boards are REALLY expensive and can easily offset the cost of getting the i7. And even if you get a board that can't OC, it's still worth getting the k when there is only ~$20 difference between the two - it's still clocked higher. 

[SirFlamenco]

10 minutes ago, Alexokan said:

yup. Just went through this myself. 

 

The Z170 boards are REALLY expensive and can easily offset the cost of getting the i7. And even if you get a board that can't OC, it's still worth getting the k when there is only ~$20 difference between the two - it's still clocked higher. 

In fact, in Canada, the price difference between a 6700 and 6700k is 2$