I5 6600k vs I5 6500

[Nzmichael]

What is better i5 6500 vs i5 6600k?

[Owlman]

6600K

[kvn95]

6600k if you're planning on overclocking, else 6500 if that GHz is fine for your usage.

Buying a K series chip and NOT overclocking it is like buying food and not finish eating it ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[toasty6776]

5 minutes ago, Nzmichael said:

What is better i5 6500 vs i5 6600k?

Definitely 6600k. Higher clock speed and unlocked multiplier.

[Owlman]

Just remember to grab a motherboard with z170 chipset if you're going with the 6600K. Otherwise you can't overclock it. The K at the end means it's an unlocked CPU which can be overclocked.

[Guest]

Depends on how much you willing to soend. I5 6500 comes with stock cooler too so you don't need to buy one while 6600k does not. It is also recommended to have z170 chipset to able to overclock though it wilk work fine on any other LGA 1151 compatible chipset. 

 

Performance wise the 6600k would perform better even with out overclocking. 

[Jumper118]

My i5 6500 was faster than my 6600k on air cooling. 

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, Jumper118 said:

My i5 6500 was faster than my 6600k on air cooling. 

Fast is a very broad term

[WereCat]

i5 6500 comes with cooler and you can use cheap motherboard.

i5 6600k doesn't come with a cooler so you will have to buy one, you don't need Z170 motherboard but it would be waste not getting it so... quite a bit more expensive in the end for not so much extra performance.

[Jumper118]

40 minutes ago, deXxterlab97 said:

Fast is a very broad term

Overclocked higher at the same voltage,  had a better memory controller kind of faster

[Matias_Chambers]

Well if you are talking about speed the 6600K is better and it can be overclocked. 

[Jumper118]

5 hours ago, Matias_Chambers said:

Well if you are talking about speed the 6600K is better and it can be overclocked. 

the i5 6500 can be overclocked as well.

[Guest]

7 hours ago, kvn95 said:

6600k if you're planning on overclocking, else 6500 if that GHz is fine for your usage.

Buying a K series chip and NOT overclocking it is like buying food and not finish eating it ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Not true IMO.

 

Especially when comparing the 6700 and 6700k. The clock speeds are just much higher for the k SKU out of the box and for the minimal extra cost is smart from a performance and resale stand point - even if paired with a non Z board. 

 

 

[Matias_Chambers]

18 minutes ago, Jumper118 said:

the i5 6500 can be overclocked as well.

Yes, but that's BCLK overclocking. 

[porina]

20 minutes ago, Jumper118 said:

the i5 6500 can be overclocked as well.

bclk method? If so, it breaks a bunch of other things so consider the impact before going that route. I haven't kept up to date with it, does it still break AVX? Fair enough if you don't care about that, but it is still something to consider when not going with a K CPU.

[Jumper118]

8 minutes ago, porina said:

bclk method? If so, it breaks a bunch of other things so consider the impact before going that route. I haven't kept up to date with it, does it still break AVX? Fair enough if you don't care about that, but it is still something to consider when not going with a K CPU.

literally nothing uses avx apart from intel xtu  

 

10 minutes ago, Matias_Chambers said:

Yes, but that's BCLK overclocking. 

and ............. its still just as fast. in fact most of the time its faster becuase it oc's the cache and cpu at 1:1 where most people with 6600K leave cache at stock. 

[Guest]

26 minutes ago, Jumper118 said:

literally nothing uses avx apart from intel xtu  

 

and ............. its still just as fast. in fact most of the time its faster becuase it oc's the cache and cpu at 1:1 where most people with 6600K leave cache at stock. 

You keep popping up and try to push your unpopular perspective onto other people.. 

 

Yes, you can OC non-k SKU's. Is it as straight forward and replicable for everyone? No. Does it still yield good results, in terms of performance? yes. 

 

Windows updates and BIOS updates are things to consider when using this method. 

 

And I would argue, if you're buying a Z chipset board, you might as well spend an extra $20 bucks on the K SKU - because the bulk of the savings from buying a non-k SKU comes from pairing the CPU with cheap motherboards. 

[porina]

7 minutes ago, Jumper118 said:

literally nothing uses avx apart from intel xtu  

My stock i3 would probably beat your OC'd i5 in apps that do  

[Matias_Chambers]

20 minutes ago, Jumper118 said:

literally nothing uses avx apart from intel xtu  

 

and ............. its still just as fast. in fact most of the time its faster becuase it oc's the cache and cpu at 1:1 where most people with 6600K leave cache at stock. 

 

14 minutes ago, Alexokan said:

You keep popping up and try to push your unpopular perspective onto other people.. 

 

Yes, you can OC non-k SKU's. Is it as straight forward and replicable for everyone? No. Does it still yield good results, in terms of performance? yes. 

 

Windows updates and BIOS updates are things to consider when using this method. 

 

And I would argue, if you're buying a Z chipset board, you might as well spend an extra $20 bucks on the K SKU - because the bulk of the savings from buying a non-k SKU comes from pairing with the CPU with cheap motherboards. 

I'm not against the BCLK method. I would do it myself if I had for example an i5 6500 and a motherboard that can do it.

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, Matias_Chambers said:

 

I'm not against the BCLK method. I would do it myself if I had for example an i5 6500 and a motherboard that can do it.

That's the problem though. You have to willfully enter yourself into a situation where you have a z chipset and a locked CPU. Which is a situation most people are just flat out not going to find themselves in. 

[Jumper118]

3 minutes ago, Alexokan said:

That's the problem though. You have to willfully enter yourself into a situation where you have a z chipset and a locked CPU. Which is a situation most people are just flat out not going to find themselves in. 

i had a 6600k and 2 6500 and i kept the 6500 and sold the 6600k, because it was faster. I am not pushing my opinion on other people, i am just telling them facts. most people are unaware of what things can do because people respond with a set answer regardless of the options.

 

If you had been on this forum when the ps4 and xboner 720p came out you would have seen that literally everyone was recommending fx cpus.  This was when haswell was out as well. I at the time was recommending people get a haswell cpu because the amd 8 cores were not better from gaming and even though the new consoles had 8 cores, most pc's ran intel cpu's so game devs would optimise for those instead...... now nobody would recommend a fx over a haswell. 

 

26 minutes ago, porina said:

My stock i3 would probably beat your OC'd i5 in apps that do  

that is true, but for gaming the i5 is better. 

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Jumper118 said:

i had a 6600k and 2 6500 and i kept the 6500 and sold the 6600k, because it was faster. I am not pushing my opinion on other people, i am just telling them facts. most people are unaware of what things can do because people respond with a set answer regardless of the options.

 

If you had been on this forum when the ps4 and xboner 720p came out you would have seen that literally everyone was recommending fx cpus.  This was when haswell was out as well. I at the time was recommending people get a haswell cpu because the amd 8 cores were not better from gaming and even though the new consoles had 8 cores, most pc's ran intel cpu's so game devs would optimise for those instead...... now nobody would recommend a fx over a haswell. 

 

that is true, but for gaming the i5 is better. 

I just get the impression that you are trying to convince people to do what you did. 

 

I don't believe it is a good recommendation for the general public, although a perfectly acceptable one for a niche market. 

[Jumper118]

10 minutes ago, Alexokan said:

I just get the impression that you are trying to convince people to do what you did. 

 

I don't believe it is a good recommendation for the general public, although a perfectly acceptable one for a niche market. 

ok, you are allowed to disagree. i think everyone should be able to tweak there pc for the minimum cost. that is how it used to be back when 775/1156/1366 was around and it was much better. none of this bottlenecking ma gtx1080 at 1080p cos i need 800fps in battlefield 1 even though i have a 720p monitor  

 

also people didnt pay a premium for the same product that has been artificially locked, to make intel more money. they just bought a cpu they like and unlocked mutli was just for people who wanted the best.  

 

seems people here are going along with marketing more and more. bclk is bad and all amd things run hot....... 

[faziten]

Buy the best you can get and never regret. 

 

You will enjoy the purchase more. If you don't need the extra speed, you won't care at all. If you need the extra speed, it's there for you to claim it. Just don't sell your organs to pay for 200Mhz expecting it will be the difference between disgusting unplayable and crazy awesome experience. 

 

[porina]

50 minutes ago, Jumper118 said:

seems people here are going along with marketing more and more. bclk is bad and all amd things run hot....... 

Please correct me if any of my understanding is incorrect. Using blck to overclock non-K CPUs means some or all of the following: AVX doesn't work correctly crippling performance in tasks which uses it (that is my personal biggest deal breaker), some power saving features don't work, some temp reporting doesn't work, you may be limited to certain mobo BIOS and avoiding microcode updates. I can't recall if bclk became a thing before or after the Skylake bug was discovered about a year ago. The fix for that was delivered by microcode. None of these are a problem if you either don't OC at all or get a K CPU to do so.