7700K or 6600K or Xeon?

[TenzoNakami]

Hi guys, I'm going to make another build in the middle of 2017, after the 7700K released maybe.

Should I go with 7700K or 6600K or a Xeon?

I'm a Xeon fanboy (not really, it's just I like it) but sometimes diving into the i7 series might be great.

I currently have two rigs up, one with 4790K and one with dual X5460. I'm planning to give away both after I make this rig in the middle of 2017.

So.. What do you guys think? Share your ideas and thought!

 

PS: My budget is somewhere around 400USD for the Processor itself.

 

EDIT: Seems like I mistyped the 4790K as 4970K..... Sorry I didn't notice that earlier.

What I have is the 4GHz Haswell-refresh 4790K. I don't know if there is 4970K either.

[Electronics Wizardy]

wait until meed 2017, no reason to do this now.

[DarkBlade2117]

If you've got a 4790k, why got for a 7700k? The IPC is pretty much the same as skylake last I checked but is just going to offer a bit higher overclocking. Have you considered what AMD will offer in the $400 range by then?

[The Sloth]

wait for zen

[Ryoku]

4 minutes ago, TenzoNakami said:

Hi guys, I'm going to make another build in the middle of 2017, after the 7700K released maybe.

Should I go with 7700K or 6600K or a Xeon?

I'm a Xeon fanboy (not really, it's just I like it) but sometimes diving into the i7 series might be great.

I currently have two rigs up, one with 4970K and one with dual X5460. I'm planning to give away both after I make this rig in the middle of 2017.

So.. What do you guys think? Share your ideas and thought!

 

PS: My budget is somewhere around 400USD for the Processor itself.

 

1 minute ago, DarkBlade2117 said:

If you've got a 4790k, why got for a 7700k? The IPC is pretty much the same as skylake last I checked but is just going to offer a bit higher overclocking. Have you considered what AMD will offer in the $400 range by then?

Also why 6600k and not a 7600k?  Either way wait awhile and see what amd has to offer with Zen, could shake things up a bit.

[aisle9]

6 minutes ago, TenzoNakami said:

4970K

You don't need to build a new PC.

[TenzoNakami]

6 minutes ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

wait until meed 2017, no reason to do this now.

Would love to see what you guys think about this. Well, I also need to plan up a bit.

 

4 minutes ago, DarkBlade2117 said:

If you've got a 4790k, why got for a 7700k? The IPC is pretty much the same as skylake last I checked but is just going to offer a bit higher overclocking. Have you considered what AMD will offer in the $400 range by then?

I wanted to try something new  << As simple as that.

I haven't used AMD personally in my entire life span, but I'll see what they had to offer.

 

3 minutes ago, nerdslayer1 said:

wait for zen

I'll take a good look into Zen.

[TenzoNakami]

4 minutes ago, aisle9 said:

You don't need to build a new PC.

Why? Any reason? Is it still strong enough or somewhat? Share your thoughts about that please 

[TenzoNakami]

7 minutes ago, Ryoku said:

 

Also why 6600k and not a 7600k?  Either way wait awhile and see what amd has to offer with Zen, could shake things up a bit.

I don't know. I was asking 

I'd love to see someone coming up with Xeon Xeon Xeon and Xeon LOL

And yes, I'd wait for both Zen and 7700K to hit the market to check up on both.

[aisle9]

2 minutes ago, TenzoNakami said:

Why? Any reason? Is it still strong enough or somewhat? Share your thoughts about that please 

Yes, it's more than strong enough. The 6700K has about a 5-10% improvement in performance over the 4790K. The 7700K has a 0.000000% increase in IPC over the 6700K, just better overclocking on the extremely high end--if your system can handle all that heat, or if you delid.

 

I don't plan to replace my 4790K for at least three more years, possibly longer, depending on whether Intel's processors keep making little to no gain over the previous generation or start jumping along more. The only possible argument would be DDR4, but my PC is more than snappy enough without it.

[SCHISCHKA]

7 minutes ago, TenzoNakami said:

I'd love to see someone coming up with Xeon Xeon Xeon and Xeon LOL

get a xeon if you like the low power models. get a xeon if you want multiple sockets with ECC ram

[asand1]

Most Xeons are not much good for gaming. If you had an x58 board I would say yes. I am no Xeon authority, but unless you have an x58 board already it won't be worth it.

[aisle9]

12 minutes ago, asand1 said:

Most Xeons are not much good for gaming.

E3-1231V3

[asand1]

1 minute ago, aisle9 said:

E3-1231V3

I'm not familiar with the e3 series, like I said most Xeons aren't good for gaming. Some are great though.

[OakTreeGaming]

If you are looking for a heavy usage workstation, Try looking at the Xeon E5-2687W v4. It has many cores for rendering videos and such, but also has a sufficent speed to support gaming.

[RGProductions]

1 hour ago, TenzoNakami said:

Why? Any reason? Is it still strong enough or somewhat? Share your thoughts about that please 

There's a very few % difference in performance between 4790k and 6700k.

[Scheer]

29 minutes ago, asand1 said:

I'm not familiar with the e3 series, like I said most Xeons aren't good for gaming. Some are great though.

Aside from the unlocked SKUs, there is a Xeon chip near identical to every i5/i7 of the relative generation, plus more (e.g. same architecture with the same core/thread count and same frequency). So if you found say 10 i5/i7 CPUs you'd deem "good for gaming" there will at least be that many Xeons, likely double that many.

 

For the most part, with exceptions, the E3's add ECC support, typically have more cache, and some won't have an iGPU.

[asand1]

1 hour ago, Scheer said:

Aside from the unlocked SKUs, there is a Xeon chip near identical to every i5/i7 of the relative generation, plus more (e.g. same architecture with the same core/thread count and same frequency). So if you found say 10 i5/i7 CPUs you'd deem "good for gaming" there will at least be that many Xeons, likely double that many.

 

For the most part, with exceptions, the E3's add ECC support, typically have more cache, and some won't have an iGPU.

I have heard many don't overclock like the old  1366 Xeons though. That would be my main concern I guess.

[TenzoNakami]

22 hours ago, aisle9 said:

Yes, it's more than strong enough. The 6700K has about a 5-10% improvement in performance over the 4790K. The 7700K has a 0.000000% increase in IPC over the 6700K, just better overclocking on the extremely high end--if your system can handle all that heat, or if you delid.

 

I don't plan to replace my 4790K for at least three more years, possibly longer, depending on whether Intel's processors keep making little to no gain over the previous generation or start jumping along more. The only possible argument would be DDR4, but my PC is more than snappy enough without it.

I am planning to give that PC away for my old school, since they use alot of AutoCAD's and their PC is still a Core 2 Duo powered. Or Core 2 Quad. I'm unsure because I finished education a long time ago.

 

22 hours ago, SCHISCHKA said:

get a xeon if you like the low power models. get a xeon if you want multiple sockets with ECC ram

This is what I like 

But.... Can you be a little bit more specific?

 

20 hours ago, asand1 said:

Most Xeons are not much good for gaming. If you had an x58 board I would say yes. I am no Xeon authority, but unless you have an x58 board already it won't be worth it.

x58? Hmmm. I'm no good at these Xeons stuff too, all I've tried is the dual x5460 on an Intel's server board.

Looked up for x58 and it seems it has been released a long long time ago, am I wrong?

[TenzoNakami]

20 hours ago, OakTreeGaming said:

If you are looking for a heavy usage workstation, Try looking at the Xeon E5-2687W v4. It has many cores for rendering videos and such, but also has a sufficent speed to support gaming.

What do you mean with "sufficient" speed?

I do alot of rendering, so I hope more cores means faster rendering.

And I also do some gaming, I currently uses the 1070.

 

20 hours ago, RGProductions said:

There's a very few % difference in performance between 4790k and 6700k.

How about 4790K against 7700K? Well, there isn't many engineering samples out there yet so we can't know for sure.

 

20 hours ago, Scheer said:

Aside from the unlocked SKUs, there is a Xeon chip near identical to every i5/i7 of the relative generation, plus more (e.g. same architecture with the same core/thread count and same frequency). So if you found say 10 i5/i7 CPUs you'd deem "good for gaming" there will at least be that many Xeons, likely double that many.

 

For the most part, with exceptions, the E3's add ECC support, typically have more cache, and some won't have an iGPU.

I don't really use iGPU and or that ECC RAM support. Having more cache would be good sometimes?

 

18 hours ago, asand1 said:

I have heard many don't overclock like the old  1366 Xeons though. That would be my main concern I guess.

I don't really overclock that much nowadays that I rarely turns on my A/C. I ran the 4790K on stock, while running the dual x5460 at 3.9GHz both. But it's really hot.

[RGProductions]

3 minutes ago, TenzoNakami said:

ow about 4790K against 7700K?

clock for clock the 7700k is basically the 6700k.

[SCHISCHKA]

26 minutes ago, TenzoNakami said:

But.... Can you be a little bit more specific?

get a xeon if you like jetpacks

[TenzoNakami]

4 hours ago, RGProductions said:

clock for clock the 7700k is basically the 6700k.

Never know about this. But sure is the same since it's just an optimization I think?

 

4 hours ago, SCHISCHKA said:

get a xeon if you like jetpacks

Best. Reply. Ever. 

[Scheer]

16 hours ago, TenzoNakami said:

I don't really use iGPU and or that ECC RAM support. Having more cache would be good sometimes?

You wouldn't notice the extra cache at all IMO.

 

Really unless rendering is taking WAY too long for you, I wouldn't bother upgrading your CPU.

 

 

 

[OakTreeGaming]

22 hours ago, TenzoNakami said:

What do you mean with "sufficient" speed?

I do alot of rendering, so I hope more cores means faster rendering.

And I also do some gaming, I currently uses the 1070.

 

How about 4790K against 7700K? Well, there isn't many engineering samples out there yet so we can't know for sure.

 

I don't really use iGPU and or that ECC RAM support. Having more cache would be good sometimes?

 

I don't really overclock that much nowadays that I rarely turns on my A/C. I ran the 4790K on stock, while running the dual x5460 at 3.9GHz both. But it's really hot.

What I mean is that it runs at a solid 3 ghz, which should be good for most games. The core count could matter less above 4 cores as the speed of the cores should be more important than the amount of cores.