7700k vs 6700k vs 4790k

[jjohnthedon1]

So Paul's hardware did a video 

that pretty much shows the 7700k is exatwrly the same CPU as the 6700k clock for clock 

 

so before the CPU part of the form gets out of hand with 

should I upgrade 

 

if u didn't need to upgrade to sky lake u dont need kaby lake 

 

and of ur still on broadwell or has well and ur gaming with a i5 or above ur all good 

 

 

[jjohnthedon1]

3 minutes ago, wrathoftheturkey said:

we already knew this?

 

Although as far as the i5 part goes.... not always

For the people that didn't 

[SeanAngelo]

7 minutes ago, jjohnthedon1 said:

So Paul's hardware did a video 

that pretty much shows the 7700k is exatwrly the same CPU as the 6700k clock for clock 

 

so before the CPU part of the form gets out of hand with 

should I upgrade 

 

if u didn't need to upgrade to sky lake u dont need kaby lake 

 

and of ur still on broadwell or has well and ur gaming with a i5 or above ur all good 

 

 

personally, i think there's no need, OC3D did a video on benchmarks too.

 

its up to you if you want to upgrade.

[Morgan MLGman]

7 minutes ago, jjohnthedon1 said:

and of ur still on broadwell or has well and ur gaming with a i5 or above ur all good

This is not true. A haswell i5-4460 or even an i5-4690K when overclocked will be too slow for high-end GPUs atm and bottlenecking them quite a bit.

[Paradine Sage]

If you have a 6700k then you probably have little, if any, reason to upgrade. If you are doing a new build then you should go for the 7700k over the 6700k. It OC's higher, uses less power, is better in terms of heat, and has a few other minor benefits. And it's MSRP is virtually identical.

[Spork829]

11 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

This is not true. A haswell i5-4460 or even an i5-4690K when overclocked will be too slow for high-end GPUs atm and bottlenecking them quite a bit.

Well, if by high-end you mean a 1070 and up, then yes.

[ARikozuM]

13 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

This is not true. A haswell i5-4460 or even an i5-4690K when overclocked will be too slow for high-end GPUs atm and bottlenecking them quite a bit.

Not true unless you're going for high-refresh low resolution. Not everyone goes for 1080@144hz.

[Morgan MLGman]

12 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

Not true unless you're going for high-refresh low resolution. Not everyone goes for 1080@144hz.

Not necessarily. Run Watch Dogs 2 with an i5-4460 and a GTX 1070/1080, enjoy a huge bottleneck aka stutterfest even under 60FPS.

6 minutes ago, Jorgen297 said:

even the 6600K will bottleneck a 1070, it's not an IPC issue, but a lack of hyperthreading issue. the 7600k will not fix this. i5's won't be enough for gaming the next GPU generation. 

There's also 2MB less of L3 Cache in i5's which is more impactful than people think.

16 minutes ago, Spork829 said:

Well, if by high-end you mean a 1070 and up, then yes.

Yes, that's precisely what I meant, also - Vega. In under 2 days it's going to be revealed and it's gonna surely have variants faster than a 1070 adding more GPUs to the "No i5's" league.

[ARikozuM]

1 minute ago, Morgan MLGman said:

Not necessarily. Run Watch Dogs 2 with an i5-4460 and a GTX 1070/1080, enjoy a huge bottleneck aka stutterfest even under 60FPS.

Ubisoft has actually acknowledged issues with many i5 and i7 users getting poor sub-60hz performance.

[Morgan MLGman]

Just now, ARikozuM said:

Ubisoft has actually acknowledged issues with many i5 and i7 users getting poor sub-60hz performance.

Watch Dogs 2 isn't the only game, Battlefield 1 is a good example. I've seen an overclocked GTX 1060 max out an i5-4690K (at stock) in BF1... And an i7-4770K @4,2GHz getting even up to 95% of usage with a 980Ti.

[ARikozuM]

8 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

Watch Dogs 2 isn't the only game, Battlefield 1 is a good example. I've seen an overclocked GTX 1060 max out an i5-4690K (at stock) in BF1... And an i7-4770K @4,2GHz getting even up to 95% of usage with a 980Ti.

You're over-exaggerating a bottleneck. Taking only CPU-intensive games and assuming 144hz is wanted isn't helpful to anyone, but yourself. Try playing Deus Ex: Mankind Divided. You'll see your GPU get hammered with ULTRA 1080 only getting a whopping 50hz on a 980 Ti. My 1080 is only getting 32hz at 5760x1080.

[Morgan MLGman]

13 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

You're over-exaggerating a bottleneck. Taking only CPU-intensive games and assuming 144hz is wanted isn't helpful to anyone, but yourself. Try playing Deus Ex: Mankind Divided. You'll see your GPU get hammered with ULTRA 1080 only getting a whopping 50hz on a 980 Ti.

I think you're mistaking those two concepts: FPS that your GPU outputs and how many of those your monitor can actually display (per second) aka Hz.

 

Now, let's imagine that you want to play Battlefield 1 on an i5-4460 and a GTX 1070, maxed out, with a 1080p, 60Hz monitor. Since it's an FPS game, (don't mistake with the other FPS I was talking about), you don't want any input lag which is caused by V-Sync. But you need to lock the framerate because if you let it get to its maximum potential framerate, the game will max out your CPU resulting in annoying stuttering in CPU intensive moments, which are usually those where more action is going on and that's also something you don't want.

 

I know exactly how it feels to be in a position described above, I used an Athlon X4 750K (@4,5Ghz) + a GTX 970 (@1530Mhz) and played The Witcher 3 on that setup, everything was fine until I reached Novigrad and got stuttering all over the place due to CPU being pegged @100% across all 4 cores, even with a 60Hz monitor it was a pain and I had to turn V-Sync on which decreased my avg. FPS besides locking it @60. 

 

Conclusion: Assuming that you're spending 400-700$ on a GPU, those things aren't what you want in your gameplay after you plug in your brand-new GTX 1080 into your system. And more GPUs are to be released in 2017 (Vega and Volta), and they're surely be faster than current gens and they're be much more likely to be like a 1070/1080 and get bottlenecked by weaker CPUs hence why buying an i5-6500 + a GTX 1070 is an incredibly stupid idea cause when you run out of GPU horsepower and want to upgrade, you need to upgrade your CPU as well cause it won't last even a single GPU upgrade.

 

Hope it wasn't too confusing.

[ARikozuM]

1 minute ago, Morgan MLGman said:

Now, let's imagine that you want to play Battlefield 1 on an i5-4460 and a GTX 1070, maxed out, with a 1080p, 60Hz

You're assuming again. Not everyone wants 1080. 144hz monitors can display everything below their refresh rate. A 6600K can get 100hz minimums and 130hz averages in BF1 and BF1 can also upscale remarkably easily to remove any hitching. You can actually limit the number of frames your GPU outputs through software allowing it to not work farther than a certain point. V-Sync causing issues is dependent on the game as many don't have issues when using sync or frame limiting technologies.

 

Also, don't use the Witcher's V-Sync, it has issues.

[Morgan MLGman]

1 minute ago, ARikozuM said:

Also, don't use the Witcher's V-Sync, it has issues.

Those framerate limiting programs also cause input lag. Just a FYI. And I needed to do something to prevent that horrible stuttering.

 

2 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

You're assuming again. Not everyone wants 1080. 144hz monitors can display everything below their refresh rate. A 6600K can get 100hz minimums and 130hz averages in BF1 and BF1 can also upscale remarkably easily to remove any hitching. You can actually limit the number of frames your GPU outputs through software allowing it to not work farther than a certain point. V-Sync causing issues is dependent on the game as many don't have issues when using sync or frame limiting technologies.

Look how much shit you need to do to make the game run smoothly if you get an i5, this isn't what high-end users want and they need to know about it. Saying that it "will be fine" might be partially true, but you still skipped the point about me saying that getting an i5 with a 1070 or above is a dead-end as GPUs get significantly more powerful with every generation and when you need more performance you'd be forced to switch not only the GPU but the CPU as well which isn't what 98% of people look for.

[ARikozuM]

2 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

Those framerate limiting programs also cause input lag. Just a FYI. And I needed to do something to prevent that horrible stuttering.

 

Look how much shit you need to do to make the game run smoothly if you get an i5, this isn't what high-end users want and they need to know about it. Saying that it "will be fine" might be partially true, but you still skipped the point about me saying that getting an i5 with a 1070 or above is a dead-end as GPUs get significantly more powerful with every generation and when you need more performance you'd be forced to switch not only the GPU but the CPU as well which isn't what 98% of people look for.

You can also just buy a 1440 or 4K monitor for the GPU. Not everything is about hyper-threading and not every game does better because of it. Many games do much better thanks to the higher clock speed of the i7 than the hyper-threading.

 

There are plenty of HT on/off videos on YouTube that will demo 5930K and show benefits of HT. Many games such as Bioshock Infinite and Project: Cars benefit very little from HT and GTAV with HT off will actually net an extra frame or two. Crysis 3's engine (Cryengine 3) has code for multiple threads up to 6 cores with hyper-threading.

 

[Morgan MLGman]

7 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

You can also just buy a 1440 or 4K monitor for the GPU. Not everything is about hyper-threading and not every game does better because of it. Many games do much better thanks to the higher clock speed of the i7 than the hyper-threading.

 

There are plenty of HT on/off videos on YouTube that will demo 5930K and show benefits of HT. Many games such as Bioshock Infinite and Project: Cars benefit very little from HT and GTAV with HT off will actually net an extra frame or two. Crysis 3's engine (Cryengine 3) has code for multiple threads up to 6 cores with hyper-threading.

Yeah... So it's better to get a mid-ranged CPU with a high-end GPU and with a next upgrade buy an expensive 1440p/4K monitor AND a CPU cause the i5 won't be able to keep up anymore instead of just the GPU... You might not be a person who values money, I am though as tech is ridiculously expensive here in Poland and I paid for my rig just as much as a pretty decent car is worth here and you need to balance your build instead of cheaping out on a CPU just to be forced to do all of this upscaling/framerate locking JUST to get the game to run properly and be forced to upgrade the CPU in 2-3 years when you decide it's time to upgrade the GPU cause it's not as capable anymore as it used to be.

CPUs and monitors are meant to last longer than 1 GPU upgrade man. Maybe someone is a rich person that upgrades everything every gen, but then again why would he cheap out on the CPU in the first place.

 

Also, HyperThreading isn't the only advantage an i7 has over an i5.

[ARikozuM]

10 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

HyperThreading isn't the only advantage an i7 has over an i5.

It's the only one that you mention time and time again.

[Morgan MLGman]

2 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

It's the only one that you mention time and time again.

i7's (mainstream) have 2MB's of L3 Cache more which does more than one might think, it's actually you who mentioned HT as I haven't mentioned it even once here.

[ARikozuM]

1 minute ago, Morgan MLGman said:

i7's (mainstream) have 2MB's of L3 Cache more which does more than one might think, it's actually you who mentioned HT as I haven't mentioned it even once here.

Not here but on other threads.

 

Also, I'm going to assume you mean L2, not L3.

[Morgan MLGman]

7 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

Not here but on other threads.

I guess you should try playing BF1 or Watch Dogs 2 on max settings on your 1080 with your 4790K @stock with HT off and monitor the CPU usage...

 

7 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

Also, I'm going to assume you mean L2, not L3.

Bad idea.

 

The screenshot on the left is my own i7.

[ARikozuM]

40 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

I guess you should try playing BF1 or Watch Dogs 2 on max settings on your 1080 with your 4790K @stock with HT off and monitor the CPU usage...

 

Bad idea.

 

The screenshot on the left is my own i7.

I didn't see the word "more" in your post. For BF1, With hyper-threading off it hits 63%. With HT on, it hits 52%.

[jjohnthedon1]

Not everyone is playing at 144hz

 

also oc ur buying a 1080 u can afford a i7

 

most people are at 60hz which a i5 does is 98 percent of games