7700k vs 8700k 7700k or 8700k?

[Wheatcake]

I've been having some trouble deciding whether to upgrade my Core i3-6100 to either an i7-7700k or i7-8700k.

I use my PC for gaming and rendering small game clips to upload to show my friends.

I think that for only £100 more I could get two more cores than the i7-7700k with the 8700k.

I'd like some opinions on if whether the 8700k's 6c/12t buying for £400, compared to the i7-7700k's 4c/6t for £100 cheaper.

Note that I am open to overclocking.

I'd like to be able to run games on max settings at 1080p and have headroom to upgrade to 1440p in the future without upgrading my CPU.

[genexis_x]

Get a used 6th/7th gen i7 would be better as you have to change the mobo if you choose 8700k. They are still very capable in games

[Wheatcake]

1 minute ago, ZM Fong said:

Get a used 6th/7th gen i7 would be better as you have to change the mobo if you choose 8700k. They are still very capable in games

I'll still have to change motherboard regardless. I just don't want to buy a 7700k and it ends up being useless in 3-4years.

[genexis_x]

2 minutes ago, DarthTom56 said:

I'll still have to change motherboard regardless. I just don't want to buy a 7700k and it ends up being useless in 3-4years.

Get a locked i7 and you won't have to change the mobo. (you can also put an unlocked CPU in a locked mobo, no OC)
Why did you say it will become useless after 3-4 years? I wonder. The i7 is still very capable even for the 4c8t ones

[TahoeDust]

If you are comfortable spending the money, the 8700k is the obvious choice.

[Enderman]

8700k

[mynameisjuan]

6 minutes ago, DarthTom56 said:

ends up being useless in 3-4years

Why do people think that after new stuff is released all of a sudden their devices are useless. Arnt 2500ks still beasting it out in gaming benchmarks nowadays? 

[maartendc]

14 minutes ago, DarthTom56 said:

I've been having some trouble deciding whether to upgrade my Core i3-6100 to either an i7-7700k or i7-8700k.

I use my PC for gaming and rendering small game clips to upload to show my friends.

I think that for only £100 more I could get two more cores than the i7-7700k with the 8700k.

I'd like some opinions on if whether the 8700k's 6c/12t buying for £400, compared to the i7-7700k's 4c/6t for £100 cheaper.

Note that I am open to overclocking.

I'd like to be able to run games on max settings at 1080p and have headroom to upgrade to 1440p in the future without upgrading my CPU.

When you're spending that kind of money already, you might as well go for the 8700k, much more future proof with the extra cores. I feel like the 7700K right now is way overpriced for what it offers.

 

If you want to save money, might as well just get a locked Skylake i5 for cheap.

[Wheatcake]

1 minute ago, TahoeDust said:

If you are comfortable spending the money, the 8700k is the obvious choice.

I am comfortable with spending the money, yet I'll have to wait an extra year to get the 8700k, whereas I could get the 7700k in a couple of months.

 

[maartendc]

1 minute ago, mynameisjuan said:

Why do people think that after new stuff is released all of a sudden their devices are useless. Arnt 2500ks still beasting it out in gaming benchmarks nowadays? 

Not really. The Ivy Bridge Sandy bridge etc. are really starting to show their age. The old adage that those CPU's are still fine is not really true anymore with games like Battlefield 1 and Witcher 3 being so CPU hungry.

 

It is not that the older CPU's are useless, it is just about what you can buy for the money right now. Again, in my opinion there is no reason to buy the  7700K right now. It is not THAT much cheaper than the 8700K, so if you are spending that much, better get a 6-core. If you are looking for budget stuff, get a good used i5 Skylake or something, or even a Ryzen 5 1600.

[TahoeDust]

Why do you have to wait an extra year?

[Wheatcake]

2 minutes ago, maartendc said:

When you're spending that kind of money already, you might as well go for the 8700k, much more future proof with the extra cores. I feel like the 7700K right now is way overpriced for what it offers.

 

If you want to save money, might as well just get a locked Skylake i5 for cheap.

That's what I was thinking.

[mynameisjuan]

2 minutes ago, maartendc said:

Not really. The Ivy Bridge Sandy bridge etc. are really starting to show their age. The old adage that those CPU's are still fine is not really true anymore with games like Battlefield 1 and Witcher 3 being so CPU hungry.

Seeing how in benchmarks on ultra settings with most games with a 1080 are still pulling 80+ FPS @1080p its far from useless. My point more around people treat old stuff as in 4 years from now his 7700k will just turn off and never work again. 

[maartendc]

On 10/20/2017 at 11:48 AM, mynameisjuan said:

Seeing how in benchmarks on ultra settings with most games with a 1080 are still pulling 80+ FPS @1080p its far from useless. My point more around people treat old stuff as in 4 years from now his 7700k will just turn off and never work again. 

I don't mean it that way, but the 7700K will start to fall behind in FPS much sooner than the 8700K a couple of years from now, and they are practically the same price now. So the 8700K is the smarter investment right now.

 

The Ivy Bridge CPU's are still fine in most games, like you said. However, this year is the first year we are really starting to see the CPU demands of games go up significantly again. Battlefield 1 64 player multiplayer brings all but the fastest CPU's to its knees. I have a i5 6600, and it has trouble keeping up in 64 player games when there are a lot of players, vehicles and explosions on screen. In less demanding scenes it is totally fine.