Comparing i7 6700 3.4GHz vs i7 6700k 4.0Ghz

[UltraXHybrid]

So I'm trying to save as much money possible when building a new PC and one way is to go from choosing an i7 6700k to an i7 6700. This will save me around £100. (I know i can also go for an i5 but i prefer the i7)

I have no intention to overclock so it seems obvious to go for the i7 6700 non K.
However the stock speeds, 3.4GHz vs 4GHz Will i see any differences between the two at stock speeds to justify spending £100 more on the K model? In gaming or any other tasks?
At what point other than CPU intensive games will the 3.4 vs 4.0 GHz have a difference?

Any help will be appreciated. Thanks

 

[Rogue Leader]

the standard 6700 will still turbo to 4 ghz when needed for single/dual core intensive applications. The performance difference between the two is minimal and if you have no intention to overclock there is no reason to spend that much more money.

 

[UltraXHybrid]

the standard 6700 will still turbo to 4 ghz when needed for single/dual core intensive applications. The performance difference between the two is minimal and if you have no intention to overclock there is no reason to spend that much more money.

Thanks, that's what i was thinking.
I will mainly be playing games, using the internet, using apps for school work etc. So i wont be seeing any major differences if i chose the 6700 over the 6700k?

 

[Rogue Leader]

the standard 6700 will still turbo to 4 ghz when needed for single/dual core intensive applications. The performance difference between the two is minimal and if you have no intention to overclock there is no reason to spend that much more money.

Thanks, that's what i was thinking.
I will mainly be playing games, using the internet, using apps for school work etc. So i wont be seeing any major differences if i chose the 6700 over the 6700k?

Honestly probably the only way you would ever know the difference is if you ran a benchmark and saw the slightly higher score the 6700k would get.

 

[spadam_2000]

the standard 6700 will still turbo to 4 ghz when needed for single/dual core intensive applications. The performance difference between the two is minimal and if you have no intention to overclock there is no reason to spend that much more money.

Thanks, that's what i was thinking.
I will mainly be playing games, using the internet, using apps for school work etc. So i wont be seeing any major differences if i chose the 6700 over the 6700k?

Honestly probably the only way you would ever know the difference is if you ran a benchmark and saw the slightly higher score the 6700k would get.

I agree, you won't see a difference while doing your tasks. Also, if you choose the K model, your budget would have to be higher to include a CPU cooler as well. The K version does not come with a cooling solution at all, while the non-K should have at least the stock Intel cooler (retail box or similar, depending on where you may buy from).

 

[geofelt]

If your main use is gaming, then save the $100 and use a i5-6600K with an overclock.
Few games can use more than 2-3 threads, so the I7 hyperthreads will go largely unused.
The "K" is intended to be overclocked. the process is easy and not to be feared.


Perhaps a better alternative on a budget would be a I3-6100.
The higher clock speed will help in most games.
Here is a recent review:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/10543/the-skylake-core-i3-51w-cpu-review-i3-6320-6300-6100-tested