How does the i5-6600k hold up without an overclock

[Shawnio]

I am looking at this pc as I feel it's good for me as my plan is to get a pc that will last and be able to play newer games on high setting at 1080p. What's worrying me is because I don't have to right mobo or cooler I can't overclock the i5-6600k. In the future I hope upgrade the mobo and cooler so I can overclock. But for the time being I am afraid that without the overclock the i5 will struggle to play more CPU intensive games. Will I have to upgrade the pc as soon or possible or will the i5-6600k without an overclock be able to play more CPU intensive games just fine.
Here are the specs:


Processor: Intel Core i5-6600K SkyLake 3.5GHz 1151 Processor

CPU Cooling: Thermaltake Intel CPU Cooler

Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-H170-Gaming 3 LGA 1151 ATX Intel Motherboard

Ram: Crucial Ballistix Sport LT 8GB DDR4-2400 Desktop Memory Kit

Graphics: MSI GeForce GTX 1060 ARMOR Overclocked V1 6GB PCIe Video Card

Solid State Drive: Toshiba OCZ TR150 Series 480GB SATA III SSD

Power Supply: EVGA 500 Watt 80+ Power Supply

Wifi: TP-Link TL-WN881ND 300Mbps Wirelss N PCI-E

I do also know I should upgrade the memory and ram and psu.
This is a prebuilt

 

[Herc08]

Honestly, it is no issue when playing games. You don't NEED to overclock to enjoy intesive games as the skylake chips are handled just well. Actually, since you are not getting a Z170, I would just get a i5-6500 or drop down to a 6600, that way you will save money, and still wouldn't need to get a cooler since you could use the stock cooler. Once you save up, you can upgrade to an i7, or make even Kaby Lake chip.


Is this pre-built or you are ranting t build it? PSU is ok, but look for a 80+ Silver or Gold. I would also get another 8GB of ram, so a set of 8GBx2 (16GB) to help you out.

 

[TJ Hooker]

Yes, a non-overclocked 6600k will be just fine. To be honest, I think upgrading mobo and cooler later just to overclock would be a poor value upgrade. I would get a system that has everything you need to overclock right off the bat if you really want to overclock. Otherwise, just get a 6600 (non-k), non-Z board and stock cooler, it will still perform very well.

8 GB RAM is OK for the most part, but if building a new system today I'd rather go with 2x8GB, especially because the price difference usually isn't that great.

 

[synphul]

I'd agree with both of the above posts. Chances of upgrading a motherboard down the road and adding a cooler along with reinstalling windows due to the motherboard change isn't something most people want to fool with for the gains. Either consider a z series board now along with the 6600k, install windows and be done with it or consider an h or b series board and an i5 6500 or 6600. The k version doesn't really offer any perks over the non k unless oc'd.

For most games it won't matter much, there are always the exceptions though like bf1 which may offer better performance based on thread count as well as clock speed. That game is going through a rough patch for many users and will basically eat whatever cpu you throw at it. It may or may not be improved with future updates. However it doesn't represent all games.

Depending on the price you're looking to pay for the 480gb ssd vs a 1tb hdd I'd opt for the 1tb hdd and use the cost savings to go with the z series motherboard for overclocking. An ssd is icing on the cake but won't make or break gaming performance aside from load times. The ssd may make more sense if it's an all around pc but if it's primarily for gaming, clock speed has the potential of improving fps while the ssd doesn't.

 

[JackNaylorPE]

I'm not quite sure why the choice was made to cut a capable MoBo as it wouldn't have changed anything and updating MoBos isa real PITA ... everything pretty much comes out and get put back in even the OS, A capable Z170 board woulda costs about $15 more.

I certainly would have upgraded the MoBo before ever considering an SSD.

That being said, the OC will not have a wide ranging impact ... OC'ing is useful for extending the useful life but you won't be feeling the pinch now. A 3 GB 1060 would saved enough to pay that extra $15 and the 3 GB is only 7% slower than the 6 GB.

Again, RAM (memory + RAM ? ... same thing) is also a PITA to upgrade as you have no guarantees that what you add will work with what you have. 2 x 8GB wouldn't have cost that, much more.

480 GB gonna run out awful fast with today's games running 40 - 95 GB

How's this compare with your original budget ?

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i5-6600K 3.5GHz Quad-Core Processor ($229.99 @ SuperBiiz)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler ($29.88 @ OutletPC)
Motherboard: MSI Z170A SLI ATX LGA1151 Motherboard ($118.89 @ OutletPC)
Memory: Avexir Core Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 Memory ($69.99 @ Newegg)
Video Card: MSI GeForce GTX 1060 3GB 3GB GT OC Video Card ($201.97 @ Jet)
Power Supply: SeaSonic S12II 620W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply ($52.89 @ B&H)
Wireless Network Adapter: TP-Link TL-WN881ND PCI-Express x1 802.11b/g/n Wi-Fi Adapter ($16.79 @ OutletPC)
Total: $720.40
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2016-12-12 18:22 EST-0500

Add $43 if ya want tot 6GB on the GFX card which will take you to 1440p one day

I left out storage ... here's it's not just the speed of SSdss versus the capacity of HDs... SSHDs are HDs with built in SSDs.... frequently used files get stored on the SSD. A 7200 rpm enthusiast HD boots in 21.2 seconds, an SSHD in 16.5 and a SSD in 15.6. ... not a big difference. Files you load frequently act in the same manner.

Now if you play FAR Cry 3 for a cupla weeks and then move to FC4, then this is ideal for the SSHD as once you start playing FC4, the system recognizes that you are no longer loading FC3's files and they get taken off the SSD portion, having been replaced by FC4 . But if you play 8 different games a day, it can't assign frequently used files anywhere cause you're accessing files all over the place

I find the best balance for a performance / capacity standpoint is a 250 GB SSD and a 2 TB SSHD. Consider some of these options:

250 GB Samsung Evo - ($75) https://pcpartpicker.com/product/Ck98TW/samsung-internal-hard-drive-mz750250bw

1 TB SSHD - ($70) https://pcpartpicker.com/product/ftPfrH/seagate-internal-hard-drive-st1000dx001

2 TB SSHD - ($94) https://pcpartpicker.com/product/tR2kcf/seagate-internal-hard-drive-st2000dx001

If you can start with the SSD and then add the SSHD with XMas Bonus / XMas Gift Money, then it's a 2 minute install as opposed to a complete rip down and rebuild.

 

[synphul]

That's not entirely true, it depends on the game. Overclocking can definitely improve overall fps as well as improve frametimes in cpu intensive games from the get go, in addition to increasing useful longevity. It doesn't apply to all games for sure but then there's no such thing as 'games'. Witcher, bf1 and solitaire are all games with highly different hardware use.

Overclocking the 6th gen i5 can offer 20-30fps improvement in farcry4 with much less erratic variation in frame times. An oc'd i5 showed better frame times in witcher 3 as well. Crysis3, same thing. In many of the comparisons done here an oc'd i5 performed very close to a stock 6700k when it wasn't evenly tied. Bf4 didn't show much difference but then it's a different game title and bf4 isn't bf1.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhaB1dqYv_I

This for bf1 only because so many people are inquiring about it recently. It's been a mixed bag as you can see from user posts. Take it with a grain of salt but assuming most people are being honest and factoring in varied cpu/gpu combos there's a wide range of performance experiences from users.
https://forums.battlefield.com/en-us/discussion/37134/pc-bf1-performance-post-fps-and-hw/p3

 

[ac13044]

i5 6500 cpu or i5 6600 upgrade the psu to 650w upgrade the ssd to a m2 you can get the h170 or b170 depending on how many usb slots and sata slot you would like