Question I-5 6600k vs I-7 7700(non k)

Gmoney06ss

Reputable
Jul 3, 2015
717
107
5,190
23
So my work is recycling all the old pc's. All they really care about is getting rid of the HDDs so the cpus are free to me. I grabbed a 7700 and I've been doing a little reading about it vs my current 6600k. My current 6600k is oc to 4.2, though I've had it up to 4.5.

From what little reading I've done, it seems as though the i7 Will slightly outperform the i5. And like I said it was a free cpu, so is it worth it to swap it in? I know it won't overclock, and I'm planning a cpu refresh late this year or early next. But figured for zero cost, if it performs better, why not do it for now.

The rest of my specs:
Asus maximus viii
Gskill ripjawz v 3000mhz 16gb
evga rtx2080
corsair hx750i
full custom loop

Any insite is welcome. Thanks.
 
If you disable hyperthreading to fully protect against Zombieload. It has no benefit over the i5-6600K.

Although if you update your firmware and only get software from trusted sources. You should be safe without disabling hyperthreading.

If your work is getting rid of a bunch of computers that recent and powerful. You should take as many home as you can. Then sell off the RAM, CPUs and motherboards on eBay. Use the money for a new gaming build.
 
Reactions: Gmoney06ss
If all you do while gaming is play the game then you are not likely to notice any real difference. If you are someone who for example likes to watch youtube on a second screen while gaming or some other secondary task then the extra threads can be very useful.

If you were spending money I'd say no, but for free absolutely. If it feels exactly the same then no big deal.
 
Reactions: Gmoney06ss

Gmoney06ss

Reputable
Jul 3, 2015
717
107
5,190
23
If your work is getting rid of a bunch of computers that recent and powerful. You should take as many home as you can. Then sell off the RAM, CPUs and motherboards on eBay. Use the money for a new gaming build.
Definitely a good idea, though other than cpu/mobo my current rig should suite me for some time. Plenty of other stuff to spend that cash on though! I almost feel guilty, and would hate to sell something I can't 100% test. But I have access to 3 more 7700, no idea on ram for those, with Dell mobo. And up to 10 4770 builds. I'll see how much I can get away with.

I'm hoping zombieload won't really affect me, as it is 99% pure gaming rig. Most of my web surfing is all on mobile, and I don't download sketchy stuff when I do need a program or app.

Even if performance gains are minimal, free is free! Just thought I'd ask if there were any to be had.
 

boju

Champion
For me, 2600k @ 4.5 HT off, games i tested saw cpu usages in the high 90s. With HT on, usage dropped between 70~80s and that also allowed the gpu to render more frames as the cpu wasn't overworked so it could prepare more frames.

Games tested

Doom 2016
Ghost Recon WL
Farcry 5
Dying Light

---

In my case, 1080Ti in 1440p isn't such a drag in these games. Frame rates aren't high enough to cause 4/8 any trouble. I haven't played BF1 or 5 but i reckon i would see higher cpu usages even with HT, these games are very cpu intensive, i would probably have to limit fps to allow the cpu do other things in-game rather than trying to battle frame pre-rendering too at the same time.

I think it's worth going 7700 and hyperthreading is underrated.

Do some testing of your own if you get the time. Compare cpu usages/ frame rates between 6600k and 7700. Id be very interested too see the outcome.
 

Gmoney06ss

Reputable
Jul 3, 2015
717
107
5,190
23
For me, 2600k @ 4.5 HT off, games i tested saw cpu usages in the high 90s. With HT on, usage dropped between 70~80s and that also allowed the gpu to render more frames as the cpu wasn't overworked so it could prepare more frames.

Games tested

Doom 2016
Ghost Recon WL
Farcry 5
Dying Light

---

In my case, 1080Ti in 1440p isn't such a drag in these games. Frame rates aren't high enough to cause 4/8 any trouble. I haven't played BF1 or 5 but i reckon i would see higher cpu usages even with HT, these games are very cpu intensive, i would probably have to limit fps to allow the cpu do other things in-game rather than trying to battle frame pre-rendering too at the same time.

I think it's worth going 7700 and hyperthreading is underrated.

Do some testing of your own if you get the time. Compare cpu usages/ frame rates between 6600k and 7700. Id be very interested too see the outcome.
I will definitely let you know what I come up with, as other than dying light, I have all of those games. I'd be curious to compare some fps numbers. The 2080 vs 1080ti, should be pretty darn close. I'll get both fps and usage numbers sometime this weekend.

Since my loop is soft tubing, I'm going to try and do it without removing anything other than the block. And hopefully leave the case upright. Quick swap, some thermal paste, cmos reset and go. Hopefully!
 
Jun 4, 2019
12
0
10
0
For me, 2600k @ 4.5 HT off, games i tested saw cpu usages in the high 90s. With HT on, usage dropped between 70~80s and that also allowed the gpu to render more frames as the cpu wasn't overworked so it could prepare more frames.

Games tested

Doom 2016
Ghost Recon WL
Farcry 5
Dying Light

---

In my case, 1080Ti in 1440p isn't such a drag in these games. Frame rates aren't high enough to cause 4/8 any trouble. I haven't played BF1 or 5 but i reckon i would see higher cpu usages even with HT, these games are very cpu intensive, i would probably have to limit fps to allow the cpu do other things in-game rather than trying to battle frame pre-rendering too at the same time.

I think it's worth going 7700 and hyperthreading is underrated.

Do some testing of your own if you get the time. Compare cpu usages/ frame rates between 6600k and 7700. Id be very interested too see the outcome.
You say "would probably have to limit fps to allow the cpu do other things in-game rather than trying to battle frame pre-rendering too at the same time."
Why nvidia Physicsx is to set core cpu to do processing and gpu to just render graphics .
 

Gmoney06ss

Reputable
Jul 3, 2015
717
107
5,190
23
Since you have both processors, why not try the 7700 and see if you do better on YOUR games.
This is my plan for now, was just curious if it was even worth it. Seems the common answer is yes, so I'll be trying it out. At worst all I have invested is some time and thermal paste. I just finished up a suite of testing with the 6600K. Some benchmarks and gameplay, now I'm gonna let the pc cool off and do the swap.

Here's my 6600K results, 4.2ghz and stock gpu and ram:
CB15 - single core - 163. Multi - 594. This is just one single run. not an average. My best multi was 696, but that was a much higher clockspeed.
CB20 - single core - 386. Multi - 1482.
Timespy - Gfx - 10,986. CPU - 3,466. Score - 8,288
Firestrike - Gfx - 27,816. CPU - 8,078. Physics - 8,407. Score - 17,487

Some gaming, using in game benchmarks and gameplay. Using MSI afterburner. All games tested in 2560x1440, maxxed out settings.
Doom 2016 - Cpu usage - 90-95avg, spikes of 97. Gpu usage - 68-85. FPS average - 200. Fps stayed solid at 200, with minor dips to 180 when there was alot going on. Very smooth gameplay at all times.

Resident Evil 2 - Cpu usage pretty much maxxed at 100, with some lows of around 95. Gpu - 94-97. Fps average over 100, dips to 80, max of around 120. Very smooth gameplay at all times.

Ghost Recon:Wildlands - Cpu - 100 at all times, if i saw a dip it was still in the high 90s. Gpu - 97 this was the average and it seemed to stay pretty consistent. Fps stayed around the 60 range with some dips in the upper 50s and a max in the low 70 range. Gameplay is less than smooth with some minor stuttering\twitchiness. Still very playable. Just gets stuttery when a lot is going on. The benchmark in the game gave some slightly different results. Cpu - min 81, max 94, avg 88.8. Gpu - 97.

Far Cry 5 - cpu - 100. Gpu - 75 on average. Fps - 75-90. The benchmark mode again displayed slightly different results than afterburner. Cpu - 100. Gpu - 79-85. Fps average 78.

Far Cry:New Dawn - Cpu - 94-100. Gpu - 89-96. Fps 80-100, with some dips and spikes anywhere from high 60s to well over 120. Benchmark mode again some variation from afterburner. Cpu - 90-100. Gpu - 80-85. fps average 72. Gameplay for both farcry5 and new dawn were very similar. Mostly smooth with some stuttering during intense moments, as well as some very random stutters. Very playable.

GTA V - Cpu - 84-100, mostly staying closer to 100. Gpu - 65-89. Average fps was close to 100. Benchmark had some variance again. Cpu - 92-100. Gpu - 95-97. Fps averaged in the 100s, but had some serious dips during the last benchmark scene dipping into the high 50, low 60 range. The game is stuttery, but playable. no real complaints, as I've played through a couple times now, but it could be smoother.

Battlefield V - Cpu - 100 at all times. Gpu - all over the place, my guess is because of the high cpu usage, but it was bouncing around between 40-99. Fps averages in the 70-80 range though with very rare dips. Playable but very stuttery\twitchy. I can only play for short periods because of this. I'm assuming it's just the way it is with such high demands placed on the cpu, and the graphic settings I'm using. Hoping the cpu change will allow for smoother gameplay. If not I will be adjusting graphics, so I can actually enjoy playing for more than 15 minutes or so at a time.

Devil may cry 5 - cpu - 55-65. Gpu - 45-70, highest spike i saw was low 80s. Fps averages well over 100, and gameplay is buttery smooth.

Shadow of the Tomb Raider - cpu - 98-100. Gpu - 73-88. Fps is between 68-100, with some rare dips below 60 and some rare spikes over 100 when very little is going on. Benchmark mode - cpu - 100. gpu - 97, average fps 82. Gpu bound 22%, we'll see if that number changes with the cpu swap. Game is very playable and for the most part very smooth, with some minor stuttering in areas with a lot of grass\foliage.

I have several other games, but figure those results will be about the same as these. And some of these are known to be very cpu demanding. Time to let the pc cool and do this all over again!! hopefully with some good results. I think it will be very interesting to see how a similar core speed along with the hyperthreading will help in some of these titles.
 

Gmoney06ss

Reputable
Jul 3, 2015
717
107
5,190
23
jumping to 8 threads might raise your minimum FPS and 1% lows, but, slightly lower your average or peak FPS due to lower clock speeds...

Alas, there are few bargains on the 7700K these days...
That's why I did my testing at 4.2, as that's the boost clock of the 7700. No idea how often it'll hit those, but I'm definitely not expecting miracles! If I can get slightly smoother gameplay on some of the titles above, I'd be more than happ, even at the expense of slightly lower max fps.. Especially considering the cost of free.99!

Couldn't agree more on the 7700K deals, or complete lack thereof. I can't see myself spending 250+ on a used cpu, barring some extreme deal. Just to upgrade at the end of the year or early next. Maybe sooner if Ryzen 3000 really shocks me, though that's where I think I'm headed regardless.

I'd rather have a more stable lower overall fps than a less stable higher fps. The difference in clock speed isn't a ton, but the thread count difference is pretty big.
Totally agree.
 
Reminds me of a video I saw.
Someone took a 9900k overclocked it to 5.1ghz and made it have 1 core and 1 thread. Then they took the 9900k, enabled 8 cores and 8 threads, and divided that 5.1ghz by 8, setting the 9900k to like 650mhz.
When they ran benchmarks, the 8 core 650mhz had much lower framerates than the 5.1ghz single core, but the 8 core was more stable.
None of the times were the games playable lol.
 

Gmoney06ss

Reputable
Jul 3, 2015
717
107
5,190
23
Got the 7700 in, and I'm starting to think it's a bad cpu. I got some testing done and all was well. Then the crashes and lock ups started happening. I keep getting various q codes and trouble leds. Dram led was first, thought I got it working. The cpu light. There's a couple more pc I can pick from out of the recycle bin, to see if one is good. For now, I'm going to keep trying. As some games runs well, and some crash straight away. While it was working, I was actually quite surprised by the results. BFV for example became playable and cpu usage was lower, still in the upper 80, low 90 range, but gameplay was very smooth. Fps also went up a bit, now averaging in the low 100 range with far less dips.

Kinda bummed at the moment, but at least it was free. If one of the other ones available actually work, I'll be very happy with the up grade. If none of them work, I'll be slightly bummed, but not necessarily upset. At least I have an idea of performance with a better cpu, and know what to look forward to when I do my core upgrade. It just may be a little sooner than planned, though I never really felt held back by the 6600k.

Cinebench results, were as you could guess, much better. As were timespy and firestrike scores. Even the graphics scores went up as there was less "bottleneck". Cpu usage in the few minutes of gaming I could actually do was down, in some cases by 20%. It was also holding an average of 4.1ghz, probably because of mce, or some other random tricks the z170 chipset was doing. Never saw less than 4.0, and never even tried xmp. So ram was still at default 2133. Like I said, I was surprised. The results were much better than expected.

Going to finish troubleshooting, but pretty sure the cpu is caput.

Edit: 99.9% sure it's a bad cpu. Cpu led, as well as dram led staying lit. Alternating between which one depending on boot. Cpu led is red, flashes amber then back to red with q code 01,02 or 03. No post, no display. Dram led is amber with q code 04. Ram tested fine not to long ago when I was troubleshooting a failed overclock. Pretty sure the 6600k is going back in and getting overclocked as high as I can go. I will grab the other two cpu from work, but now remember why the newer pc were being tossed. They didn't work, lol. If I had a 4th gen system I know all the old pc do work. The 7700 systems were replacements for those, which is why there was only a few. But what are the chances of getting 3-4 bad cpus out of 15 or so pcs? Maybe I'll get one good one. Oh well, it was free, and my old cpu works well enough for gaming that this minor set back is really a non issue.
 
Last edited:

Gmoney06ss

Reputable
Jul 3, 2015
717
107
5,190
23
Did you reset bios; load defaults or clear cmos after the cpu change?

Does task manager show all 8 threads? If not Check msconfig > boot > advanced options. Is number of processors unchecked?
Cleared cmos via the button, as well as the pull battery way. BIOS was defaulted and booted fine at first. I loosened my block, which I may have overtightened, the first round of troubleshooting. As it threw the dram led on a crash and refused to reboot. Then it worked for another few minutes. Several clear cmos later, along with reseating ram and trying new slots. One stick at a time, etc. It booted again. Put both sticks back in, cleared cmos again and booted again. Ran several cb15 and cb20 runs. Couple timespy and firestrike runs also. Started gaming benchmarks and crashed, reset again. Played shadow of the tomb raider for near an hour and then crash. Reboot, fired up ghost recon, insta crash. Reboot, let sit idle for a few, tried bfv. Crash, then cpu led, dram led, q codes. No boot, no post. Q codes.

So unfortunately, as of now, I can't get into bios or Windows to check task manager. Leaving it sit off for tonight and retest tomorrow.

I can say afterburner showed all 8 threads on the osd while running the few gaming benchmarks as well as the 3dmark runs.

Also bios did show the correct cpu.
 
It is very rare for an Intel processor to go bad.
One real possibility is that a pin in the cpu socket was damaged during the process.
They are delicate and specced for only 15 insertions.
When you go back to the 6600K examine the pins closely.
 
Reactions: Gmoney06ss

Gmoney06ss

Reputable
Jul 3, 2015
717
107
5,190
23
It is very rare for an Intel processor to go bad.
One real possibility is that a pin in the cpu socket was damaged during the process.
They are delicate and specced for only 15 insertions.
When you go back to the 6600K examine the pins closely.
Appreciate the advice, will definitely be thoroughly inspecting when I swap back to the 6600k, or one of the other 7700. This is only the second insertion, the 6600 has been in since day one, and this is the first time I swapped. I was careful, but that means nothing, and anything can happen. Going to grab another 7700 tomorrow and try again after work.
 

Gmoney06ss

Reputable
Jul 3, 2015
717
107
5,190
23
It is very rare for an Intel processor to go bad.
One real possibility is that a pin in the cpu socket was damaged during the process.
They are delicate and specced for only 15 insertions.
When you go back to the 6600K examine the pins closely.
Well dang, glad you mentioned this. Just removed the 7700 and have several bent pins from the looks of it. Thought I was careful but, it happened.


Any good tips for straightening? Or is the mobo just toast?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY