i7 6700k or i7 6800k

Mathijs_1

Commendable
Apr 14, 2016
6
0
1,510
I wonder what CPU will be better for standard use and maxed out gaming and if the i7 6800k would actually be way more future proof and better for gaming I also wonder if the X99 would be better than the LGA 1151 socket since it does seem more expensive and it only supports ddr4 and I haven't seen any improvement in ddr4 benchmarks over ddr3 ram anyone maybe help out :)
I use a r9 390 gaming 8G GPU
 
Solution
I would be curious also, maybe in a few isolated cases. However here's a comparison between the i5 6600k and i7 6700k.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1544?vs=1543

In games there are like 2 listed that show even 5fps difference between the two. The biggest performance gaps are in file compression like winrar and 7zip and a few synthetic tests. Some heavily threaded production applications. Otherwise the two perform very close to one another. Of course the i7 is the better performer. It's also 50% more expensive than the i5. If you have the cash then go for it, but for the 50% price increase it doesn't offer 50% more performance and definitely not where gaming is concerned. At best around 15-20% difference in shadow of mordor.
I would imagine the same as it has been. The 6700k is the 4c/8t mainstream desktop cpu like the 4790k was and the 6800k is the lower clocked 6c/12t enthusiast or workstation cpu for the broadwell-e platform. Games are still not overly threaded, a couple are starting to make use and show a slight performance improvement with hyperthreaded cpu's but for the vast majority there's not much difference between the i5's and 4c i7's.

X99 is the predecessor to broadwell-e and the 5820k is the predecessor to the i7 6800k you mentioned. All 3 of those use ddr4 and ddr4 shows little to no improvement over ddr3 especially in gaming. If considering 3 cpu's that all use ddr4 though there's really no point in being concerned over how ddr3 stacks up.

There's no such thing as future proof. If that were the case the 8 core fx cpu's would be topping the gaming performance charts and instead they're in the lower half. Often times losing out to an i5 which has strictly 4c/4t or tying with the i3 many times which is only a dual core with ht. Not often but in a number of games the i3, i5 and i7 all perform within a few fps of each other.

Unless this is a video editing rig or you're looking to run obs or twitch or something along with your gaming at the same time the 6c/12t cpu's are liable to be overkill.
 
I have seen a improvement with the i7 6700k it's actually pretty epic how much better modern games run on it compared to even the i5 6600k.
Thanks I suppose I will be going for the i7 6700k :)
 


Where have you seen this? Pretty much every gaming benchmark I've seen has shown the the 6600k to be within 10% or so of the 6700k.
 
all benchmarks are different everywhere it might be a big boost or a small boost but the boost is there and the hyperthreading will probably proof useful with dx12
 
I would be curious also, maybe in a few isolated cases. However here's a comparison between the i5 6600k and i7 6700k.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1544?vs=1543

In games there are like 2 listed that show even 5fps difference between the two. The biggest performance gaps are in file compression like winrar and 7zip and a few synthetic tests. Some heavily threaded production applications. Otherwise the two perform very close to one another. Of course the i7 is the better performer. It's also 50% more expensive than the i5. If you have the cash then go for it, but for the 50% price increase it doesn't offer 50% more performance and definitely not where gaming is concerned. At best around 15-20% difference in shadow of mordor.
 
Solution