Is a Intel Core i7-5820K (Overclocked to 4.2Ghz) better than a stock Intel Core i7-6700K ?

[ObelixThe]

I am just about to make a major PC [upgrade] purchase. I came across this PC Version Of 'Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain' Out On Same Day As Consoles article while browsing inside tom's hardware. The recommended specs include a i7-4790 processor which is incredible because its so brand new. It got me thinking will a 6700K become recommended hardware for games within 2 years' time?

I was decided about the 6700K +GTX970. [http://pcpartpicker.com/user/ObelixThe/saved/#view=rCGzK8]

Should I rather opt for a 5820K and OC it to 4.2+ Ghz? [http://pcpartpicker.com/user/ObelixThe/saved/#view=4tPWGX]

If I can OC the i7-5820K to a stock 6700K's clock speed then will it be better than the 6700K?

I am more inclined towards the Skylake because it is newer and slightly cheaper than a Haswell-Extreme build.

However, I really enjoy Strategy games with massive maps and 8 [or more] players with huge numbers of units.

So I am wondering if I can get some expert advice whether or not a overclocked 6-Core 5820K would be superior to a stock 6700K?

For the GPU I am probably buying either the GTX 970 or the R9 390X.
For the PSU I am considering between the CM V750S and V850 models.
I really like the Inwin Case so that's what I am getting.
For motherboard if I buy X99 I will get the Asus x99-A. For skylake I'll get the Gigabyte Gaming7.
For RAM 16GB G.Skill DDR4-3000 [8GB x2 or 4Gb x4].
I am kinda scared of the kind of CLC failures I read about so I will stick with a cheap aircooler like the 212X or 412 slim.

Any and all suggestions, advice are most welcome and appreciated.

 

[ObelixThe]

Throw a nice x4 m.2 drive for amazing drive speed. The next extreme processor may not fit in an x99 board, but by the point you need to upgrade your gonna want a new motherboard anyways. Go with the 5820 or 5930 if you can afford it. You won't regret it.

went with the skylake build... for better or worse
the 980Ti is unavailable atm. i have ordered the asus dc3.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i7-6700K 4.0GHz Quad-Core Processor ($369.90 @ B&H)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Nepton 240M 76.0 CFM Liquid CPU Cooler ($89.99 @ Newegg)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-Z170XP-SLI ATX LGA1151 Motherboard ($138.98 @ Newegg)
Memory: G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-3200 Memory ($144.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Samsung 850 EVO-Series 250GB 2.5" Solid State Drive ($89.49 @ OutletPC)
Storage: Western Digital WD Green 2TB 3.5" 5400RPM Internal Hard Drive ($72.99 @ NCIX US)
Storage: Toshiba 3TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($87.89 @ OutletPC)
Video Card: Asus GeForce GTX 980 Ti 6GB STRIX Video Card ($694.98 @ Newegg)
Case: Thermaltake Core V51 ATX Mid Tower Case ($94.99 @ Directron)
Power Supply: Cooler Master V850 850W 80+ Gold Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply ($159.99 @ Newegg)
Total: $1944.19
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-09-22 03:40 EDT-0400

 

[GaryO63]

I'm playing MGS V on a Core i5-4690K,a GTX 960, Asus z-97 E, Windows 10,16 GB DDR3 2400,and a Corsair OTX 250 GB SSD.No issues whatsoever on max settings.Oh,I have an Acer 24" monitor as well.No problems.I'm OC'd to 4.5 GHz on water and my temps average 66c at full load.The 5820k is your best bet though.For $46.00 more,you get 2 extra cores,almost double the cache,28 PCI Express lanes,2 more memory channels,and double the memory bandwidth.I'm personally going with the 5930 K in a few months for a new build.These chips are beasts,and I don't think the Skylake E's will be any better.I was hoping to see a Broadwell E,but it looks like Intel is scraping them in favor of Skylake E next fall.I may wait until then.Just my prospective.And just a suggestion,do not skimp on cooling.If you go with the 5xxx series chip they run hot,and you don't want cheap cooling solutions on them.

 

[David_106]

This is my Skylake Build @PcPartPicker.

I typically keep a PC for 5-6 years. The GPU I will upgrade after about 2-3 years. Then sell off the whole setup and buy anew.

That's why I am inclined towards the i7-6700K (instead of the i5-6600K) because besides gaming, I also want my system to be responsive for the full 6 years.

However, the i7-5820K (seems to me) to be more future (the next 6 years from now) proof as a gaming processor.

There are quite a few game titles which already require a Intel QuadCore CPU such as FarCry4, Battlefield4, Battlefield Hardline, AC: Unity, MSGV just to name the few I know of.

@Spentshells Can you say with certainty that in 4 years' time games will not use more than 4 cores? If you can, then I would rather get the 6700K build because it is cheaper than a PC with the Haswell-E 5820K.

@spentshells & @LookItsRain

Both of yous are master/authority/experts and you are offering different suggestions.

That's why I am so confused, cuz both of yous can't be right, right?

The 5820 is much faster also don't forget you get quad channel ram with the 5820. Two more cores as well. Go with the extreme line. Imho

 

[David_106]

Make sure you take advantage of quad channel ram. Geil ram is very solid. Get 8 dimms instead of 4 you lose a lot of performance by wasting the other 2 channels. The geil 3000 mhz memory runs at 3100 mhz on my system.

 

[zhamiraq]

Make sure you take advantage of quad channel ram. Geil ram is very solid. Get 8 dimms instead of 4 you lose a lot of performance by wasting the other 2 channels. The geil 3000 mhz memory runs at 3100 mhz on my system.

There is very little, if any at all, performance benefit of using quad channel over dual channel, so there's no point in filling all slots unless you feel like it. I wouldn't since it would stop me from upgrading in the future.

See tests at for example: http://www.pcworld.com/article/2982965/components/quad-channel-ram-vs-dual-channel-ram-the-shocking-truth-about-their-performance.html


I see OP has already settled for the i7-6700k. I will upgrade myself in the near future, probably when Black Friday sales hit late novemeber.

I am considering the i5-6600k vs the i7-5820k. If the i5 isn't going to be enough, then the HT in the i7 will not be as big an upgrade as two full cores in the 5820k.

And since you can clock the 6-core close to the same speeds, and the systems do cost about the same, I have a hard time considering the 6700k myself to be honest.Maybe if it falls a lot in price compared to an X99 build. (Currently the 5820k is cheaper than the 6700k, while the mother board is a bit more expensive. The total cost is about the same, within 10-20EUR or so).

 

[Th3-Hunter333]

Do not make the mistake to go to Intel x99 ever again you will start with 271 watts consumption and the ram usage from both sides is blocking the cool air to go in the power regulators. The issue starts from here:

http://www.amd.com/en-us/products/processors/desktop/fx#

my FX 8370E works at 4.5 Ghz with only 95 watts consumption.

Do not listen to this man^

You have got to be absolutely INSANE to reccommend anything by amd over a x99 platform.

I have the 5820k and even overclocked at 4.5ghz it doesnt even come close to using that much wattage, you are outright lying. (Check my signature, i own one)

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-fx-8370e-cpu,3929-2.html

Please refrain from giving completely false information when you clearly have ZERO clue what you are talking about.

The 5820k beats everything amd has to offer by a couple miles, they dont even come close to comparing

P.S. i use to own the fx 8350, i know what im talking about

 

[sammy sung]

Thank you, OP

Your thread is giving me cancer

 

[LookItsRain]

Do not make the mistake to go to Intel x99 ever again you will start with 271 watts consumption and the ram usage from both sides is blocking the cool air to go in the power regulators. The issue starts from here:

http://www.amd.com/en-us/products/processors/desktop/fx#

my FX 8370E works at 4.5 Ghz with only 95 watts consumption.

Shows you literally know nothing if you think overclocking does not change the power consumption and heat output. TDP is NOT power consumption anyways.

 

[Th3-Hunter333]

Do not listen to this man^

You have got to be absolutely INSANE to reccommend anything by amd over a x99 platform.

I have the 5820k and even overclocked at 4.5ghz it doesnt even come close to using that much wattage, you are outright lying. (Check my signature, i own one)

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-fx-8370e-cpu,3929-2.html

Please refrain from giving completely false information when you clearly have ZERO clue what you are talking about.

The 5820k beats everything amd has to offer by a couple miles, they dont even come close to comparing

P.S. i use to own the fx 8350, i know what im talking about

I didn't claim I'm an expert somewhere in the test you post they didn't use Indigo xtream for fx processors and NH-D14 I just copied everything I found in

http://giatrakis.wix.com/john-giatrakis

even the voltages and I paired SAPPHIRE Radeon R9 380 with GA-990FXA-UD7 and I'm running everything in max settings at 1280 x 1024 without any problem at 40 and 45 C maximum at full load during summer. I deactivate all the bios functions that was dropping the hz of the cpu and I'm at 4.5 ghz all the time even in idle. Now I gathering money to buy a better psu that can support a better graphics card and higher over clocking in the feature.

I understand mate, i fully understand. I dont like to come off sounding rude or harsh on forums meant to be helping people, i just like accuracy.

One thing to keep note of most of these tests you are going to be looking at are mostly done in 1080p or higher resolution sometimes. 1280 by 1024 is FAR less intensive on the processor/gpu than 1080p for comparison.

My cpu is the same way though, mine is always at 4.5ghz as well while having all power saving and things off.

Keep in mind that 4.5ghz on amd is NOWHERE near the same as 4.5ghz on intel.
Intel is FAR more "efficient" with higher clock speeds

I.E. 3.3ghz on intel is "roughly" the same as 5.0ghz on amd

This is why literally every single benchmark you find, intel's single threaded performance is beating the ever loving he** out of amd's best performing processors