what cpu is better for gaming

May 16, 2018
19
0
10
im gonna be gaming and sometimes streaming plus recording which cpu is better i7 8086k or 8700k im gonna be using a hyper 212 evo and a gtx 1060 i heared the 8086k is bullshit but is it worth it?
 
Solution
As profoundnoah said, for gaming, the highest-end CPU won't matter much if the graphics card is holding it back. An 8700K will offer a bit faster per-core performance compared to a 2600X or overclocked 2600, but that's not going to really make any significant difference unless they are paired with a high-end graphics card that can reach high enough frame rates to push the CPU to its limits.

And you won't be overclocking either of those i7s to any substantial degree unless you get a high-end cooler for them. For gaming, a faster graphics card will generally be more important than a faster CPU. And even for streaming, an overclocked 2600 should perform pretty well, as it offers the same number of cores and threads as the current i7's...
I would much rather go with an AMD 2600 and a GTX 1070 vs an i7 and a 1060. The 212 Evo is not a sufficient cooler to overclock either of those chips. The 2600 doesn't require an after-market cooler, and overall costs less while barely losing any streaming. The 8086k is only better when overclocking, as you are basically guaranteed 5 Ghz- something meaningless if you don't have adequate cooling.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: AMD - Ryzen 5 2600 3.4GHz 6-Core Processor ($169.89 @ OutletPC)
Motherboard: ASRock - Fatal1ty B450 GAMING K4 ATX AM4 Motherboard ($101.98 @ Newegg)
Video Card: EVGA - GeForce GTX 1070 8GB SC2 Gaming iCX Video Card ($409.99 @ Amazon)
Total: $681.86
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2018-07-27 00:49 EDT-0400
 

GR1M_ZA

Reputable
Apr 29, 2014
418
1
4,960
The 8086k is just a binned 8700k. It is not worth the extra money, if you are looking for OC bragging rights then get it. GamerNexus did a video about this and also said that the 8086k is not worth the extra $$$ over the 8700k. If you are going to OC and looking to hit 5.4-5.5 then yes, but most 8700k's will do 5.2Ghz. And get atleast a 240mm AIO cooler as the 212 Evo will not be able to keep 8700k or 8086k at decent temps.
 

GR1M_ZA

Reputable
Apr 29, 2014
418
1
4,960



The 8086k will do higher than 5Ghz. My 8700k does 5Ghz @ 1.28v.I am sure I will get 5.2 but I do not want to use to high voltages as I like the CPU to run nice and cool.Anyway 5Ghz is more than enough and under gaming load my CPU is +- 40C using an Antec Mercury 360. Stress testing it reaches on avg 70-80C , the highest spike I have seen is 89C , but that was only for a split second.

But I agree with you....rather go for a GTX1070 and Ryzen 2600, gaming @ 1440 CPU differences is basically non existent.
 

GR1M_ZA

Reputable
Apr 29, 2014
418
1
4,960


Agreed, but in my experience , everybody that I have spoken to or know with a 8700k, got to the 5Ghz mark on their 8700k. I would personally say, 5Hgz is almost a guarantee on a 8700k and 5.2 if you got s decent chip in the silicon lottery.

But yes, it is definitely not worth the money.
 
As profoundnoah said, for gaming, the highest-end CPU won't matter much if the graphics card is holding it back. An 8700K will offer a bit faster per-core performance compared to a 2600X or overclocked 2600, but that's not going to really make any significant difference unless they are paired with a high-end graphics card that can reach high enough frame rates to push the CPU to its limits.

And you won't be overclocking either of those i7s to any substantial degree unless you get a high-end cooler for them. For gaming, a faster graphics card will generally be more important than a faster CPU. And even for streaming, an overclocked 2600 should perform pretty well, as it offers the same number of cores and threads as the current i7's, even if it can't clock as high. It is around half the cost of an 8700K though, and that money might be better put toward graphics in a build limited by budget.

As for the 2600's stock cooler, it will likely allow for some overclocking, but it's not as capable as the one that comes with the 2600X, so I would look for an AM4-compatible tower cooler for overclocking it.

And if you're running stock settings, an 8086K will be even more pointless, since it only boosts higher on a single core. For multi-threaded workloads, it boosts to the same clocks as an 8700K. And for overclocking, it only manages around 0.1 GHz higher clocks than an 8700K on average, which works out to about a 2% difference. And that's on average, as clock rates aren't guaranteed... some 8700Ks may overclock slightly better than some 8086Ks.
 
Solution