Which Cpu for a Gtx 1070 or 1080.

[blondishasp69]

I am planning on buying on Black Friday. I want to know which of these cpu's I should get. Xeon E3 1230v5. E3 1240v5. Or a core i5 6600k.

 

[GregFarley248]

i5 6500k

 

[Luminary]

For gaming? Core i5 6600k, no question about it.

 

[killerchickens]

I would go with the i5 6600k if you are going to overclock.

 

[Chugalug_]

Agreed, pair it with a good Z170 board and 16GB of RAM and you're set.

 

[GregFarley248]

but be carful overclocking if u dont know how to

 

[cTigon]

I have an i7 4790k which is more powerful than the i5 6600k and has hyperthreading.

However, it is quite overkill for my 1070. Go with the 6600k.

 

[blondishasp69]

The 1230v5 is about 15 dollars more than the 6600k and has HT and can oc with an asrock mobo (SKYOC). And I am more than capable of overclocking.

 

[blondishasp69]

Im going to be playing 1440p with a 165hz monitor. The 1080 is going to be water cooled and oc'd balls to the walls. I need to know which one is better for a Oc'd 1080 at 1440p. The 1240v5 is basically a binned and higher clocked version of the 1230v5. The 6600k is cheaper by only 20 bucks and offers less than the 1230v5 which is a rebranded i7 6700.

 

[Chugalug_]

If you're going to be getting such a high end monitor, maybe a 6700k is for you?
Especially since you seem to be considering Xeons....
Are you doing any video work?

 

[blondishasp69]

No. The Xeon, however. Is a rebranded i7. Its not on 2011v3. It has 4 cores and 8 threads. Its the 6700 with no Igpu and ecc support. It can be overclocked using SkyOC and the Base Clock method. Its also only around 250 dollars compared to the 330 of the i7's

 

[Chugalug_]

Exactly my point.
The higher single threaded performance of the i5 will give you better performance than a 6700, especially if overclocked.
If it is just for gaming the 6600k is a significantly better choice.

 

[blondishasp69]

The i5 doesn't have higher single thread performance?!?. They are all skylake cores. The cores are EXACTLY the same.

 

[Chugalug_]

Compare it directly to an i7 6700, it does have higher single thread performance.
It's like saying an i3 performs better than an i5 because it also has 4 threads and runs at a higher base clock speed, doesn't necessarily work like that.

 

[blondishasp69]

But they are all on the same core lmao

 

[Chugalug_]

I'm afraid that's not how it works.
Look up some facts about CPU cores, threads and architectures, typically very helpful.
There are many different factors such as instructions per cycle (IPC), cache etc.

Here's a few links to get started:
http://www.howtogeek.com/194756/cpu-basics-multiple-cpus-cores-and-hyper-threading-explained/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-core_processor

 

[blondishasp69]

I know. IPC is a big factor in single core performance. But I am afraid you aren't getting the point. They are all Skylake quad cores. Same everything except for hyper threading lel.

 

[Chugalug_]

Please, read up on the links.
Not true. 🙁
Edit: If you still don't believe me, look at the single core performance differences here.
http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-6700-vs-Intel-Core-i5-6600K/3515vs3503

 

[sarwar_r87]

They have the same core and hence same IPC.

It has the same single thread performance clock for clock.

End of file.

 

[Chugalug_]

sarwar, statistics don't lie....
Read above please.
If you need further justification the 6700 actually boosts 0.1GHz higher than the 6600k.

 

[sarwar_r87]

You need to read your own links that you suggested to the other chap. The have the same everything.

Also I'm starting to think you don't understand what IPC or clock for clock mean

also be my guest and measure .1 GHz time savings using a stop watch

 

[Chugalug_]

Due to the hyperthreaded nature of the cores and essentially splitting them down the middle to allocate actions and tasks it slightly weakens their single thread performance.

Please take the time to actually go through the links before posting.
'The same everything' as you put it simply doesn't apply.
And to quote the resources I posted for you two; "Hyper-threading can help speed your system up, but it’s nowhere near as good as having additional cores."
"The CPU pretends it has more cores than it does, and it uses its own logic to speed up program execution. Hyper-threading allows the two logical CPU cores to share physical execution resources. "


Multi-Core CPUs *key*
---------------------
"Unlike hyper-threading, there are no tricks here — a dual-core CPU literally has two central processing units on the CPU chip. A quad-core CPU has four central processing units, an octa-core CPU has eight central processing units, and so on.

This helps dramatically improve performance while keeping the physical CPU unit small so it fits in a single socket. There only needs to be a single CPU socket with a single CPU unit inserted into it — not four different CPU sockets with four different CPUs, each needing their own power, cooling, and other hardware. There’s less latency because the cores can communicate more quickly, as they’re all on the same chip."

Edit: Just remembered that now L2 is shared cache, not per core as L1 was, retracted.

 

[sarwar_r87]

Lol. Nothing is split down the line. Lol you are funny person.

When the CPU is idealing due to missed cache or missed prediction or waiting for data, it executes a different thread while it waits for the misprediction to be corrected or the fetch to be completed.

U r so confused ... Its funny

Reason why HT is bad is because if there is a cache over flow while running two threads requiring CPU to go to L2 or L3 or system memory which has higher latancy. But that's multi threaded app and not single threaded. In single thread they have same performance clock for clock.

Again read your own links please.

 

[Chugalug_]

I'm simplifying it for you with 'splitting it down the middle' as you don't seem to understand the most basic applications in regards to hyperthreading.

This missed cache or prediction which is corrected via HT adds latency, READ.

Not going to pursue this further, don't make your comments further attacks on people when they attempt to correct you.

 

[sarwar_r87]

Yes of course. I don't know anything. Says the noob who says two identical cores with same cache has different single thread performance.

Did not see that coming.

Single thread means single thread.