• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

[DigitalFoundry] Stock vs OC: 7350K vs 7600K vs 7700K

LTC8K6

Lifer
Mar 10, 2004
28,523
1,570
126
Why is the i7 killing the i5 at the same clock speed?
Is HT making a bigger difference than usual?
 

LTC8K6

Lifer
Mar 10, 2004
28,523
1,570
126
games slowly start to take use of more cores.
Both have 4 cores. The i7 just adds 2mb cache and Hyperthreading.
We know that the i7 can handle more threads via HT, but I have always heard that the HT does not add enough performance to justify buying an i7 over an i5 for gaming.

The i7 is an 8 thread chip, but a true 8 core 8 thread chip at the same clock speed would kill it.
 

Rifter

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,518
745
126
nothing new really, i would only consider i5 for a budget build nowadays. i7(or maybe zen) or better for a main gaming rig in 2017. The consoles being 8 cores is starting to make a difference in pc games thread utilization.
 

happy medium

Lifer
Jun 8, 2003
14,387
471
126
nothing new really, i would only consider i5 for a budget build nowadays. i7(or maybe zen) or better for a main gaming rig in 2017. The consoles being 8 cores is starting to make a difference in pc games thread utilization.
I would not consider my i5 build a budget build, My cpu cost me $150 used and will be faster than most systems out there. It pushes my $400 gtx1070 just fine.
My motherboard and ram cost me like $300!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ken g6

daxzy

Senior member
Dec 22, 2013
393
77
101
I wish they had a summary of results at the end. So I did a compilation of the average FPS (and the end of each game segment).

Ashes of the Singularity
i3 @ 4.8 > 25.6
i5 @ 4.8 > 33.1
i7 @ stock > 42.0
i7 @ 4.8 > 44.1

The Division
i3 @ 4.8 > 128.5
i5 @ 4.8 > 133.3
i7 @ stock > 132.7
i7 @ 4.8 > 132.8

Witcher 3
i3 @ 4.8 > 93.3
i5 @ 4.8 > 116.0
i7 @ stock > 140.6
i7 @ 4.8 > 146.3

Rise of the Tomb Raider
i3 @ 4.8 > 75.3
i5 @ 4.8 > 98.2
i7 @ stock > 126.5
i7 @ 4.8 > 131.4

Far Cry Primal
i3 @ 4.8 > 115.2
i5 @ 4.8 > 117.1
i7 @ stock > 137.9
i7 @ 4.8 > 140.1

Assassin's Creed Unity
i3 @ 4.8 > 110.2
i5 @ 4.8 > 125.6
i7 @ stock > 132.3
i7 @ 4.8 > 133.0

Crysis 3
i3 @ 4.8 > 89.6
i5 @ 4.8 > 108.6
i7 @ stock > 138.2
i7 @ 4.8 > 145.6


Both have 4 cores. The i7 just adds 2mb cache and Hyperthreading.
We know that the i7 can handle more threads via HT, but I have always heard that the HT does not add enough performance to justify buying an i7 over an i5 for gaming.

The i7 is an 8 thread chip, but a true 8 core 8 thread chip at the same clock speed would kill it.
Why is this so hard to believe, that HT and cache may add a huge benefit? More game developers are using more cores (coincidentally, the PS4 and XBox One have 8 cores to work with). Things chance, and the whole "i7 isn't worth it" started to change, IMO, around 2015. It's all a balance of CPU/GPU.

Just feel bad for the people who spent more money on a i5-7600K/6600K setup to O/C to 4.5 GHz (with Z170 and heatsink/fan tax) to get upwards of 30+% worse performance than a stock i7-6700/7700.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Madpacket and Crono

daxzy

Senior member
Dec 22, 2013
393
77
101
I would not consider my i5 build a budget build, My cpu cost me $150 used and will be faster than most systems out there. It pushes my $400 gtx1070 just fine.
My motherboard and ram cost me like $300!
Yea, I really don't get most people's philosophy about getting a souped up motherboard, but skimp (relatively speaking) on a processor. Your combo (in your own words) cost $450 for CPU/Mobo/Memory. For the same or less price, you could get a i7-6700 ($275) / H110/170 Mobo ($75-$100) / 16GB ($75) memory.
 

happy medium

Lifer
Jun 8, 2003
14,387
471
126
Yea, I really don't get most people's philosophy about getting a souped up motherboard, but skimp (relatively speaking) on a processor. Your combo (in your own words) cost $450 for CPU/Mobo/Memory. For the same or less price, you could get a i7-6700 ($275) / H110/170 Mobo ($75-$100) / 16GB ($75) memory.
Not over a year ago when I bought it. The 6700k was like $385 when I bought my motherboard and ram. 16gb of DDR4 3000 was over $150. My motherboard is at the same price now on newegg as when I bought it. ~150$

I made good use of the original i3 6100 @ 4.5 , I paid $124 for that and sold it for $90.
That's over 60fps for over a year for $35. :)

I would never buy junk H110 boards.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: VirtualLarry

daxzy

Senior member
Dec 22, 2013
393
77
101
Not over a year ago when I bought it. The 6700k was like $385 when I bought my motherboard and ram. 16gb of DDR4 3000 was over $150. My motherboard is at the same price now on newegg as when I bought it. ~150$

I made good use of the original i3 6100 @ 4.5 , I paid $124 for that and sold it for $90.
That's over 60fps for over a year for $35. :)

I would never buy junk H110 boards.
Fair enough, timeline is critical. Skylake prices were bloated for awhile when they just came out. And yes, stay away from the lowest end H110 boards (MSRP $40-50). It's amazing what you can get for an extra $20, though.

However, at this point in time, if anyone is getting a GTX 1070+ GPU, not getting a i7 is just dumb.
 

Rifter

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,518
745
126
I would not consider my i5 build a budget build, My cpu cost me $150 used and will be faster than most systems out there. It pushes my $400 gtx1070 just fine.
My motherboard and ram cost me like $300!
You can call it whatever you want but as posted in post #9 i5's in CPU bound games are scoring closer to i3 in FPS now that they are to a i7.

The days of 4 thread CPU's being all you need for gaming is quickly coming to a end. They arnt there yet, but they are getting close. And since in this CPU's dont get much better for 6+ years world we live in now if you are building a gaming rig now you might as well go for a i7 and keep it for a long time and not worry about it, vs buying a i5 now and upgrading to a i7 in 1-2 years.
 

happy medium

Lifer
Jun 8, 2003
14,387
471
126
Show me 1 AAA good game that won't run over 60fps with a Skylake i5 @ 4.6
My i3 6100 @ 4.5 ran every game I through at it over 60fps for over a year that I owned it.
My i5 6500 @ 4.5 is even faster.

A 7700k @ 4.5 bottlenecks a TitanXP @ 1080p.
 

StrangerGuy

Diamond Member
May 9, 2004
8,443
124
106
You can call it whatever you want but as posted in post #9 i5's in CPU bound games are scoring closer to i3 in FPS now that they are to a i7.

The days of 4 thread CPU's being all you need for gaming is quickly coming to a end. They arnt there yet, but they are getting close. And since in this CPU's dont get much better for 6+ years world we live in now if you are building a gaming rig now you might as well go for a i7 and keep it for a long time and not worry about it, vs buying a i5 now and upgrading to a i7 in 1-2 years.
Yeah the lengths some go to justify not to spend $100 more for a CPU that actually have 2x the threads to use for a long time are pretty funny. This isn't nowhere even close to 98/99 where a P3-500 costs 4x more than a C300A@450 while barely faster.
 

cbn

Lifer
Mar 27, 2009
12,968
221
106
We know that the i7 can handle more threads via HT, but I have always heard that the HT does not add enough performance to justify buying an i7 over an i5 for gaming.

That started changing a while back.

Now in some cases even a stock clocked i7 2600K (or even a FX8350) can beat a stock clocked Skylake Core i5 6600 (although the core scaling seen below is probably the best of its kind):

http://gamegpu.com/action-/-fps-/-tps/watch-dogs-2-test-gpu







 
Last edited:

happy medium

Lifer
Jun 8, 2003
14,387
471
126
That started changing a while back.

Now in some cases even a stock clocked i7 2600K (or even a FX8350) can beat a stock clocked Skylake Core i5 6600 (although the core scaling seen below is probably the best of its kind):

http://gamegpu.com/action-/-fps-/-tps/watch-dogs-2-test-gpu







So one game that Shows a stock i5 6600 running 60 fps means an i5 7600 @ 4.5 won't cut it ?
What is your point of this post?
 

cbn

Lifer
Mar 27, 2009
12,968
221
106
So one game that Shows a stock i5 6600 running 60 fps means an i5 7600 @ 4.5 won't cut it ?
What is your point of this post?
Of course an i5 7600 @ 4.5 will work, but so will a i7 2600K @ 4.5.....and the i7 2600K would be faster yet again.

So the point of the post is that a 4C/8T with lower single thread can beat a 4C/4T with higher single thread.
 

happy medium

Lifer
Jun 8, 2003
14,387
471
126
Of course an i5 7600 @ 4.5 will work, but so will a i7 2600K @ 4.5.....and the i7 2600K would be faster yet again.

So the point of the post is that a 4C/8T with lower single thread can beat a 4C/4T with higher single thread.
A 2600k @ 4.5 is about 7% faster than a 7600k @ 4.5 in that one game you show.
ANd both are fast enough that you couldn't tell the difference.

I see people here saying better to just buy a 350$ 6700k rather to get what you need for $125.

I think ahead when I buy a system.
First you need a good foundation. PSU, motherboard and fast ram.
Next I decide what performance is good for a cpu. I looked at benchmarks and saw that a i3 6100 @ 3.7 was doing well for $124 in most any AAA title.
Found out my fast ram gives me like 10% more performance with my i3. Bonus:)
Then I got lucky and found out I can overclock my non K i3. Bonus. :)
Kept the cpu until I saw that soon it would not quite cut it. Over a year!
Sell cpu for $90.
Buy a i5 6500 for $150 and overclock it.
I didn't buy a Skylake i7 because the overclocked i5 6500 will be fine till Coffee Lake comes out.
Now I'm praying for a 14nm 6 core Coffee lake cpu for my Z170.
If it never comes , I'll sell the i5 6500 for $100 and buy a 7700k for UNDER $300.
 

daxzy

Senior member
Dec 22, 2013
393
77
101
So one game that Shows a stock i5 6600 running 60 fps means an i5 7600 @ 4.5 won't cut it ?
What is your point of this post?
It's not about cutting it as it is about "worth".

People pay a $300 premium for a GTX 1080 over a GTX 1070 because it is 30% faster. Why won't they pay a $100 premium for a i7-6700K vs a i7-6600K when it can net them the same 30% gains?
 

happy medium

Lifer
Jun 8, 2003
14,387
471
126
It's not about cutting it as it is about "worth".

People pay a $300 premium for a GTX 1080 over a GTX 1070 because it is 30% faster. Why won't they pay a $100 premium for a i7-6700K vs a i7-6600K when it can net them the same 30% gains?
That's easy.
You will actually see your 30% faster gpu with higher framerates and better visuals.
Last year my i3 6100 was 124$ and the 6700 was $385 dollars.
The i3 with fast ram was pushing over 60 fps in every title I played.
If I bought a 6700k for $260 more, would I have gotten my 260$ worth? NO, I would not be able to tell the difference between 70fps and 120 fps. Who cares? I had a 60hz monitor, like most people.

Now I have a $150 i5 6500, can I tell the difference between it and a $320 7700k? No, not at all.
My games still run over 60fps.

When I sell the i5 6500 for $100, I will have $85 invested in my system cpu wise for 2 years of over 60fps performance.
Then mabe they will release a 6 core cpu I really want on the same socket.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Madpacket

maddogmcgee

Senior member
Apr 20, 2015
285
141
116
So many people on these forums assume everyone plays shooters. Most of the games I play are completely CPU bound (unless you are using integrated graphics). My old 7870 would run them at max...but they still manage to bring a 6700k at 4.6 to its knees late game.
 

coercitiv

Diamond Member
Jan 24, 2014
4,166
5,069
136
Yea, I really don't get most people's philosophy about getting a souped up motherboard, but skimp (relatively speaking) on a processor. Your combo (in your own words) cost $450 for CPU/Mobo/Memory. For the same or less price, you could get a i7-6700 ($275) / H110/170 Mobo ($75-$100) / 16GB ($75) memory.
So you would argue that i5 @ 4.5 Ghz with DDR4 @ 3000 would be outclassed by i7 @ 3.7Ghz and DDR4 @ 2133?

So many people on these forums assume everyone plays shooters. Most of the games I play are completely CPU bound (unless you are using integrated graphics). My old 7870 would run them at max...but they still manage to bring a 6700k at 4.6 to its knees late game.
That's an interesting concept: choosing a CPU that is fit for your needs, based on your workloads in gaming or otherwise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Drazick

ASK THE COMMUNITY