Intel 6600K or 6700K for a new Gaming PC

[NTMBK]

Wouldn't both the i7 6700K and the i7 5820K be faster? That just looks like an Xeon version of the 6700K, but at lower clocks and locked, and the 5820K has 2 more cores and 4 more threads.

It's faster than the 6600k, but significantly cheaper than the 6700k (and in stock!). 5820k might be a decent choice, but it comes with a more expensive platform (quad channel memory kits, more complex motherboards). And I don't fancy overclocking anything which is going to be doing serious video editing work

 

[Burpo]

Non of the 2011-3 K processors can use more than 64GB of RAM. Intel fuses that capability off. The Xeons that the X99 chipset supports, though, can use up to 128GB (on X99).

Skylake Xeon E3-1270 v5 LGA 1151 fits a Z170 mobo, & will probably overclock via bclk. Available too. I like it

 

[dark zero]

Skylake Xeon E3-1270 v5 LGA 1151 fits a Z170 mobo, & will probably overclock via bclk. Available too. I like it

Sadly Intel made the Xeon no longer useable on Z170 as far I know and there are few OCer Xeon boards

 

[Burpo]

Yeah, I just read it.. That sux..

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9731/skylake-xeon-motherboard-gigabyte-c230-c236

 

[Magic Carpet]

Speaking of which. Has anybody delidded any 115x Xeon, to find out what kind of thermal interface used there. Burpo, perhaps?

 

[Burpo]

Xeon's used to be soldered.. Not sure about Skylake..

 

[RussianSensation]

Non of the 2011-3 K processors can use more than 64GB of RAM.Intel fuses that capability off. The Xeons that the X99 chipset supports, though, can use up to 128GB (on X99).

Do you have a professional source to validate the above statements?

Linus confirmed that he was able to run 128GB DDR4 on 5960X.

G.Skill Forums confirm the same:

MB: Asus X99-Deluxe, Bios-1801
CPU: i7 5960X @ 4.5Ghz-1.265V, Cache:4.0Ghz @1.255V
F4-2800C15Q2-128GRKD
http://www.gskill.us/forum/showthread.php?t=13549

Even works on lower end i7s:

"Not everyone can get to 128GB of RAM. Obviously you need eight memory slots. You’ll also need a CPU that supports DDR4, but you don’t need a $1,000 Xeon or Core i7-5960X CPU. For this particular test I used Intel’s cheapest Haswell-E CPU, a Core i7-5820K. The final ingredient that you’ll need is a motherboard whose BIOS supports 128GB of RAM."
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2938...s-pc-with-128gb-of-cutting-edge-ddr4-ram.html

It doesn't mean that all 5820K/5930K/5960X CPUs have the capability to support faster speed 128GB DDR4 kits. The higher the DDR4 speed, the less likely the CPU's memory controller can cope with all 8 DIMMs filled. It becomes a memory controller lottery which is why some may only run with DDR4 2133mhz while others can hit 2800mhz.

"This is the best 128GB memory kit on the market so it does come at a hefty price tag. Quantity is extremely limited so it is not intended for any average user. The Intel Extreme Core i7-5960X CPU is highly recommended to reach the rated specifications of this RAM (DDR4-2800 CL15 1.35V)."
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231866

If someone is serious about running a 128GB DDR4 kit on X99, they should contact the motherboard manufacturer + the memory manufacturer just to confirm the compatibility. The starting point is making sure the X99 board was designed to support 128GB DDR4 in the first place.

 

[MrTeal]

Is the 32GB DDR4 you bought already four DIMMs or two?

If it's 4x8GB, going with X99 and a 5820k for your wife and keeping the 4790k seems like easily the best choice. It gives her the computer that will benefit her the most, and while you'd lose a little staying with the 4790k vs the 6700k, it's not that much. The hex core won't even cost that much more, since the extra $100 you'll spend on the X99 motherboard will be partially offset by the $50 cheaper processor.

You also will have the benefit of not having to fudge driver issues with a motherboard swap or reinstalling Windows on your rig, since all you're changing is the GPU. Those couple hours are probably worth it if nothing else is.

 

[bystander36]

Do you have a professional source to validate the above statements?

Linus confirmed that he was able to run 128GB DDR4 on 5960X.

G.Skill Forums confirm the same:

MB: Asus X99-Deluxe, Bios-1801
CPU: i7 5960X @ 4.5Ghz-1.265V, Cache:4.0Ghz @1.255V
F4-2800C15Q2-128GRKD
http://www.gskill.us/forum/showthread.php?t=13549

Even works on lower end i7s:

"Not everyone can get to 128GB of RAM. Obviously you need eight memory slots. You’ll also need a CPU that supports DDR4, but you don’t need a $1,000 Xeon or Core i7-5960X CPU. For this particular test I used Intel’s cheapest Haswell-E CPU, a Core i7-5820K. The final ingredient that you’ll need is a motherboard whose BIOS supports 128GB of RAM."
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2938...s-pc-with-128gb-of-cutting-edge-ddr4-ram.html

It doesn't mean that all 5820K/5930K/5960X CPUs have the capability to support faster speed 128GB DDR4 kits. The higher the DDR4 speed, the less likely the CPU's memory controller can cope with all 8 DIMMs filled. It becomes a memory controller lottery which is why some may only run with DDR4 2133mhz while others can hit 2800mhz.

"This is the best 128GB memory kit on the market so it does come at a hefty price tag. Quantity is extremely limited so it is not intended for any average user. The Intel Extreme Core i7-5960X CPU is highly recommended to reach the rated specifications of this RAM (DDR4-2800 CL15 1.35V)."
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231866

If someone is serious about running a 128GB DDR4 kit on X99, they should contact the motherboard manufacturer + the memory manufacturer just to confirm the compatibility. The starting point is making sure the X99 board was designed to support 128GB DDR4 in the first place.

The reason I thought it supported 128Gb was because my motherboard says it does, but when said it doesn't support it, I looked up Intel's spec's and they say the i7 5820k only supports up to 64Gb.

 

[MrTeal]

The reason I thought it supported 128Gb was because my motherboard says it does, but when said it doesn't support it, I looked up Intel's spec's and they say the i7 5820k only supports up to 64Gb.

Intel also says the 5820k only supports up to DDR4-2133. In fact, the list of supported speeds includes mythical DDR4-1333 and DDR4-1600 that has never been offered for sale that I've seen. Their specs can be a little misleading.

 

[GamingDaemon]

Is the 32GB DDR4 you bought already four DIMMs or two?

If it's 4x8GB, going with X99 and a 5820k for your wife and keeping the 4790k seems like easily the best choice. It gives her the computer that will benefit her the most, and while you'd lose a little staying with the 4790k vs the 6700k, it's not that much. The hex core won't even cost that much more, since the extra $100 you'll spend on the X99 motherboard will be partially offset by the $50 cheaper processor.

You also will have the benefit of not having to fudge driver issues with a motherboard swap or reinstalling Windows on your rig, since all you're changing is the GPU. Those couple hours are probably worth it if nothing else is.

Yes, the memory I bought were 4x8GB sticks:

G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB

And I see they are $30 less than what I spent for them a few weeks ago!! GRRRR

They are DDR4-2800, that should work in a Z99, right?

But anyway, back to your point. Yes, I do not look forward to reinstalling Windows either. But I will need to do a little bit of surgery as I'd like to remove the SSD drives from my wife's current rig, and give that one to my daughter (inserting my daughter's SSD drives there), and then build a new rig for my wife, using her old Windows 8.1 product key to get the Windows 10 upgrade. Actually, I will need to do that on both of those. So I will need to perform some mystical rites, burn some candles and sacrifice a lamb. Or is it a chicken?

And in the process, I'd like to upgrade my case, so it won't be as clean as I'd like, but still, I get a 980GTX Ti SC, my wife gets a 5820K with a TitanX, and my daughter gets a 3750K and a 680GTX. WIN-WIN-WIN

The XEONs look good, but I don't think I want to venture out that far with this build for my wife. Not sure if the speed improvements are that much more than a 5820K, but I could be wrong.

 

[myocardia]

Do you have a professional source to validate the above statements?

Linus confirmed that he was able to run 128GB DDR4 on 5960X.

If you want to call a kid who makes his living filming Youtube videos a professional, you are more than welcome to do so, but I call everyone who does not know how many threads a 10-core Xeon happens to have the antithesis of a professional.

BTW, you misunderstood him. He was saying that the RAM he was reviewing ran fine @ DDR4-2400 with his 5960X. He was talking about RAM speeds when he mentioned his 5960X, not RAM amounts. He said nothing about it being able to use 128GB of RAM with that Gigabyte motherboard he had. It is great to hear that the 5960X can use up to 128GB on at least one Asus motherboard, though. That's actually a very real reason to upgrade from a 5930k, if you have the money for both the 5960X and the 8 matched 16GB sticks. Thanks, I'll do my best to pass that info on, when I get the chance.

 

[bystander36]

The XEONs look good, but I don't think I want to venture out that far with this build for my wife. Not sure if the speed improvements are that much more than a 5820K, but I could be wrong.

The Xeon would be a bit slower. Not only will it not OC, but it only has 4 cores, compared to 6.

 

[moonbogg]

Any of those CPU's + 980ti SLI is better than any of those CPU's + Titan X for gaming.

 

[GamingDaemon]

Any of those CPU's + 980ti SLI is better than any of those CPU's + Titan X for gaming.

I'm only getting one 980GTX Ti SC... Hoping one is better than TitanX for gaming.

 

[Arachnotronic]

I'm only getting one 980GTX Ti SC... Hoping one is better than TitanX for gaming.

Did you overclock the Titan X?

 

[frozentundra123456]

Wow, both 6600k and 6700k are sold out at my local Microcenter. Supply must not be improving. Seems to be getting worse actually, earlier they had good supply of both.

Even 4790k is back to 299.00 from 249.00 a couple weeks ago.

 

[GamingDaemon]

Did you overclock the Titan X?

No I haven't OC'd the Titan X but I am about to play around with it. I am buying the 980GTX Ti Hybrid from EVGA now...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487144

 

[Arachnotronic]

No I haven't OC'd the Titan X but I am about to play around with it. I am buying the 980GTX Ti Hybrid from EVGA now...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487144

Damn that card looks nice. Enjoy!

 

[RussianSensation]

Wow, both 6600k and 6700k are sold out at my local Microcenter. Supply must not be improving. Seems to be getting worse actually, earlier they had good supply of both.

Even 4790k is back to 299.00 from 249.00 a couple weeks ago.

Sad, isn't it? Just reinforces the average level of technical knowledge of many PC builders/gamers or perhaps completely lack of it altogether. :thumbsdown:

Ya, at MC Skylake makes no sense whatsoever unless everyone is buying 980Tis with it, but under a more realistic scenario:

i7 4790K $250 + GTX980Ti $600 vs. i7 6700K $380 + GTX980 $475.

i5 6600K is $250 at MC as well, which is absurd since it would lose to an i7 4790K in almost everything.

On Amazon i7 6700K still sells for $500 or close to it. i7 4790K is $332. At these prices, many PC enthusiasts will gladly shift to X99 and its successor. Even as a matter of principle, I'd never pay $500 US for a glorified i5 on the mainstream platform that has no viable upgrade path. At that price point it might not be that far to swing to an 8-core Broadwell-E. Also, if a 5820K and its 6800K successor suddenly look like a 'bargain' in comparison, you know the mainstream platform's pricing is whacked.

my wife gets a 5820K with a TitanX, and my daughter gets a 3750K and a 680GTX. WIN-WIN-WIN

Let us know what overclock you manage on the i7 5820K.

 

[Arachnotronic]

On Amazon i7 6700K still sells for $500 or close to it. i7 4790K is $332. At these prices, many PC enthusiasts will gladly shift to X99 and its successor. Even as a matter of principle, I'd never pay $500 US for a glorified i5 on the mainstream platform that has no viable upgrade path. At that price point it might not be that far to swing to an 8-core Broadwell-E. Also, if a 5820K and its 6800K successor suddenly look like a 'bargain' in comparison, you know the mainstream platform's pricing is whacked.

If you need the absolute best single-threaded performance on the planet, 6700K is still the way to go. Also, Z170 chipset has an upgrade path to Kaby Lake so not all is lost

But I generally agree...HEDT is generally the way to go, especially for those who overclock. I look forward to seeing the pricing on the Broadwell-E chips when they launch.

 

[MiddleOfTheRoad]

No way. Among i7 4790K, 5820K, 5930K, 6700K, this is the worst choice.

I think that is a bit harsh on the Skylake. I mean it's a lot like saying a "lowly" Porsche is the worst choice -- don't settle for anything less than the Lamborghini or Ferrari.

 

[RussianSensation]

If you need the absolute best single-threaded performance on the planet, 6700K is still the way to go. Also, Z170 chipset has an upgrade path to Kaby Lake so not all is lost

KB is most likely going to be limited to a quad though but BW-E is 8-10 core options.

Maybe Intel needs to exploit the desire for some consumers to want the fastest single core CPU and release a $399 5Ghz Core i3.

I cannot in good conscious recommend a $500 CPU with a $350 MSRP. It also sends a message to retailers+Intel that $500 quad-HT i7 is what the real market price should be. There is no reason to justify $500 i7 6700K pricing because if we go back to the time when i7 2600K/3770K/4770K/4790K came out, at any one of those times you could make the argument that those CPUs provided the best single core performance but why didn't consumers pay $450-500 for them? It's even worse since Skylake brings the least improvement in IPC compared to Core 2 Quad -> Nehalem -> Sandy -> Haswell. Maybe there is huge pent up demand from C2D/C2Q/1st gen i5/i7/2nd gen i5 users?

I think that is a bit harsh on the Skylake. I mean it's a lot like saying a "lowly" Porsche is the worst choice -- don't settle for anything less than the Lamborghini or Ferrari.

It was in the context of $250 i7 4790K, $320 i7 5820K, $400 i7 5930K vs. $380 i7 6700K at the same store. Also, for OP's wife's use case, I still stand by my statement that among those 4 CPUs, it is a bad choice. In this case I am not sure how the comparison to Ferrari/Lambo applies since nearly the most expensive CPU is slower for rendering among the 6-cores and barely faster than the way cheaper i7 4790K.

 

[crashtech]

Skimmed the thread, but from the OP, I would say that wife does not need OP's gaming machine, but rather an X99 system, and perhaps the TitanX. OP in turn might get a new 980ti, and a better CPU cooler for more OCing of the 4790K, still a potent CPU for games.

 

[Arachnotronic]

KB is most likely going to be limited to a quad though but BW-E is 8-10 core options.

Definitely limited to quad.

Maybe Intel needs to exploit the desire for some consumers to want the fastest single core CPU and release a $399 5Ghz Core i3.

Ew, no.

I cannot in good conscious recommend a $500 CPU with a $350 MSRP. It also sends a message to retailers+Intel that $500 quad-HT i7 is what the real market price should be.

I think you are seeing demand at this price point because many people bought boards/memory and need to finish their builds. You would be surprised at how many people buy their PCs piece-meal like this. Going X99 or Z97 for them at this point is a messy option.

There is no reason to justify $500 i7 6700K pricing because if we go back to the time when i7 2600K/3770K/4770K/4790K came out, at any one of those times you could make the argument that those CPUs provided the best single core performance but why didn't consumers pay $450-500 for them?

Supply was a lot better because yields weren't in the toilet. Really basic supply/demand here

It's even worse since Skylake brings the least improvement in IPC compared to Core 2 Quad -> Nehalem -> Sandy -> Haswell. Maybe there is huge pent up demand from C2D/C2Q/1st gen i5/i7/2nd gen i5 users?

SKL was anywhere from 10-20% perf/clock improvement so it's about as good as NHM/WSM->SNB or SNB->HSW.

It's a solid, if standard, tock.