• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Money no object: which CPU do you choose?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

5960X + X99 or 6700K + Z170 given to you for free?

  • 5960X + X99, no question.

  • 6700K + Z170, without a shadow of a doubt.

  • I would flip a coin.

Results are only viewable after voting.
I already made this decision and I chose X99/5960x.

The additional pci-e lanes alone was worth it. My overclock is stuck at 4.25 GHz due to temps being extremely high, but it's enough for me.
 
Last edited:
So from the results of this poll so far, it would seem that "moar cores" even if those cores are slightly worse performing (or much worse in a stock-to-stock compare) are valuable.

Interesting.
 
The 5960X does have a lot going for it even at stock besides more cores. PCIe lanes, quad channel, 20MB cache. It essentially got the same benefits as Broadwell-C for those games/applications that cant fully utilize the faster core benefits. But depends mainly on memory/cache bottlenecks. Had the 5960X been clocked 500Mhz higher the poll would be much more one sided.
 
5960x for the solder.

Although in terms of how things are phrased the 6700k with the IGP and newer features would make more sense as a hand down or secondary system down the line.

What makes this also a tough choice is hypothetically I'd prefer a SFF build and itx would limit the 5960x to only dual channel so I'd have to go m-atx at the smallest.

Do we get free memory as well? 😀

Are there any examples of games that would actually favor a 6700k due to the faster cores over both the more cores and larger cache of the 5960x? Focused in terms of actual play ability of minimum and lower end fps as opposed to bench marking higher in terms of avg fps well beyond 60? This would the only usage I can think of that the 6700k could win out at in terms of performance but are there examples?

Otherwise it seems to come down more to whether or not you feel the newer platform has more advantages.
 
Last edited:
Gonna have to go with the 5960X.. I won't miss the few hundred MHz in top end OC but there are some situations where those extra cores would be nice. I wish Skylake-E wasn't so far out on the map =\
 
Money no object? I would buy multiple 5960X CPUs until one was found that could clock near 5GHz without LN2.
 
Last edited:
Ci7 5960X, no questions asked. 6700K is usually compared to 5820K, and the 5960X is much stronger. You may lose Single Threading performance, but win a much more heavy lift system. Also think what system would cost you more if you had to buy it yourself.



You can also tell whoever is making those free Hardware deals that they can sponsor my next computer whenever they want. Just tell them I like Xeons.
 
theAnimal said:
Your poll does not match the topic. Money is no object would obviously mean multi-Xeon CPUs.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. Other than for reselling, I would choose a top of the line X99 board and 5960X over a dual E7-8890v3 system, despite the latter being worth more than my car. I have a lot more use for 8 cores at 4.5GHz than 18(or 36) at 3.3GHz.
 
Larry, your basement looks like the beginnings (or the end?) of Skynet. Adding $1k of hardware to that will only make it worse.

In all seriousness, the 5960x has Broadwell-E as an upgrade path. LGA1151 has Kabylake which is . . . well we don't know if that will bring much to the table to suit the needs of a high-end enthusiast user that would be even considering a 5960x (free or otherwise).
 
Last edited:
The 5960X of course, that's if I had to choose between those two chips. Depending on how well they OC, I might go for a 5930K instead if it clocks better. I'm done with quads forever unless the tech changes in some really strange way to where 1 core is equal to like 4 of todays cores.
 
moonbogg said:
The 5960X of course, that's if I had to choose between those two chips. Depending on how well they OC, I might go for a 5930K instead if it clocks better. I'm done with quads forever unless the tech changes in some really strange way to where 1 core is equal to like 4 of todays cores.
Click to expand...
Don't think small, OP said money no object! I say buy all the 5960Xs like an enthusiast Veruca Salt, I want that golden chip, daddy!
 
MrTeal said:
Not necessarily. Other than for reselling, I would choose a top of the line X99 board and 5960X over a dual E7-8890v3 system, despite the latter being worth more than my car. I have a lot more use for 8 cores at 4.5GHz than 18(or 36) at 3.3GHz.
Click to expand...

Why only dual, that's hardly money is no object either. Having 144 cores (288 threads) would be so much better than 1 CPU even if it is 4.5GHz.
 
Arachnotronic said:
So from the results of this poll so far, it would seem that "moar cores" even if those cores are slightly worse performing (or much worse in a stock-to-stock compare) are valuable.

Interesting.
Click to expand...

I wonder how Zen would fair if it is priced around the same as a 6700K, with 8 cores, but if it's single core speed is 15% less than the 6700K?
 
NTMBK said:
Ooh I like your style. I want a 5GHz 14nm shrink of Northwood, with 256MB of eDRAM please 😀
Click to expand...
No problem, sir. Your wish is my command. I'll just need to forward your inquiry up the chain for a quote. Impossible is nothing.

/sarcasm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top