4790K - 5820K - 6700K
Who wins in terms of price/performance?
shit, it is ~$60. That's my mistake. STILL, you have to go for an X99 board and GPU is required, so automatically you're paying like $100 more for the motherboard and you now need a GPU just to run the machine.
it doesn't actually use less power. look at the charts. skylake never goes past a haswell, all while being about 5% faster and being cooler by about 5C
wtf are you talking about 4790k at 4.5ghz being cooler than a 6700K at 4.5ghz? citation fucking needed
With the HEDT processor you have to factor in the more expensive motherboard. 4790k will likely win in terms of price/performance assuming you can still easily and cheaply buy the mobo. Also the 6700k has the best upgrade path.
too be more clear: LGA 2011-3 mobos are quite a bit more expensive than LGA 1151 and 1150. As for the 4790k vs 6700k it looks like one does not have worry about short supply of 4790k or LGA 1150 mobos yet. With Ivy Bridge Intel cleared out old stock quickly once Haswell launched, though from looking at various vendors it does not appear to be the case with Haswell after Skylake.
Kaby will be compatible, most likely Canonlake as well
unless you upgrade your CPU every year or two, being compatible with kaby lake and cannon lake doesn't matter, either. I don't "upgrade' anything. who uses a build for less than 5 years before changing anything? what a waste.
You can easily sell a CPU on Craigslist or Kijiji for a high percentage of the original price. Skylake to Kaby will not be worth the upgarde, though Skylake to Canonlake could quite possibly be worth it.
half of the features of cannon lake aren't fucking on z170 motherboards. the transistors are smaller. it will be a totally different piece of tech, just like the 7nm will be. never have you been able to do that.
everybody has a fucking 1150 motherboard. nobody has a 2011 v3.
4790k is still best cpu for us plebs, but you really need to cool it properly to prevent throttling because that thing is a rape ass beast of a cpu.
if i had it all to do over again i'd go 5820k and 2011 v3 and a good cooler.
god damn it anon are you srs i'm about to choose between the two. 5820k seems more futureproof, like by a fucking shit-ton desu. I can afford it but it's going to be $300 for the 2011-v3 motherboard and $400 for the 5820K VS. $340 for the 4790K and like $150 for the lga 1150 motherboard. the lga 2011-v3 motherboard is a way higher quality, but it's still $150 more. fhgjdfsghgf i don't know what to do m80s.
You clearly don't know what you are talking about. Transistor size has nothing to do with compatibility, architecture does. All of the tick-tock processors have been compatible with 2 nodes (Conroe/Wolfdale, Lynnfield/Clarkdale ,Sandy/Ivy, Haswell/Haswell-Refresh/Broadwell). So unless you know that Cannonlake is a significant architecture changes you are the one speaking out of your ass.
they don't come with heatsinks but i'm guessing you'd be fine with 4ghz at <1.25v on a hyper 212. i currently have a nh-d14 and my highest temps during a stress test was 78c at 4.5 ghz/1.3v which is the highest recommended voltage.
4.5 ghz on a 5820k with a D14? nice.
i know right?
anyway i figured since it shiped at 3.3 ghz it wouldn't clock too well.
i want to bring up the point about the 4790k's clocking higher yet still thermal throttling, guys pushing them to 4.8 ghz or so getting the speed on paper but the cpu throttling itself constantly.
i'm such a pleb i've got a 4440 and barely push it to the limits, i just like to hear what other people are doing.
x99-a. it's not a 4.5 anymore because i got a BSOD during a 24/7 overclock but i have been running it at 4.4ghz/1.25v for like the last 2-3 months. i'm changing to a custom loop soon and plan to find out my max overclock then.
that is p fucking ridiculous and you're convincing me to go for the 5820K more.
This is my only choice for a motherboard.
some people are saying it OC's a tad better than haswell, and some people are saying the the other way around. AKA don't bother considering it because it seems like a wash. Haswell seems to run a 3-5 C hotter, though.
>LGA 2011-3 mobos are quite a bit more expensive than LGA 1151 and 1150
No they aren't. A motherboard of comparable quality is the same price on both platforms. It's just that they don't make shitty $100 motherboards with zero features and shitty components that'll fail after a year for X99, but then only a complete retard would buy one of those anyway.
it's a steal for some kid with an i3 to sell at 120 but i just might do that.
thing is even at 120, a 300 dollar cpu is 180 bucks in the red for me and i'm not sure what real world gains i'll really see compared to putting that money into my next gpu, which currently is a 290x that i bought for $200.
i'm all about bang for the buck since i don't sit in front of my computer all day, i might get one day a week to enjoy it.
I had this same dilemma, I ended up going with a 5820k, simply because it has more cores, better multi-threaded performance, which is good for anything other than gaming, hopefully with DX12 having 'mur corez' becomes more relevant.
So you may have Kaby lake, and possibly Cannonlake, though I honestly see cannonlake being on at least new motherboards, and only some vendors providing micro-code bios updates like what happened with Z87-Z97...but they will still have less physical cores, and thus be less relevant in the next few years, when hopefully, things start to go toward true multi-threaded parallelism.
The only thing I dislike about my 5820k is the lack of pci-e lane support, if I ever intend on having sli/cfx and using my u.m2 slot at the same time, its going to cause some bandwidth issues...but it runs fine at 4.5Ghz at 1.3v on air 24/7 stable using a Phanteks PH-TC14E (and from what I've seen, that's a pretty average OC, you could be lucky and hit closer to 5).
Yeah, I'd get a K over a non-K as the overclocking ability and automatic .5ghz overclock is well worth it, just more features. Get a Noctua D15 and you can basically overclock to the maximum limit of your CPU. That's what I did for my 4790K, and temperatures are absolutely fantastic. Keep in mind that the D15 is basically the best cooler you can possibly buy, other than maybe some insane liquid cooling options for benchmarking nerds.
Can you get a good rig for 1K, you're asking? For overclocking, well yeah sure. You just need a decent motherboard. For a 4790K, you want a motherboard that is Z97, and a good one will cost like $150, and then a good cooler like the Noctua D15 that I just mentioned.. You could do a good build for 1K, sure. Hell, my build is basically 1K. pic related. I don't use a GPU, though. You'd have to maybe get a shittier case, only 8gb RAM, maybe a worse cooler, whatever.. I'm waiting for pascal and polaris, basically. I don't really play with gaymen.
It's not superior just because it's cheaper. It gets outperformed by the 5820K at a lower core speed and heat.
I'm comfy with my 5820K and X99. If my GPU ever shits the bed I'll buy something to replace it. Having a cheap card to get me buy is just fine. I don't NEED a 980.
I AM having fun knowing that my chip is going to last me many many years and I make enough money and am stable enough to repair or replace products that I purchase.
At least I didn't buy the 5930 500+$ meme.
I have a solid high quality compared that if treated right is going to last me for quite some time. Upgrading from an old i5 from 5 years ago, I think I chose a good time to buy a high end PC.
I render videos occasionally. I some times stream with friends. I primarily got this to take advantage of any software that may take advantage of the power in the future, since I'm pursuing a career in computer engineering and mechanical engineering as a double major right now.
I figured since I have a large income(not from daddy, through paid internships), I can keep a high quality system in my home that I won't need to worry about upgrading any time soon.
this. 5820k is the obvious choice if you are okay with paying a little extra for x99 mobo.
if you dont need/want the extra cores, you probably wont be using HT anyway so might as well go with a i5 instead.
This is the reason I ultimately went X99. It was also on sale meaning I lost no money due to more costly motherboards. Also remember that you get 8 more PCIe lanes compared to Skylake and double the RAM slots.
GPU issue is a mute point since I always run discrete cards anyway.
Skylake is overpriced crap.
6700K, but if you have a 200$+ project go for the 4790K, and if you have even more go for the 5820K build, in terms of performance thats the best, its quite simple really, there's no catch.
It's a damn shame there's no 5820K-equivalent Xeon, the 1650 V3 has 40 lanes I might not need, but I do need that ECC capability. Once you go 32GB & up, ECC starts to sound like a really good idea when crunching data for extended periods.
5820K flat out. Performance gain out does both the 4790K and 6700K and is worth the price given PCs are long term for up to 3-4 years and some do up to 2 to just about 3 years for resale value.
The 5820K is the cheapest X99 CPU, but has two extra cores and isn't subjected to the cheap materials issues as the other two with crap TIMS and for only the 6700K (whole Skylake CPU) the cheap thin circuit board which breaks easily with a heavy CPU cooler.
Also the set up for the 5820K is cheaper now that DDR4 is no longer first release and this CPU is more likely to be in special offers given many retailers prefer to shift cheap stock which doesn't sell as often as their more high end counterparts (confirmed this already, seen in more than a few special offers).
By cheaper this also extends to RAM but motherboards haven't come down by that much. For me this set up are worth it for the performance and small price difference with the current gen Skylake which are inferior to this set up and the top i7 Skylake has and is at normal price more expensive than the 5820K which I've seen from many retailers and the Skylake CPU is inferior in almost all aspects.
...It draws like 20-25 watts more than the 6700K, the difference might be a bit higher if OC'd, but it's ultimately not a lot.
Most people will use a big air cooler like a D-15 or R1 on these chips anyway, and those are more than capable of the job.
stay mad poorfags ;)
only richfag allowed in this thread
I'm not rich and have a better set up than that.
Saying that I'm not a poor fag either.
Invested in the Devil's Canyon Intel i7 4790K set up with Gigabyte's best Z97 Motherboard at the time (Gaming G1 WiFi-Black? Not a fan of the gaming theme, but performance matters and reviews were very good).
SSDs and storage HDDs are good.
Thinking of upgrading my dated GTX Titan to either a GTX 980Ti or maybe a GTX Titan X.
Gigabyte's Titan X with their non-reference cooler is tempting, but I also like Asus with their Strix GTX 980Ti OC which matches the colour scheme of my mobo.
The choice is hard.
>i5 and 212 evo
And he calls others poorfags
Enjoy your broken keycaps and LEDs
I hope you have the RMA slip handy
Did you seriously buy all this crap just to trigger people on /g/? I don't know whether to be impressed or disgusted.
>Performance gain out does both the 4790K and 6700K
Nope and Nope.
I really wish gaymer kids weren't allowed to post on /g/
All online comparisons assume stock speeds, but NO ONE will ever buy a -k CPU and not overclock it, thus these comparisons are irrelevant.
You can OC the 5820K to 4.5Ghz on air, and while the other two can go a little higher (4.8 if luck) it's a much smaller delta than stock.
Depends on use.
I'm fairly skeptical of this benchmark and seen shit tier figures from Intel about performance gains.
Try seeing if the other two CPUs encode a 3D animation file better than the i7 5820K. Probably not.
Not likely to benefit from the apparent stronger areas of the i7 6700k, but I do use the i7-4790K as my preference at the time was for a last gen build that uses DDR3 and the i7 5820K was more expensive at the time I brought my build.
I know Asus is the Elite, but I would have thought EVGA and PNY would be in opposite positions from that list.
Also Gigabyte is at least Good Tier with their high end stuff, but I admit I was concerned they've had a DOA issues with some of their high end mobos with mine being one of them, but fortunately I have not had such issues.
My consideration for the Titan X with Gigabyte is that they all use the same reference design from NVIDIA (no choice in the matter from rules set by NVIDIA so Elitism matters very little), but only Gigabyte has a non-reference Air only cooler (others are either water coolers or hybrid with water and air cooling) and has better stock clocks than the others.
My difficult choice with the other Asus Strix GTX 980Ti OC is that it is sexy (matches my set up too), good clocks and is cheaper.
Both hold very good points which makes it hard.
I have an i5-4690k and looking to upgrade. I can get my $200 back for my i5 via return at microcenter and either
Get a 4790k for $30 and direct swap
Return my z97 board for $150, Get a 5820k for $320 and x99 asus for $300.
I have plenty if money so the $350 or so to move from z97/ddr3 to x99/ddr4 isn't that big a deal to me. But at the same time, is the 5820k going to oulast a 4790k for general use? Gaming, a lot of video encoding, VM usage for school etc.
>games that utilize all cores that are available = poorly coded
Since when is utilizing available cores make a program poorly coded.
Also you can overclock the 5820k if you want better single core performance. You can easily overclock an 5820k to 4.0+ghz.
This, my 5820k at work (according to open hardware monitor) at 4ghz drank 180watts peak in prime and hit ~75degrees with a D14 with two 120mm fans on it. In normal usage where the software is saying 100% usage often enough, it's only going for around 100watts.
But I keep it at 3.8ghz for stock volts as it's not mine.
the fact that you even have to think about this is pretty ridiculous. The difference between the 4790K and the 5820K in actual performance is so negligible, you will never see it unless you're a professional who is rendering video on a daily basis, physics simulations etc.. and at that point you should have a Xeon. The 5820K, I don't understand why it even exists.
You buy a consumer chip because the clock speed is higher because most software/applications use few threads and you'll be saving money and power. You buy a CPU like a 5820K for servers. The people who actually buy them for games and fapping to their hentai or something are just morons with too much money. You will never see a difference that isn't related to balls-to-the-wall rendering.
I went with a 5820k when it was time to upgrade from my i5 750. I figured I deserved the upgrade to a nice processor, seeing as how I have a job now. I went to Microcenter and picked it up with an open box motherboard for ~$400. 16GB of DDR4 was another $150. Not bad for $550 total.
>You buy a CPU like a 5820K for servers. The people who actually buy them for games and fapping to their hentai or something are just morons with too much money. You will never see a difference that isn't related to balls-to-the-wall rendering.
keep telling yourself that having gimped pci-e lanes for sli and pcie m.2 ssds makes the 4790k a better consumer chip
the next logical upgrade for consumer chips will be 6 threads, making the 'negligible' difference in performance between the 4790k and 5820k pale in comparison to the 5820k and the upcoming kaby lake chips
>are just morons with too much money
for a while the 5820k cost less than a 4790k, a little upset that you bought an inferior chip for a higher price are we?
4790K is easily the best value right now. skylake is a major disappointment, no surprise. the 5820K is more of a production chip that you'd use in a workstation.. no real reason to have it if you're not working with pro software daily. 4790K will give you a much better single-threaded score out of the box while having a much lower TDP etc etc.
>keep telling yourself that having gimped pci-e lanes
>he actually believes in the pci-e lane meme
Everyone point and laugh at this guy. (Anime laughing girls preferable.)