Convince me not to buy a 6600k over a 7600k. >No stuttering.

>>59228568
what if i convince you to buy a 2600k, and to shut the fuck up

$10 difference on Newegg until today, but I still went with the 6600K.

>>59228568
Better iGPU.
Can overclock to 5Ghz.
Number is bigger.

>>59228568
>Convince me not to buy a 6600k over a 7600k.
7>6

do the MATH

why does the 7600k stutter?

>>59228568
i bought a 4690k because i didnt want to fall for the ddr4 meme and i already had 16 gb of ddr3 laying around.

>>59228677
Good choice. You'll be limited by the 4 cores way before RAM would have been a real factor in most things you'd be doing. Not worth $100.

>>59228588
That's an i7, not an i5
i5 2500K is definitely awesome tho

>>59228568
I really hate the DDR4 meme. RAM is super expensive now.

Really jigs my jags desu.

File: 21546854841.jpg (58KB, 639x720px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 639x720px

>>59228568
buy AMD

>>59228568
>>No stuttering.

Nice meme, now provide evidence there is a stuttering issue.

There's no reason, the difference is so small you should let your wallet decide. iGPU is meaningless because anyone buying an expensive CPU has a GPU.
Do note before buying, installing Windows 7 in Kaby works just like in Skylake. Just inject the drivers in the ISO or plug in an external with drivers during install. The drivers that get it jumpy are USB 3.0 and SATA (in Gigabyte boards in my experience).

>>59228697
lol you keep trying to make this many core meme an issue.

your literally 4-5years out from 4 cores being viewed like 2 cores are today

>>59229459
I wasn't really commenting on quad cores and when they'll be obsolete. Just saying the difference between a 4690k and a 6600k or 7600k isn't worth the $100 you'd have to spend on DDR4 RAM when you have 16 GB of good DDR3 hanging around.

Whenever it is that quad cores are obsolete, having DDR3 or DDR4 isn't really going to matter much.