INTEL 6700k Vs 5820k?

[ghostlynkush]

Looking to build a AWSOME computer right now, that will last me a good 5-6 years without any worries. Using for general computer usage, Live Tv/3-D movies, game streaming/recording/editing.
I want something that is Awesome right now, but 3-4-5years down the road will still be relevant and pushing harder than ever .

Intel Core i7-6700K 8M Skylake Quad-Core 4.0 GHz LGA 1151 91W BX80662I76700K Desktop Processor Intel® HD Graphics 530
http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117559&cm_re=6700k-_-19-117-559-_-Product
$579.99


Intel Core i7-5820K Haswell-E 6-Core 3.3 GHz LGA 2011-v3 140W BX80648I75820K Desktop Processor
http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117402&cm_re=5820k-_-19-117-402-_-Product
$529.99




Will be paired up with one of these mobo's;
AsRock Fatal1ty, Asus Maximus V3, Asus Z170 Deluxe.

I like the 6cores on the 5820k, however the 6700k seems to be a little better for gaming than the 5820k?
I don't seem myself doing any serious graphic rendering or anything like that. At most I'll record myself gaming and stream or video edit that stuff.

 

[Headfoot]

Depends wholly on whether you will overclock or not. I went 5820k because I'm overclocking it to the same level (or very close) to where I could get a 6700k, cancelling out any clock speed bonus it has.

6 cores + more cache on 5820k will neutralize or overcome the benefit of Skylake in many cases. In some cases Skylake will have a 5-10% lead in gaming, but the times where the extra core get used will be much greater than a 5-10% lead in favor of the 5820k. If you are streaming using a CPU based encoder, then the 2 extra cores on 5820k will be very useful. Also, X99 will be getting Broadwell-E in the future which will include 6/8/10 core CPUs, so you will have an upgrade path on X99. I'm not sure what Intel's plans for z170 are right now. I anticipate it will get one more CPU generation as well but there are rumors saying maybe 2. I doubt you will ever be able to move beyond 4 cores on z170 though.

I think the 5820k + overclocking with DDR4 3000 or higher is the best bet for a long term system. In fact, I think so enough that I just went and bought that exact set up last week to replace a 2500k rig. I'm using an Asrock Extreme4 X99 board, and it's quite nice despite how much less money it is than other X99 boards.

If you're not going to overclock, then paradoxically a 4790k rig will be your best bet due to the very high default clockspeed its only barely slower than a 6700k at stock, not to mention it is the best priced option. I'd still get the fast DDR3 RAM as RAM speed seems to be increasingly important these days

 

[Denithor]

6700K offers better IPC and higher clock speed (at stock) versus the 5820K.
5820K offers 50% more cores versus the 6700K.

Most games today barely take full advantage of 4 cores let alone 6.
It has taken many, many years for games to even take advantage of 4 (some still don't).
Video editing, depending on program used, can take advantage of more cores.

So it's really highly dependent on what you will do mainly.

 

[Headfoot]

Higher stock clock speed only matters in non-overclocking scenarios. If he's not overclocking then the 4790k has even higher stock clocks for almost $200 less (if you're near Microcenter, about $100 less otherwise plus cost savings on DDR3). 5820k also has more cache which is not to be under estimated. It has nearly double (8MB on 6700k vs 15MB on 5820k). It also uses solder instead of crappy TIM which is nice.

 

[sm625]

$600 for a 6700K. Wow. All I can say is.... buy a 6700k. To the moon, Alice!

 

[IEC]

Neither. Wait a few months and get the i7-6850K or similar instead.

I have a i7-6700K and would not recommend it. Unless you get a golden sample, stock voltages are already pushing 1.3V and you don't have much OC headroom.

If you HAVE to get a CPU now, go with the 5820K... just don't pay as much as it's listed for, that price is insane (for both 6700K and 5820K).

I paid $335 USD for my 6700K, for reference.

Edit: I just saw you mentioning recording and streaming gaming. Depending on which app(s) you are using, some will benefit more from having 6C/12T (i.e. 5820K or upcoming 6850K), and in 5-6 years time I'd expect the gap to be even bigger versus a 4C/8T processor. There can be a noticeable difference in minimum FPS even if you don't see much difference in averages. That's particularly helpful for streaming. Personally, I'm waiting for Broadwell-E, Skylake-E, and Zen to see how things pan out before upgrading to 8C+.

 

[Headfoot]

I have a i7-6700K and would not recommend it. Unless you get a golden sample, stock voltages are already pushing 1.3V and you don't have much OC headroom.

Wow thats nuts. I just got a 5820k and the stock vcore under OCCT load is .9v. I know I've gotten to 4.0ghz so far on 1.05v measure vcore in OCCT. Offset of +.25 with LLC maxed. I don't know if I got a golden chip yet or if the 6700k is just that much worse at stock volts...

 

[frozentundra123456]

Neither. Wait a few months and get the i7-6850K or similar instead.

I have a i7-6700K and would not recommend it. Unless you get a golden sample, stock voltages are already pushing 1.3V and you don't have much OC headroom.

If you HAVE to get a CPU now, go with the 5820K... just don't pay as much as it's listed for, that price is insane (for both 6700K and 5820K).

I paid $335 USD for my 6700K, for reference.

Edit: I just saw you mentioning recording and streaming gaming. Depending on which app(s) you are using, some will benefit more from having 6C/12T (i.e. 5820K or upcoming 6850K), and in 5-6 years time I'd expect the gap to be even bigger versus a 4C/8T processor. There can be a noticeable difference in minimum FPS even if you don't see much difference in averages. That's particularly helpful for streaming. Personally, I'm waiting for Broadwell-E, Skylake-E, and Zen to see how things pan out before upgrading to 8C+.

If you dont want more than 6 cores, not sure it is worth waiting for BW-E. IPC gain will be minimal, and overclocking is unknown. I cant see it being better than HW E, could be worse. It all depends on how pricing shakes out, but i dont expect any six core to be cheaper than 5820k. 8 core should be cheaper, and supposedly there will be a 10 core, but those are the only benefits I am expecting. And considering the token launch of BW K and the yield and pricing issues of skylake, could be problems like those as well.

Edit: I agree with other posters, as long as the 6700k is so expensive, the best buys now are 4790K and 5820K (if willing to overclock).

 

[isamu99]

4790k

 

[bystander36]

Keep in mind, these are Canada prices.

 

[Joepublic2]

I picked up a 4790k for $299 on sale (with 3 vidya games) the other day but only because I needed VT-d (my 4670k didn't have it) and have a z87 board and DDR3 already. If I didn't have any existing hardware I would have gotten a 5820k and clocked it to 4+Ghz. If you have the money I'd say definitely stretch a little and step up to one vs. a quad. DDR4 prices are much more reasonable nowadays then they were when haswell-e launched.

 

[Face2Face]

I had the option to get a 6700K or a 5820K for free through work; I chose the latter. I'm starting to get into more content creation now, and the added cores should be worth it. I don't game as much as I would like anymore, but an overclocked 5820K should hold it's own with a 6700K.

I've had the system setup for about a week now, and I'm still tweaking here and there, but so far it's a solid upgrade from my 4.8GHz 3570K. I really can't complain since the entire upgrade was only $300.