Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/g/ - Technology

Search:


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
>> No.56883973 [View]
File: 14 KB, 402x400, 2016-09-14 09_40_52-CPU-Z.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
56883973

>>56883534
at 4.4Ghz the 5820k is not slower than the 6700k at 4ghz, they basically tie. My 5820k can hit 4.7GHz which beats a stock 6700k in single core performance. Once the 6700k is OC'd it has more single core performance by about 10-15%, but it is MUCH slower in anything well threaded (some newer games or basically anything using professional software)

The 5820k is a great gaming CPU, it costs almost the same as the 6700k and is within about 10% single core performance while destroying it in multi-core.

Unless you NEED one of the features offered by the 6xxx series over the 5xxx series, no reason not to get the 5820k if you run VMs, or do encoding, or anything else that would benefit from the 2 extra cores.

>> No.56710930 [View]
File: 14 KB, 402x400, 2016-09-14 09_40_52-CPU-Z.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
56710930

depends what you do, an OC'd 5820k holds up fairly well for single core performance, but dominates the 6700k in multicore.

If what you're doing is properly threaded, the 5820k will beat a 6700k by upwards of 35%.

>> No.56597353 [View]
File: 14 KB, 402x400, 2016-09-14 09_40_52-CPU-Z.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
56597353

>> No.56597068 [View]
File: 14 KB, 402x400, 2016-09-14 09_40_52-CPU-Z.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
56597068

>>56592270



Navigation
View posts [+24] [+48] [+96]