Printable View
So I'm looking to build a new system and would like something that will last me a while before I need to upgrade the CPU. I was looking into an i5 6600 and was curious what everyone else's thoughts are on it? I currently play BF4 but obviously would love to play other games too.
You can't go wrong with an i5 6600, though I would recommend going with a i7 6700k or even non K if you are looking to save money and aren't looking to overclock. I personally have an i7-4790k and likely won't have to upgrade for at least another year, perhaps two depending on what games come out. Another thing to consider is how many graphic cards you will have, as more cards will require more pcie lanes if you want to harness the full capabilities of each card.
Sent from the Matrix using telepathic communication
The i5-6600 will last you a while. Get the 6600K if you want to overclock at some point. You only need an i7 for really heavy applications, like video processing/rendering.
i7 does have hyperthreading which some games are starting to use. And I can imagine that future games will likely take advantage of this feature if the end user has it.
Sent from the Matrix using telepathic communication
Do you have a budget? I can make a build for you that should do really good for anything.
I second Kaos...we love to help put builds together for folks and knowing a budget helps (if you're willing to disclose, of course).
Well I already have a graphics card, a power supply and a monitor. So for everything else 750$ or lower would be kinda nice.
Here's a first swag at a pretty decent build with an i5-6600K (Skylake). Went with the "standard" 8 GB RAM but the motherboard supports up to 64 GB, so there's room to grow if it's ever needed (easily to 16 GB with just popping in another kit like the one included here).Quote:
Originally Posted by AOD_GaseousSnake
I'm an NZXT fan so I went with one of their mid-range cases. My guess is that the PSU you already have won't have an issue with this build, nor will your video card.
Included an SSD for primary OS, etc... and you can't really go wrong with the Samsung Evo 850. I'm guessing 250 GB should be plenty to get going with, and tossed in a secondary 2 TB HDD just in case.
Wasn't sure if you also needed an optical drive and OS, so included them here, but that's where some costs could be trimmed if you already have. I would say that if you could trim anything here, look at jumping to an i7 (about $100 more than this i5) or toss in another 8 GB RAM kit (can never have too much RAM) :)
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant
CPU: Intel Core i5-6600K 3.5GHz Quad-Core Processor ($244.99 @ Amazon)
CPU Cooler: Noctua NH-U9S 46.4 CFM CPU Cooler ($56.89 @ OutletPC)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-Z170-HD3P ATX LGA1151 Motherboard ($86.89 @ OutletPC)
Memory: G.Skill Ripjaws 4 series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR4-2133 Memory ($37.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Samsung 850 EVO-Series 250GB 2.5" Solid State Drive ($86.75 @ OutletPC)
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($45.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Case: NZXT H230 (White) ATX Mid Tower Case ($66.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Optical Drive: Asus DRW-24B1ST/BLK/B/AS DVD/CD Writer ($19.89 @ OutletPC)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 10 Home OEM (64-bit) ($87.95 @ OutletPC)
Total: $734.33
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2016-03-09 19:08 EST-0500
Hmm $750 eh? What GPU are you using?Quote:
Originally Posted by AOD_GaseousSnake
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/qCpXgs would work well, and is a bit more than $750. You might ask why there's no Windows 10 tacked on, on Reddit if you go to /r/Microsoftsoftwareswap you can get Windows 10 copies for dirt cheap.
If it makes you feel any better, I'm still running an i7 930 (OC to 3.8GHz) from about 7 years ago. As long as you buy something in the i5/i7 class of CPUs (K models are very nice) clocked north of 3.2GHz, you should have a lot of runway. I'm not up to speed on the AMD offerings, but the 6/8 core CPUs from a few years ago had plenty of lasting power as well.
Modern games really take advantage of the GPU far more than the CPU so the above shouldn't really be a surprise. I upgraded to an NVidia 970 GTX last year and, in terms of gaming, was the single best upgrade I ever made.
This is a really good article that shows more cores don't equal better gaming: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/di...est-gaming-cpu
If you invest a bit more up front you'll have more lasting power on your CPU, also be mindful of PCI lanes if you plan to SLI ever. Get a K series CPU as well, I overclock mine by almost 50% with a bolt on cooler.
This IS a good article, and for about 95% of the PC population, it's a very valid point. Low, mid, and even some upper end builds would do just fine with an i5 level chip with more focus on the GPU and monitor as the primary means of contributing to the overall gaming experience.Quote:
Originally Posted by AOD_Cyrihs
It's a lot like the debate around the clock speeds of RAM as well. Most people aren't going to ever see the difference between DDR4-2133 and DDR4-3000.
For the longest time, I remember that when dual core chips came out, the only thing ever touted as being able to take advantage of more than a single core was a product like Adobe Photoshop (and some other products within the Creative Suite). I believe CAD applications were up there too, as well as other rendering / modeling type applications. Hell, if memory serves me correctly, if you had a Windows PC around the XP / 2000 days, applications would take advantage of the multi-CPU architecture and the OS wouldn't. Crazy (and yes, it's entirely possible) :)
This is where I typically land on the topic. My previous build was an i7-4770K. I could build a new rig around that and throw a Pascal-based card in there when they come out and it'll be up to snuff with a brand new Skylake build. But, if I had, say, an on-board m.2 type drive, it'd be horribly slow when compared to the Haswell-E / Broadwell-E and Skylake chipsets (X99 and Z710) because it wouldn't take advantage of the newer architecture (which, would be tied into the motherboard directly). m.2 SATA would still operate at the standard 6 Gbps throughput as the normal SSDs we use today, but the m.2 PCI-E 3.0 x4 variant (made possible by the X99 and Z710 chipsets in conjunction with those CPUs and the additional PCI lane availability) operates at around 32 Gbps throughput (8 Gbps per PCI lane) because more lanes are made available to both the onboard chipset AND the use of things like GPUs and such (where they're typically limited since one takes precedence over the other).Quote:
Originally Posted by AOD_Floppycatt
Fun stuff...lmao :)
I'm hoping that when I do Phase II of my build, that the Broadwell-E i7-6950X (10 cores, 25 MB cache, 3.50 GHz) will get me through the next 5 years or so (or until Quantum computing is FINALLY a reality) :)
Can't you OC that i7? If you can, i'd throw a Watercooler and a big OC into it. Something around the number of 4.5 Ghz sounds nice.Quote:
Originally Posted by AOD_Tymplar
Just got a 4790k that I plan to keep for a very long time. Have yet to play a game that really makes it sweat (and thats without overclocking it). Even though most games don't need it, getting an i7 for the hyperthreading will definitely give it more longevity.
I've been eyeballing the 4790k as it's till pretty relevant even being a generation (or is it two?) behind. It's more than enough power for any game I can think of, and it only what, 10 percent less powerful than the 6700k?
I've been dreaming of an upgrade myself buuut i work for 9$ an hour and pay rent
The 4790K is two generations behind Skylake.Quote:
Originally Posted by AOD_Jayson201
The 4790K is a Haswell chip (albeit the second round of Haswell via the Devil's Canyon refresh. After Haswell was Broadwell. Now there's Skylake.
The 4790K is actually a much more powerful chip than the 6700K. It comes down to power enhancements and other new features (like DDR4 RAM, larger max RAM capacities, better integrated graphics and more PCI-Express lane availability / throughput).
Processors last awhile (Especially Intel ones) And honestly most games aren't as demanding on the cpu as they used to be, Most people still run I7 2500's and such. Aslong as the processor has decent single core performance and is atleast quad core (Which is something an I5 4460 (or the newer skylake I5') can do perfectly, It should be good for atleast a few years, Some gamers are still using FX 6300s which have laughably bad single core performance yet have no problems :)
In my opinion, Don't buy an i7 for gaming, Buy a quad core i5 and spend the extra money on an IPS Monitor and a better video card, You don't need a professional top grade processor to play Battlefield :) If an FX 4300 or 6300 is enough for gaming (Overkill in most scenerios) than an i5 is more than enough :)