Is the future i7 or i5

Kek700

I must say my newly acquired GTX 980ti is certainly an impressive graphics card;
So much so that it is my processor that seems to throttle the pc when playing rfactor2. I know about the pci problems with my i7 2600k and p8p67 mb.

This leads me to ask for some more advice, cost is a factor, so should i go for i7 6700k processor or the i5 6600k, i do not know enough about hyper threading and the future of simulator software processes to take advantage of this to make a decision or the importance of the extra 2mb of cache.

I would prefer the i5 on cost but is the i7 really a better choice in the long run.

The i7 2600k has proved a good investment over the past 5 years and can still hold its own today.

I would probably go for the i5, as my opinion at the moment is that it will do every thing that an i7 will do when used for just racing simulators.

Any advise would be welcome.
 
Stock Intel 6600 won't even bottleneck a GTX980Ti lool

Everyone will tell you to get a K , spend more, money on mobo, ram and cooling. BS lol

i5@3.9GHz ANY single card up to 2560.............not a worry in the world

If you want to 4K or multi screen then you can start talking to me about i7 and overclocking.
 
DurgeDriven said:
Stock Intel 6600 won't even bottleneck a GTX980Ti lool

Everyone will tell you to get a K , spend more, money on mobo, ram and cooling. BS lol

i5@3.9GHz ANY single card up to 2560.............not a worry in the world

If you want to 4K or multi screen then you can start talking to me about i7 and overclocking.
Click to expand...


4k oder multiscreen means more gpu load and that makes a faster CPUs even more unnecessary. No actual racing simulation benefits from SMT, HT or however you call the simulated cores. Project Cars and Asssetto Corsa run even slower with these technic. I got a few more fps by deactivating that in the bios.

I would overclock the 2600k because ists possible with a P chipset. A 6700k is round about 10-10% faster in games so its not worth to buy a new system
 
I too very doubt that a 2600k bottlenecks anything.........
and as already said, you have headroom to overclock! Save your money!
 
Yep +1 ;)

=========


Mind you my comments are pointed at people that must look after budget.


Having said that if I ran say 2560 Res @144Hz I know which system I would have from the 2 below ! :rolleyes:


Untitled_1.jpg


Untitled_2.jpg



=====



***Aussies take note the dollar has finally started to dig into PC prices ! :mad: >>> :D
 
Sure Durge, I am saving money right now for a new gfx-card, but don´t know how long this will take
as I´m really poor and have to think 10 times before buying anything....:(
 
Kek700 said:
This leads me to ask for some more advice, cost is a factor, so should i go for i7 6700k processor or the i5 6600k, i do not know enough about hyper threading and the future of simulator software processes to take advantage of this to make a decision or the importance of the extra 2mb of cache.
Click to expand...

It's almost 2016 and it hasn't happened yet. I remember when multi core processors first came out and the talk about the possibilities it could have with gaming. Well, here we are how many years later and almost none of those possibilities have come true. Ripper asks a good question "why i7 over i5".
 
peterchen said:
Sure Durge, I am saving money right now for a new gfx-card, but don´t know how long this will take
as I´m really poor and have to think 10 times before buying anything....:(
Click to expand...

I just pointing out what you lose with the 6600 and overclocking is simply and utterly dwarfed by the performance increase in a GTX970 to GTX980Ti.

I mean we are talking about Gaming right ? not crunching numbers.

I dare anyone tell me that i7 /GTX970 for the same price is a better buy.

But that is the sort of list people here start with for years.......almost everyone said get a 2600K !

"Oh you want a i7 , you can overclock them well but get a good motherboard and good cooling and fastest memory........ "
Click to expand...
I mean why buy crappy components with a $500 CPU right ?

Then they add a too good a case a too good a power supply , SSD and yep you guessed it a slower then the best GPU..........
 
Np BG

I say 3 screens 2 cards i7 + ;)

Just want to make that distinction clear as a bell, that I am not saying dont buy a i7 if you can afford all the goodies.


Here is a good compare guys.

He calls this a "starter build" lmao ( 32GB ram , 1TB SSD and 8GB Sata is Starter .....okay if you say so ) lol

http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/the-sweetspot-i5-6600k-sept-2015-starter-build.216215/



Okay straight away for "GAMING" I look for 10 seconds and see I can put a GTX980Ti G1 Gaming in that sucker and most likely have money to spare.

See how you go too. :)
 
Last edited:
DurgeDriven said:
Here is a good compare guys.

He calls this a "starter build" lmao ( 32GB ram , 1TB SSD and 8GB Sata is Starter .....okay if you say so ) lol

http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/the-sweetspot-i5-6600k-sept-2015-starter-build.216215/



Okay straight away for "GAMING" I look for 10 seconds and see I can put a GTX980Ti G1 Gaming in that sucker and most likely have money to spare.

See how you go too. :)
Click to expand...

He! Yes, that´s a good laugh! Especially that guys that are so freaky hot about water-cooling! For an Intel. With 91W TDP! LOL! Stock-cooler does it without any probs (and is quiet by the way)!
 
DrR1pper said:
But it will bottleneck a 980Ti in rf2.
Click to expand...

@1920/2560 show me the money. :)

I never said a Overclocked i7 would not get good gain from cache and bandwidth but please show me where a stock 6600K goes backwards. (....... that is exactly what a 6600 is 3.9GHz Turbo)


http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-2674716/4690k-bottleneck-gtx-980-sli.html

Depending on the game the i5 can very much bottleneck SLI of those two powerful cards.
Click to expand...


I stipulated from very first comment single screen single card


The 6600-GTX980Ti I built above is a faster better gaming machine for up to 2560 then any i7 or extreme with a GTX970..............I rest my case.
 
DurgeDriven said:
@1920/2560 show me the money. :)
Click to expand...

I don't have empirical data for a 980Ti but i do for my GTX 770 and 970 and based on those i estimated the gains one can expect in rf2 when going from pci-e 2.0 x16 to 3.0 x16.

Here's my most recent test results with a 970: https://community.racesimcentral.ne...her-end-cards!?p=382841&viewfull=1#post382841

Gains were 22% at 1920x1080 and 16% at 2560x1440 with my 970. Applying the performance difference between 970 and 980Ti onto those values, gives me estimated gains of ~35% at 1920x1080 and ~25% at 2560x1440 for a 980Ti when switching from pci-e 2.0 x16 to 3.0 x16.




edit: oops. Misread your post where you said "Not at 2560 and below" and thought you were referring to an i5 2000 series cpu. My mistake, please ignore. Partly because like Bjørn i too thought you were referring to the e/q6600 when you said "Stock Intel 6600". I know how silly of a mistake that is lol. I used those cpu's for many years back then.
 
Last edited:
Like I said I never meant to say a stock 6600/K could not bottleneck .............but my 1920x1080 won't be doing it. hehehe ;)
( obviously with big resolutions, multi screen and multi card systems that is another story.......... I did say as much ;) )

For instance there are some games out there at even 2560 Res put a huge stress on GTX980Ti
In that circumstance you need every rpm of CPU power you can muster. hehehe

All I know mate is what my specs are below and my rFactor2 settings GTX970 G1 is fantastic @3.9GHz
BUTTS p I run reduced shadows , no HDR and no taxing NVi settings
THEN I run blurry crappy low latency 60Hz monitor. p
It kills me when I have more then enough fps my settings for 120Hz p

I have even tested it up to 44 cars something I could not even hazard to do with my 2500K@4.5Gz/5Ghz and GTX670 OC

44 ran as smooth as my room with 8 cars in it, all with a 4690@3.9GHz :)

If you asked me would I drop a GTX980Ti G1 in those lowly specs I have below, YES mate :) !!! indeed, indeed !!! lol

P.S.
I can't get over how good the 9xx series looks compared to GTX670 visually in rF2, both W7 and W10, I do not use NV Inspector anymore.
 
Last edited:
I made some edits in my previous post whilst you were posting your last. I misunderstood you.
 
I have only one screen at the moment, as I do not at the moment have access to my triple monitor rig. ( All 1080p )
My old gtx970 single 1080p monitor with old spa, 16 cars, with me in last place at the start line and all setting set at high, FPS is 115 with cpu clock at 3.4ghz. By clocking to 4.2ghz it goes to 135.

Changing to a gtx 980ti at 4.2ghz my FPS IS 130.

The only time the gtx 980ti gets going is when i am well into the first lap when FPS goes above 400. The gtx 970 would be at 270 FPS at the same place. This is were in the race that the cpu seems least stressed.

The difference is most noticeable as i crank all the setting to max the gtx 980ti almost does not notice unless the cpu starts to get to 100% which seems to happen more as i crank up the settings. Its is though the cpu is the main problem with a gtx980ti this was far less noticeable with the gtx970 and less so again with my gtx580.

I am not trying to suggest anything from my random observations, just that i at first decided to stick with the i7 2600k, but when i observed the above it got me thinking about an upgrade to the cpu and mother board.

Thats were the i5 and i7 question sprang from.
 
DrR1pper said:
I don't have empirical data for a 980Ti but i do for my GTX 770 and 970 and based on those i estimated the gains one can expect in rf2 when going from pci-e 2.0 x16 to 3.0 x16.

Here's my most recent test results with a 970: https://community.racesimcentral.ne...her-end-cards!?p=382841&viewfull=1#post382841

Gains were 22% at 1920x1080 and 16% at 2560x1440 with my 970. Applying the performance difference between 970 and 980Ti onto those values, gives me estimated gains of ~35% at 1920x1080 and ~25% at 2560x1440 for a 980Ti when switching from pci-e 2.0 x16 to 3.0 x16.




edit: oops. Misread your post where you said "Not at 2560 and below" and thought you were referring to an i5 2000 series cpu. My mistake, please ignore. Partly because like Bjørn i too thought you were referring to the e/q6600 when you said "Stock Intel 6600". I know how silly of a mistake that is lol. I used those cpu's for many years back then.
Click to expand...
Glad I'm not alone... DD - DecipherDurge :D
 
So let me get this right, your GTX980Ti @ 4.2Ghz is 5fps slower then your GTX970.


Historic Cars at Day ( I assume ) at Belgium is not what I would call a taxing ISI test, surely something like mixed GT Sliverstone night would show a better gap between the 2 cards ? :)
 
I am sure that's a perfectly valid statement which i must agree with, but it was just a check i made before putting in the gtx 980ti after removing the gtx970.
I had assumed the gtx would just fly with the FPS and was shocked to find it virtually the same.
I just read what i wrote i meant to put 135 for the gtx980ti , miss read my results that i scribbled down.
 
I suppose i am trying to suggest that at the start of the race the cpu is effecting the FPS and not the gpu.
 
Bjørn said:
Glad I'm not alone... DD - DecipherDurge :D
Click to expand...

I can only say I rather have a i5 and GTX980Ti then a i7 and GTX970 .....if I was building on a fixed budget to use 2560 max monitor


1. It is faster.

What you see here spread over 20 games ...........( I never ever directed comments specifically towards rF2 )

The more Resolution the GTX980Ti pulls away 23 -26 -31 percent

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_980_Ti/31.html

You simply cant gain 31% with a CPU swap.


2. Later ......if I decide to upgrade to a i7 I have done $325 on a i5, if I decide to upgrade to GTX980Ti I have done $539 on a GTX970



3. If you adhere and base everything on this................ of course you would get a GTX970 reading that.

" Performance per Dollar "
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_980_Ti/33.html



BUT lol look at DD's dollar for dollar systems above ($16 difference)
https://community.racesimcentral.ne...uture-i7-or-i5?p=402111&viewfull=1#post402111

It is clear to anyone even rats up the drainpipe the GTX980Ti build with slower CPU would beat the i7-GTX970, even in Battlefield the GPU makes up for more then the difference gained from hyper threading, it is plain logic .........so starting from the same cost point one is clearly the " better Performance per Dollar " choice.

Sure , sure I could have specced a much cheaper i7 build , less cooling, less board, less memory ......No Matter lol you still won't fit in a GTX980Ti for the same money ($1,750 Australian ) ! hehe
 
Last edited:
DrR1pper said:
lol
Click to expand...

:(

lol

:p


Good test GTX970/980/Ti - i5/i7 all users compare in DSR 2.25 and 4.00

DrR1pper said:
Provided i've not misunderstood you again, but you can at least in rf2 with a 980Ti @1080p if you're upgrading from a pre i5 3000 series cpu.
Click to expand...

Yeah same gen i5 to i7 I meant.

Battlefield clock for clock gets 10 fps more with i7 ? .... a lot for sure but not when you compare i7-970 vs i5-980Ti builds for the same cost. ;)
 
DrR1pper said:
Ah ok, yes, gotcha.
Click to expand...


Also D people need to consider the gains they get from overclocked 2500/2600

My 2500K did 5Ghz @1.38v stress tests 2 days I turned in down to 4.8GHz then settled on 4.5Ghz at much nicer 1.28v

My point being 2500K@4.5GHz is 800Mhz so you get nice gains, with a 6700K it is 300MHz.

6600/6700 overall overclock speeds results are not quite as good overall imho on top of that they start at a higher MHz.

ie: Turbo speeds

2600K - 3.8GHz 6700K - 4.2GHz

2500K - 3.7Ghz 6600K - 3.9GHz


So my 2500K at 5Ghz was 1300MHz gain.
If a 6700K did 5.5GHz out of the box, where do I sign. lol :)


Of course you have to weigh up the advantages of later chipset, faster ram, SSD 4x and the rest in your given circumstance.
 
Last edited:
WhiteShadow said:
Yes but only i7 5820k or better.
i7 5820k vs i5 4690k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytFskvhTNJo
Click to expand...

Sure, in some games (such as BF4) there can be a ~10% fps difference and in others non. The cpu benchmark tests win hands down but that's not surprising. Do you consider these gains (where/when present) personally worthwhile? Also are you under the impression that such gains (~10%) will happen in rf2? And if so, what makes you think so?
 
DrR1pper said:
Sure, in some games (such as BF4) there can be a ~10% fps difference and in others non. The cpu benchmark tests win hands down but that's not surprising. Do you consider these gains (where/when present) personally worthwhile? Also are you under the impression that such gains (~10%) will happen in rf2? And if so, what makes you think so?
Click to expand...

I am not sure about rFactor2 but like it is now I think that i5 4690k and i7 5820k has same performance but remember that final build of rFactor2 is not released so we rely don`t know how it is going to bee :)
 
WhiteShadow said:
PC is much more then rFactor2 isnt it?
Click to expand...

ok, that's fair enough if that's why you'd opt for the 5820k.

WhiteShadow said:
I am not sure about rFactor2 but like it is now I think i5 4690k and i7 5820k has same performance but remember that final build of rFactor2 is not released so we rely don`t know how it is going to bee :)
Click to expand...

True, you never know, ISI could throw us a curve ball in that regard. But i don't think a "final build" is going to happen they way you might be thinking it will. "Final build" would be when ISI ceases it's continuous iterative development model for rf2, as in, when they start working on rf3.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top