Intel 6700k or 5930K

[lealex84 0]

Hi.
Just a fast question.
I'm building a new system and don't know which CPU to buy.
 
I have a 2600k OC to 4.7 and I hesitate between 6700K (4 cores)  and 5930K (6 cores). My GPU is a EVGA Titan (first generation) and my next motherbord will be ASUS
 
What do you thik, which is better for P3D ???

[Angelo Cosma 61]

I am in the same boat, upgrading form a 2700K at 4.8Ghz. I am eagerly awaiting the 6700K since I have all the other parts but the CPU is not in stock anywhere at the moment. Since I really only use Flight Sim, and GTA V, Train Sim 2015. The 6700K is perfect for me, none of the games I use would benefit from the 6 cores, and the smaller 14nm chip the 6700K is leads to lower temps and higher OC potential. Since it is not in stock and nobody really knows when, its up to you what you want to do. 

 

If it was readily available now then I would say go for the 6700K. If all you are building the PC for is Flight Sim then the 6700K is again a winner in my book. 

[flyingsub1959 3]

Both are available here in the UK

 

http://www.novatech.co.uk/products/components/processors/intelskylake1151/bx80662i76700k.html.

 

http://www.novatech.co.uk/products/components/processors/intelcorei72011/bx80648i75930k.html

 

If only I could afford one..

 

I would be amazed if they weren't available elsewhere.

[DylanM 1,069]

Good question. I've got my 5930 @ 4.7 GHz (with HT enabled), and am intrigued whether the 6700 OCs much higher (particularly as factoring out clock speed, the performance bump to Skylake from Haswell-E is minimal - there are few benchmarks on Youtube on this).

 

It'll also be interesting to keep an eye on whether P3D 3+ will further spread processing across more cores (where a 5960 might come into it's own despite lower clocks).

[Airline2Sim 489]

I'm just about to move from a 3970x with an original Titan to a 6700k and a 980Ti so I'll let you know.

 

The 6700k is less than half the price that the 3970x retails at even two and a half years after release so I can't say I'm not a little concerned. However someone who has one and is more knowledgeable than me in these matters assures me that the raw single core speed of the Skylake eats the more expensive processors for breakfast when it comes to FSX/P3d. We will see.

[Capt Pugwash 6]

I have the Skylake 6700k on an Asus Hero Z170 mobo with 16 gb Corsair vengeance ram & samsung pro 1TB SSD. Running Win7 although tempted to upgrade to Win 10 to see if my new Skylake system likes it!

 

I let the Asus ROG Software overclock & stress test...it took it up to 5.1oc...

Although for the time being I have dialled her down to 4.6oc whilst I try to get P3D v2.5 running to my satisfaction.

 

Having major problems getting aircraft with native P3D installers to either install or if installing they are missing instruments or not showing externally or giving license errors.

 

The stock aircraft in conjunction with FTX Global,Vector with Palm Springs & KEGE for example with Rex soft clouds looks & runs truly amazing.

 

Just can't get any of my P3Dv2.5 compatible aircraft to install correctly...AS Airbus, JF Canberra, JF Chipmunk all have panels, externals missing & Alabeo Titan (406 license error although code is correct!)

[A340Bangla 40]

was before the same question some 10 days ago. In the end, I went with the 6700K, mainly because it is newer and cheaper.

 

Have it now running at 4.7 without complaints together with a GTX980Ti and am in the process of installing P3D25

[HamSammich 17]

Ben,

 

I would suggest NOT the 5930K or the 6700K, but an X99-based alternative. Namely the 5820K. Here's why:

 

1) Unlike FSX, P3D seems to like more cores over clock speed, arguing against the 6700K.

 

2) Both the 5930K and 5820K can be overclocked to about the same level. Both have six cores.

 

3) The 5820K has 12 fewer PCIe lanes than the 5930K--which matters NOT AT ALL unless you plan three-way SLI.

 

4) The 5820K can be had for 299 dollars from a Microcenter, or about 50 bucks more elsewhere. Meaning it's no more expensive than the 6700K.

 

5) Z170 motherboards are not quite mature. Lotsa teething problems and very little you can't get, say, on an Asus X99 Deluxe. Unless you're just wanting specmanship. 

 

6) Love the Q400 videos. Eagerly awaiting the First Officer's edition.

 

Best,

 

Marshall

[rcladin 4]

 

1) Unlike FSX, P3D seems to like more cores over clock speed, arguing against the 6700K.

 

 

love to see some evidence of this, i'd still say 4faster cores on the 6700k will give a better experience than 6slower cores on the 5820k.

 

I'm considering waiting to hear of news of P3D v3, to ascertain whether extra cores have much effect on performance before going for a 4 or 6 core cpu

[Airline2Sim 489]

Ben,

 

I would suggest NOT the 5930K or the 6700K, but an X99-based alternative. Namely the 5820K. Here's why:

 

1) Unlike FSX, P3D seems to like more cores over clock speed, arguing against the 6700K.

 

2) Both the 5930K and 5820K can be overclocked to about the same level. Both have six cores.

 

3) The 5820K has 12 fewer PCIe lanes than the 5930K--which matters NOT AT ALL unless you plan three-way SLI.

 

4) The 5820K can be had for 299 dollars from a Microcenter, or about 50 bucks more elsewhere. Meaning it's no more expensive than the 6700K.

 

5) Z170 motherboards are not quite mature. Lotsa teething problems and very little you can't get, say, on an Asus X99 Deluxe. Unless you're just wanting specmanship.

 

6) Love the Q400 videos. Eagerly awaiting the First Officer's edition.

 

Best,

 

Marshall

Thanks for the kind words Marshall. I have however pulled the trigger on the 6700k after seeing some great results on a friend's rig with this CPU so time will tell.

 

The FO training is also inbound, hope you enjoy.

[Christopher Low 5,337]

 

Unlike FSX, P3D seems to like more cores over clock speed, arguing against the 6700K.

 

 

love to see some evidence of this, i'd still say 4faster cores on the 6700k will give a better experience than 6slower cores on the 5820k.

 

I am not convinced either where P3d v2.x is concerned, but P3D v3 could be a significantly different ball game where use of multiple processor cores is concerned.....

[HamSammich 17]

>>love to see some evidence of this, i'd still say 4faster cores on the 6700k will give a better experience than 6slower cores on the 5820k.

 

All I can give is the evidence of my Mark II-A eyeballs.

 

Two Asus boards with the same 970 GPU and same Windows 8.1.Three CPUs--a 5820K and 5960X--clocked each at 4.4, and a 4790K at 4.7.

 

Virtually identical FPS on all three. However, P3D gobbled up the additional two and four cores on the bigger chips for texture loading. Result, again to my eyes and others who flew it, was a much smoother experience. Views out the side, especially low altitude in complex scenery, were subjectively more immersive-- and Resource Monitor showed all cores in use.

 

As a final proof, restricting core usage on the X99 CPUS to 4, to match the 4790K, made the experience in all three look identical. QED, IMHO.

 

And Rob Ainscough's experience, as well, on his monster rig.

 

 

Marshall

>> I have however pulled the trigger on the 6700k after seeing some great results on a friend's rig with this CPU so time will tell. <<

 

Ben,

 

Congrats!

 

Looking forward to another data point. There has indeed been some surprisingly good buzz about it--namely that it has a happy affinity for P3D, disproportionate to its seemingly minor advantage in most benchmarks. 

 

Marshall