I want to buy a new CPU but Im struggling between a 4790k and a 6700k which one should i get /g/?
stick with haswell, fuck skylake
Haswell's cheaper so go for it
haswell refresh is better than skylake, motherboard and ddr4 are more expensive
Skylake is just a meme
Either get a 6700k or go full value and get a used 4690k or even a 2500k. I went Skylake because I got a ridiculous cpu/mobo/ram deal on Craigslist so it will be fun to try the super fast m.2 ultra ssd.
skylake is not worth it
Go skylake if you're going to buy a 950 pro, else go haslel.
>>51234324
What does skylake have to do with SSDs?
>>51234357
nvme, yo
>>51234357
4 more PCI lanes than Haswell, bringing the total to 20. Comes handy when you want to run a PCIe x16 GPU and a PCIe x4 SSD.
if you want to play the latest games for more than a year go with the i7-6700
>>51234451
inane post
>>51234451
bahahaha. sure. even a fuckin 2600K can play anything nowadays. with a small overlock it's on par with the small generation is the base clocks back then were quite low.
>>51234481
>2600
that's not even half of 6700, it must be old as shit. higher number always means more powerful when it comes to cpus
>>51234502
yeah shit like ancient. cant even run windows 10, not even 8
>>51234357
>>51234401
The extra lanes aren't a terribly big deal. I got 3 290's running in 8x, 4x, 4x on my 4790k with no issues(non heat related issues...). I presume if I grabbed a PCI SSD then I'd still be at 4x across the board.
>>51234647
The thing is when you need lanes you go X99. Going x4 x4 x4 x4 you will notice performance drop
>>51234401
Why would you need more than ~600MB/s (SATA 3.0) for a SSD? What purpose would ~4GB/s serve for an SSD? Programs already load fast as hell, more than ~600MB/s seems like diminishing returns.
SSDs will never be as fast as RAM anyway. Even a 32GB stick of 1600MHz RAM shrieks at ~12.8GB/s
>>51234706
Why would 4x,4x,4x be significantely worst than 8x, 4x, 4x. 290's are rated down to PCIe 2.0 8x/3.0 4x for crossfire without any performance loss.
>>51234898
It's for M.2 SSD's that can use more than 600MB/s. 16 lanes is more than enough though.
>>51233262
Don't buy obsolete ram.
>>51234898
>why do you need X, Y (significantly worse) is fast enough
Yeah I mean High speed trains are so stupid with those diminishing returns, a horse is so much more sensible :^)
>>51234706
[4] gen 2 lanes is still fast as hell though. That's still 2GB/s of bandwidth for loading textures and shit from the hdd/ssd.
>>51234985
Tell me more about that obsolete RAM and the wonders of DDR4, ESPECIALLY on consumer-shit Z170
>>51235021
Every new motherboard from now to 5 years later will be DDR4. That's the wonder.
>>51234996
You're an idiot, the average joe can't even use more than 125MBps even if he had a 1Gbps internet connection and downloaded 100s of torrents at once.
SSDs load programs faster because they load the tiny 1-10MB files faster onto the system RAM than an ancient HDD can.
>>51235068
You're suggesting to go for Skylake which is 2% slower than Haswell in order to save $60 in 5 years ? Excellent
>>51235147
This. SATA 3 SSDs are rarely stressed to their full write speeds.
>>51235147
Yeah I could expend my previous analogy ad vitam aeternam without resorting to insults, if you still haven't figured out the main issue behind your argument I guess the discussion is over.
>>51235319
>>51235147
>>51234996
Just to add my 2¢ to this whole exchange. There is really not much to gain between 16 and 20 PCIe lanes. No GPU will come anywhere close to saturating PCIe 3.0 4x speeds so unless somehow its possible to get four GPU's on either an 1150/1151 board then it's totally fine with either socket.
>>51233904
dude are you dumb, it's £36 for 8gb DDR4 and £40 for 8gb DDR3, and the motherboards are the same price.
>>51235319
I get that things advance but the kind of advancements plays a role in whether they are actually useful or not.
Yes, the bullet train is a huge improvement over a shitting horse. That advancement was very useful to human beans.
Maybe one day the average joe will benefit from a 4GBps SSD but not today. Buying a skylake cpu just to get 20 gen 3 lanes is absurdly retarded no matter which way you look at it.
>>51235270
It's faster.
There is a small hit even with one card at 4x
techpowerup says they're going to test SLI next but that's locked at 8x. They really need to test CrossfireX since AMD doesn't use a bridge anymore. I wonder if there's more of a hit or not. Linus did a test too but only with SLI.
>>51235455
lol
>>51235291
Only time I notice anything is when deleting files from recycling bin and being on skype at the same time, the audio quality goes to shit.
>>51235474
So any pcie transfer speed greater than 2GB/s for a gpu is a placebo? Good to know.
>>51235490
the sample size isn't comparable, also you're fucking retarded if you go from devils canyon i5 to skylake i5, when even intel marketed skylake for a ivy bridge or older upgrade.
>>51235490
>slower single core performance
You've gotta be shitting me.
>>51235490
>sample sizes
>>51235531
Upgrading beyond Sandy Bridge is pretty much retarded.
>>51235490
Please tell me this is a Photoshop, PLEASE.
>>51235490
>CPUMark
lol
>>51235490
>>51235602
true, but comparing 2 identical CPUs which are 1 generation apart and expecting significant improvements is pretty dumb and if anyone goes from i5 to i5 instead of i5 to i7 is pretty stupid
>>51235568
Exactly and with dx12 the weight should fall on the gpu more, so I wont be upgrading from 4790k just yet and save for better gpu later.
May go from 16GB mem to 32GB mem just to start using a ramdisk for some caching to minimize ssd wear.. Or may just get a pcie ssd one of these days.
>>51235659
Well it's the closest performance gap (or lack of) since Sandy.
>>51235655
>Encoding video with hardware acceleration.
>>51235664
SSD wear is a myth, i've bought plenty of used SSDs and they still report good health despite being 5 years old.
>>51235687
it's not really surprising as the 4690 and 4790 is like core i gen 4.5 to make up for the fuck up of broadwell so intel had longer to tweak the cores, while skylake is just to get mainstream DDR4 out the door so memory fabs slow down DDR3 production.
>>51235430
>Buying a skylake cpu just to get 20 gen 3 lanes is absurdly retarded no matter which way you look at it.
And HERE is the problem: I never ever implied that, I'm myself on 5930K. Why would I suggest people to go for Skylake (oops I didn't this wasn't even my point)
>>51235655
now compare using discrete gpus, which is the actual use case scenario
>>51235792
You were implying an upgrade to skylake was good. It's not. Maybe you should watch how your little vapid retorts can make people imply things about you.
>>51235759
this. read an article where the guy wrote like fucking petabytes on some ssd's he tested before they died, let me find it.
http://techreport.com/review/27909/the-ssd-endurance-experiment-theyre-all-dead
>>51233904
Comparing shittest ddr4 to most expensive ddr3, you're a good fisher anon.
>>51234401
the 5820 has 28 lanes
16 8 4
>>51235961
They're gen 3 lanes too. skylel is still a meme
>>51233262
But what about its sekret ARC co-processor running ThreadX OS - that doesn't bother you?
www.libreboot.org/faq/#intelme
>>51235664
Is caching really that big of an improvement compared to using a m.2 for a os? Seems like it would be handy in laptops but not in a desktop.
>>51235996
skylane is pice 2.0? Is it so it can fit on old boards?
>>51236006
No idea. i don't have pcie ssd yet so.
I just notice on skype calls if I move a lot of files, the call quality goes to shit.
>>51236044
No, skylake is gen 3 as well. They can use gen 2 motherboards I think.
>>51236102
weird
