Upgrade from 6600K to 7700K worth it?

Hi.

I'm looking to upgrade my 6600k to 7700k and wondering if it'll make a noticeable difference.

I mainly game and do some video editing.

My system:
i5 6600K (OC to 4.8GHz)
MB asus z170 pro gaming itx
RAM 16GB (XMP profile 3,000mhz)
Cooler Phanteks ph-tc14pe (3 fan setup)
GTX1060 EVGA SSC

Below is a link to a screenshot of my cinebench score.



Please let me know what you think))
Reply to rasul-16
19 answers Last reply
More about upgrade 6600k 7700k worth
  1. At that level of OC, the i5 and i7 are basically the same cpu, without the hyperthreading. In that area, no, it's not worth the upgrade. However, if there's a need for 8 threads because 4 just isn't cutting it with heavy thread games like BF1 or gta:V or Witcher 3, then yes it is worth it.
    So you gotta ask yourself, is there a need for the extra 20+ fps, or a need due to streaming or rendering or any other high thread usage app, because on a purely performance basis, that 6600k is more than enough for a 1060 on a 60Hz monitor.
    Reply to Karadjgne
  2. Karadjgne said:
    At that level of OC, the i5 and i7 are basically the same cpu, without the hyperthreading. In that area, no, it's not worth the upgrade. However, if there's a need for 8 threads because 4 just isn't cutting it with heavy thread games like BF1 or gta:V or Witcher 3, then yes it is worth it.
    So you gotta ask yourself, is there a need for the extra 20+ fps, or a need due to streaming or rendering or any other high thread usage app, because on a purely performance basis, that 6600k is more than enough for a 1060 on a 60Hz monitor.


    Thank you for your reply. I agree with you because there is quite a difference between 3.9GHz and 4.8GHz
    Reply to rasul-16
  3. Karadjgne said:
    At that level of OC, the i5 and i7 are basically the same cpu, without the hyperthreading. In that area, no, it's not worth the upgrade. However, if there's a need for 8 threads because 4 just isn't cutting it with heavy thread games like BF1 or gta:V or Witcher 3, then yes it is worth it.
    So you gotta ask yourself, is there a need for the extra 20+ fps, or a need due to streaming or rendering or any other high thread usage app, because on a purely performance basis, that 6600k is more than enough for a 1060 on a 60Hz monitor.


    Thank you for your reply. I agree with you because there is quite a difference between 3.9GHz and 4.8GHz
    Reply to rasul-16
  4. CPU power is not connected to resolution.

    When you go from 1080p to 1440p ALL the additional load is on the GPU, not the CPU. So going for a 1070Ti or 1080 would be the better choice in that case.
    Reply to Isokolon
  5. Isokolon said:
    CPU power is not connected to resolution.

    When you go from 1080p to 1440p ALL the additional load is on the GPU, not the CPU. So going for a 1070Ti or 1080 would be the better choice in that case.


    This. Save your money and buy a better GPU.
    Reply to Tensai30
  6. https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3009-amd-r7-1700-vs-i7-7700k-144hz-gaming
    http://www.game-debate.com/cpu/index.php?pid=2448&pid2=2324&compare=core-i7-7700k-4-core-4-2ghz-vs-core-i5-6600k-3-5ghz

    According to these, there's almost no difference with a 7700k sitting at stock and 4.9GHz.
    The second shows roughly the advantage that the Hyperthreading has over 4c/4t and in many games its quite large as games are taking advantage of the extra Lcache, threads, clock speeds etc. It's only in the single thread heavy games like skyrim and cs:go that you'll basically have no improvement.
    Reply to Karadjgne
  7. Karadjgne said:
    https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3009-amd-r7-1700-vs-i7-7700k-144hz-gaming
    http://www.game-debate.com/cpu/index.php?pid=2448&pid2=2324&compare=core-i7-7700k-4-core-4-2ghz-vs-core-i5-6600k-3-5ghz

    According to these, there's almost no difference with a 7700k sitting at stock and 4.9GHz.
    The second shows roughly the advantage that the Hyperthreading has over 4c/4t and in many games its quite large as games are taking advantage of the extra Lcache, threads, clock speeds etc. It's only in the single thread heavy games like skyrim and cs:go that you'll basically have no improvement.

    Hyperthreading only makes a difference if the game utilizes it. Even now in 2017 a majority of the games out there don't really utilize it at all. Almost over 90%. The ones that do will show more of an improvement but regardless an i5 6600k should have no trouble maintaining 60fps on any modern title. IF the OP is capping his fps with vysnc on a 60hz screen, the I7 would make no difference. If the OP is unable to maintain 60fps, it's not the CPU, it's the GPU at fault and a GPU upgrade would fix that.
    I'm saying this from personal experience. I own a 6600k at 4.5ghz paired with a 1080TI and 16gb ddr4 and I never drop below 60 on anything. If I ever do it's always because I set the resolution too high. Lowering the resolution (ex: 2160p to 3200x1800) always fixes it meaning it's not a cpu issue.
    Reply to Tensai30
  8. I have an i5-3570k and i7-3770K, both currently at 4.3GHz. Half my games I can't tell the difference, the other half (including skyrim with over 130 mods and enb) are considerably different. The i5 I had to cut down to 70 mods and drop the enb. My skyrim averages 6 threads usage, so no issues for the i7, but would tank the i5.
    And yes, there aren't all that many multi thread games, but every last one is a AAA title, and that trend will continue to grow. Add some mods to gta5 and the i5 will seriously start suffering, as does farcry etc. If Op wants to try and maintain @100fps in anything new it's going to need the larger Lcache and higher thread count of the i7, or keep the i5 but deal with @60fps avg.
    Reply to Karadjgne
  9. Save your money, buy a better GPU. Check my validations. My 2500k still runs everything that my 6700k does. The only reason that I built a 2nd computer was age and I wanted a full size tower w/ more bells and whistles. I play everything from Skyrim, Fallout 4, Ark, Final Fantasy, Assassins Creed, etc.
    Reply to DarkOutlaw
  10. a picture says it all, you decide what is good for you next. power and money wise.

    Reply to The Paladin
  11. The Paladin said:
    a picture says it all, you decide what is good for you next. power and money wise.




    Of course this is going to show these statistics. The 8700k is a 6 core processor, it should be faster than the 7700k processor for CPU marks. Will this impact anything of real value? No. Does the size of your car's engine determine how many people fit in it? If you want to actually provide some sort of value to the thread, find a statistic page that has real world value like the performance of a game using the 8700k vs 7700k vs 6600k.
    Reply to DarkOutlaw
  12. And if you do a little bit of googling, this questions has already been asked/answered multiple times:

    http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-3298021/6600k-7600k.html
    Reply to DarkOutlaw
  13. DarkOutlaw said:
    And if you do a little bit of googling, this questions has already been asked/answered multiple times:

    http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-3298021/6600k-7600k.html


    Same could be said to 90% of the threads here.
    Reply to Tensai30
  14. True. But just a few years ago the question would have been is it worth it to upgrade from an i5-3570k to an i7-4770k. But, that was a slightly different time, where the i7 really showed no positive impact on any game so currently all those questions/answers would be of no use today.

    Personally, if op has the cash, it's going to be a benefit, if for nothing else but broadening the scope of playability in all games. In the time of the 3rd and 4th gen, the i5 was king of gaming value, it was all that was required. Today, it's the i7. I'd not recommend any pre-8th gen i5 for anything but a budget restore build. It's simply not worth the limitations of a 4t cpu.
    Reply to Karadjgne
  15. Karadjgne said:
    True. But just a few years ago the question would have been is it worth it to upgrade from an i5-3570k to an i7-4770k. But, that was a slightly different time, where the i7 really showed no positive impact on any game so currently all those questions/answers would be of no use today.

    Personally, if op has the cash, it's going to be a benefit, if for nothing else but broadening the scope of playability in all games. In the time of the 3rd and 4th gen, the i5 was king of gaming value, it was all that was required. Today, it's the i7. I'd not recommend any pre-8th gen i5 for anything but a budget restore build. It's simply not worth the limitations of a 4t cpu.

    Not really true at all. A i5 6600k handles every game on the market beautifully and games still don't utilize I7's that much. When aiming for a 60fps target, the limitations of a 4 thread cpu as powerful as the 6600k at 4.8ghz isn't going to be shown by today's games. Sure there's a select few games that take advantage of the extra threads but not nearly enough to justify spending the money especially when a 6600k would be doing pretty well in those titles already. As far as gaming is concerned it would be rather foolish for the OP to upgrade to a 7700k when he already has a 6600k at 4.8ghz. If any upgrade is to be considered, it should be 8th gen or a better gpu.

    With my current setup, I max every game at a minimum resolution of 3200x1800 and never drop below 60fps. I'm using a 6600k 4.5ghz, 1080ti and 16gb ddr4.
    Don't get me wrong, I have no problem upgrading. I'm running a 1080ti in this build so I'm not unwilling to spend money on parts that improve performance. Just today's games haven't given me a reason to upgrade my CPU yet.
    Reply to Tensai30
  16. Exactly. Today's games. BF1, gta5, Witcher 3, pubg, Starwars Battlefront /2 etc show definite improvement with the i7 or even a Ryzen over the i5. And that trend is going to continue as quad cores generally loose ground the way the dual/quad era was. Granted not every game will be multiple thread, many will remain single thread heavy, but even the next iteration of cs:go is looking at 8 thread optization. With these new AAA titles, there's so much graphical detail and design that to even be AAA, they have to be pushing the limits. The new Starwars Battlefront 2 exceeds the limits of my 3770k /gtx970, I'm just barely at minimum specs. And that's at 1080p.
    Today's games or older on the 6600k usually isn't an issue, the games out next year, or the year after, that's a different story.
    Reply to Karadjgne
  17. Karadjgne said:
    Exactly. Today's games. BF1, gta5, Witcher 3, pubg, Starwars Battlefront /2 etc show definite improvement with the i7 or even a Ryzen over the i5. And that trend is going to continue as quad cores generally loose ground the way the dual/quad era was. Granted not every game will be multiple thread, many will remain single thread heavy, but even the next iteration of cs:go is looking at 8 thread optization. With these new AAA titles, there's so much graphical detail and design that to even be AAA, they have to be pushing the limits. The new Starwars Battlefront 2 exceeds the limits of my 3770k /gtx970, I'm just barely at minimum specs. And that's at 1080p.
    Today's games or older on the 6600k usually isn't an issue, the games out next year, or the year after, that's a different story.

    Possibly so but I own all the games you mentioned with the exception of pubg and battlefront 2(I did however play the beta maxed at 60fps 4k) and all of these games had absolutely no difficulty maintaining 60ps maxed. So my statement still remains that unless the op wants to play on a high refresh rate monitor or over 60fps, then there isn't much point in an I7 for gaming. It is correct that in the future games will start to require more cores to maintain 60fps but that will most likely not happen for a few years and by then most people will be on 6 core i5s.
    Edit: actually the witcher 3 I have hairworks off because I play in 4k but maxed other than that.
    Reply to Tensai30
  18. Lol, yeah, hairworks is brutal on an i5, as is physX and even grass.
    Reply to Karadjgne
  19. Karadjgne said:
    Lol, yeah, hairworks is brutal on an i5, as is physX and even grass.


    No it isn't. Not an i5 6600k at 4.5ghz. At least not enough for anyone who is aiming for 60fps to care about. Which goes back to my original point. Speaking from personal experience with my 6600k and 1080ti, I can easily turn on hairworks and set it to high preset and never drop below 60fps if I play the game at 1440p. I'm only disabling it because I am playing in 4k. Which means it's my GPU holding me back. Physx also doesn't suffer on a 6600k when set to use the gpu on nvcp. Same goes for grass. My point still remains, rather silly for the OP to get a 6700k if he already has a 6600k at 4.8ghz. I suspect the op is craving performance because of his gpu (1060). Upgrading to either a 1080 or 1080ti would give the op the largest boost in fps and allow him to crank his settings up. Now if the op is looking to run in high refresh rates, a new GPU and an 8th gen Intel CPU would be recommended.

    To sum it up;
    OP should only consider upgrading to a 6700k if he does the following:
    1)game streaming
    2)wants more than 60fps (in this case a better gpu will also be needed)
    3)does a lot of video encoding
    4)any kind of 3d editing
    Otherwise, just buy a better GPU.

    I'm sorry but today's games just haven't reached the complexity to require an I7. I would love to have a reason to buy one. Right now it's looking like vr games might actually get to that point sooner but they still haven't yet either. My 6600k also plays all my games on my vive perfectly as well. I would love to see vr games improve in fidelity to the point that a 6 core was required. Maybe a few years from now.
    Reply to Tensai30
Ask a new question Answer

Read More

Overclocking Gaming Video Editing Intel