You can run various applications and games on an OC i5 6600k, depending on your needs.
You can run various applications and games on an OC i5 6600k, depending on your needs.
In short, OC would be beneficial mainly for tasks that require heavy processing, such as rendering videos or using software that demands more CPU power—applications typically used by professionals like designers and engineers. For gaming, an i5 6500 could handle it for a while, even with some demanding computations, and it might still last a few years before needing an upgrade. I could possibly keep the same model for several years and eventually switch to a newer i7 7700k around three years later, as the LGA 1151 connector remains compatible. This approach would help me stay current without making major changes, unless quantum computing becomes a reality.
This seems like a solid plan, wouldn't it? If you're considering a mid-to-high range gaming setup, a 6500 should suffice and offer better performance than older models. Back in the day, upgrading within the same socket was sometimes worth it, but those days are behind us. Intel CPUs have consistently improved by about 5-10% per generation, so a Kaby Lake (7xxx) chip wouldn't be a good investment. If you choose a non-K processor, you'd likely need a less powerful motherboard, limiting your ability to overclock the 7700K, which would reduce the overall benefit.
Uncertainty remains about future developments, but it's reasonable to expect around four years of solid gaming performance from a 6500, especially if you don't rely on maximum settings.
One thing to note is whether you're planning to use a display with a 144Hz refresh rate and aim for over 100fps. Some users prefer higher refresh rates and may sacrifice detail settings, shifting more load to the CPU. In such cases, the GPU becomes less critical, and the CPU's role increases. A 6500 can still perform well, but an upgraded 6600K might be necessary in certain titles to achieve those frame rates.
Even at 1080p, I opted for an MSI Rx 470 because the performance-to-price ratio was great. I don’t mind graphics much beyond running games smoothly and getting decent visuals. Of course, before you can test it, you need a solid system to launch the game properly.
13thmonkey :
1. gaming is intensive, and as it is time senstive (i.e. you need that calculation now, not in 1/2 a second) then faster is better. Video encoding a slight slowdown in encoding speed won't be noticed as it is not a real time operation.
2. the 7700k won't be any cheaper than the 6700k, old 6700k's might drop by $20-$40, but they tend to empty out the supply channels so there is no need to dump stock.
Everyone tries to justify the update that they will do in the future, very few actually get around to doing it, assume you aren't.
I plan on sqeezing the LGA 1151 as much as I can for as long as I can. Computer parts are expensive in the third world and I already squeezed the AM3 socket that way. I honestly dont go with Zen because AMD has been lagging behind and I want to try Intel this time.
Time will tell how prices move. Who can say that we won't have quantum computers or VR computers in the next 5 to 10 years? But better be safe than sorry.