Can someone tell a beginner where I'll see the most difference between an i5 and an i7?
I'll be using my build mainly for multimedia and gaming (running a GTX 1060) and I'm not sure which would bests suit my needs. I'd love to have the i7 but it's slightly out of my price range, and I'm wondering if it might be worthwhile to just save up a bit more, or if it'll be useless and I'll never really take advantage of it compared to an i5
Other urls found in this thread:
tomshardware.com
twitter.com
HT
If you arent video editing or doing tons of rendering on a consistent basis then an i7 is throwing money away.
If you have i7 money then the correct choice (for what i mentioned) is to get an i5 6600k and overclock it with a z170 mobo.
If you actually do multimedia shit and use resource intensive production software consistently, then yeah it'd be worthwhile saving for the i7.
In most cases you'll see a few extra FPS in gayming if you pick an i7 over i5, which is kinda negligible, considering you're paying more than "a few extra" dollars.
Video editing and rendering are 2 of the things that are helped out a fair bit by the hyperthreading of an i7.
If you plan on doing heavy multimedia, it'd probably be better to get i7, but if you'll primarily be doing gayming and a bit of video editing/rendering (inb4 youtube), then an unlocked i5 and overclock it.
>where I'll see the most difference between an i5 and an i7?
anything that uses more than four threads.
This. i7s can also be viable for high FPS, like 144 Hz 1080p, but otherwise get the i5 and OC it. If you want 60 FPS and don't get enough think about investing in a bigger GPU.
If you choose the i7 get the 5820K, the 6700K is a waste of money. I did the switch myself, but in gamees the cores will just shut off, while it renders really fast compared to my old OC 3770K.
/thread.
HT = your CPU acts like it has 2x the cores that each perform about 48-54% as fast, depending on the workload.
This shit has almost never worked out for anybody, and virtually anybody who knows what they're doing leaves it off.
A HT core doesn't magically get twice the cache, register file size, or bandwidth, so you just get fun new forms of resource contention, mostly in the form of cache thrashing.
whats good for last gen since skylake is shit
This, albeit some games are starting to utilize more cores/HT like BF1/GTAV. The i7 also has more L3 cache.
If you play AAA shit, you probably want to go with an i7. It shouldn't be necessary, but games are poorly optimized these days.
The cache doesn't matter for gaming, and even other tasks. Some games utilize the threads, but then I would still get more cores.
4 core are pushing the same fps as 6 cores in both them games user,
4690k
4790k
why would you say that skylake is shit?
L3 isn't very relevant for HT performance.
The bigger concerns are L1D, L1I/uop-trace, BTB, and the register file.
L2, TLB, and L3 can also get contention, but they aren't the biggest killers.
Not him, but Skylake and Kaby Lake have been horrible new architectures as far as improving IPC is concerned.
Also, Coffee Lake will be similarly worthless, and Cannon Lake won't hit workstations until 2019 and maybe not Xeons until even later...
...
2
How is the performance on the i5 6402p?