New
#41
yeah ok
Last edited by ruzzi; 22 Apr 2016 at 09:25.
You can get a CPU which is OP now by not overclocking, for example my CPU is 8 years old, it's quad core, it's got about half the performance of today's processors and better still, it's never been overclocked and still going strong, overclocking isn't something to just enable a better framerate, it's a very unstable way to push your processor past it's recommended specifications, that's not a decision I would consider to be an easy one to make.
What I meant in the above quoted post was, you can get a CPU what is considered an overpowered CPU right now, and it will keep up without overclocking in a few years time, or you can get a CPU that can be clocked and would require overclocking to achieve the same results in 5 years time to keep up with future hardware, but run the risk of the CPU dying prematurely due to overclocking (which is why people upgrade every 3 years), so it's completely your choice and your circumstance will be taken into consideration :)
So you're saying there's no difference in a K and non K processor when it comes to gaming, right?
And that in 3 years time I'd have to upgrade the CPU anyway, right?
But still, there are others who advised me to get a K to keep current with future games without spending money on upgrading the CPU for 4 - 5 years. They say if I get a non K, I'll have to upgrade it in 3 years.
So what do you think?
---------- EDIT ----------
OK I re-read your previous post and understand what you're trying to say. I think I'll get a K and overclock it when the time comes to do so to keep up with future hardware and future games. But I definitely won't overclock to its limits and risk degrading it. I'll o'clock it just enough without going overboard. I think it's the smart thing to do and the best compromise without having to upgrade it in a short period of time as you would with a non K.
You're overthinking this. The difference between the two you listed is the k can be overclocked and the other can't,.
Don't worry about what's going to be usable that far down the road.. just get the one you want. If you think you want to or can overclock get the K and if you don't then get the 6500. Either one is more than adequate for the job. Keep in mind that overclocking is tricky and you can damage the processor/motherboard if you do it incorrectly.
Jeff
Edit: Check this out.. Intel Core i5 6600K vs 6500
Hi there
One problem you *Might* find with some I5's is that ECC isn't supported -- this could be a problem if you decide to "Cannabilize" some server parts for creating gaming rigs. (Micro servers have great small footprints and robust enterprise strength components so if you can physically get your graphics card into one these make a good rig and occupy very little space -- also built for 24 hr operation too. !!)
A great good performing CPU if you can find them is Xeon E3-1230V2 -- ECC no problem and 4 cores. It's slot compatible with some I5's and a lot better performer. You can find them from time to time but usually supplies are snapped up pretty quick as this CPU was really great value for money from INTEL.
Cheers
jimbo
Guys, I finally got my list of parts to build my gaming desktop. Below is a link to my build. I need your opinions as to what parts I can swap out to reduce costs further. Let me know. Appreciate it.
Intel Core i5-6600K, MSI GeForce GTX 970, Cooler Master HAF 912 USB3.0 - My Custom Build - xlooks Saved Part List - PCPartPicker
Gonna be a nice system.......good choices all.....
Now, you better hit the submit payment button before you do change your mind.........