i7-6700K or i7-4790K [I know there's a lot of threads on this topic, but they didn't help me decide]

[-kiddo-]

Before you start typing that there's a lot of threads about that, I just wanna say that I read almost all of them and I still can't decide.

Hi, I'm looking to upgrade my current cpu (i5-4690k) and I can't decide for which one I should go. I'm a video editor, but I still play a lot and I like to record/stream my gameplay. So I'm looking for an i7 processor and I can't decide between i7-4790k and i7-6700k. My main goal was to get a cpu that can handle recording/streaming without an fps loss. I read a lot of threads on many forums and watched few videos with comparison of those processors and all I got from it is i7-4790k is slightly worse than i7-6700k but still a good choice. But here's a thing, I'm going to have a 144Hz monitor in few days and I'm not sure if i7-4790k can provide me that high fps in games as i7-6700k.

I know that if I go for i7-6700k - I'll need to upgrade my motherboard and ram. That's affordable for me but that's the maximum of what I can spend.

So, what I wanna hear is - Will i7-6700k be a better choice for me, or i7-4790k is enough to feed my needs?


P.S.: Not sure if it's useful there, but my current gpu is R9 390 8GB.

 

[Hawkshot]

letting us know your GPU is very helpful, and while upgrading to skylake is advised as Haswell as no upgrade path the I7-4670k is still a fantastic choice, in all honesty what kind of budget do you have and where about are your from as this will help me decide if its worth the upgrade to skylake or not. also having a (K) processor in real world situations doesn't provide as much as you would think it would .

 

[-kiddo-]

letting us know your GPU is very helpful, and while upgrading to skylake is advised as Haswell as no upgrade path the I7-4670k is still a fantastic choice, in all honesty what kind of budget do you have and where about are your from as this will help me decide if its worth the upgrade to skylake or not. also having a (K) processor in real world situations doesn't provide as much as you would think it would .

I can't really explain my budget since almost all high-end processors in my country are overpriced. All I can tell - my maximum is getting 6700K, new cheap motherboard and ddr4 ram for it.
I wanted to overclock it, that's why I chose a (K) processor. I have Cooler Master 212 EVO cooler and as I know - it fits 6700K.

 

[Hawkshot]

letting us know your GPU is very helpful, and while upgrading to skylake is advised as Haswell as no upgrade path the I7-4670k is still a fantastic choice, in all honesty what kind of budget do you have and where about are your from as this will help me decide if its worth the upgrade to skylake or not. also having a (K) processor in real world situations doesn't provide as much as you would think it would .

I can't really explain my budget since almost all high-end processors in my country are overpriced. All I can tell - my maximum is getting 6700K, new cheap motherboard and ddr4 ram for it.
I wanted to overclock it, that's why I chose a (K) processor. I have Cooler Master 212 EVO cooler and as I know - it fits 6700K.

to be able to overclock the I7-6700k you're going to need a Z170 motherboard and you wont be able to get a cheap motherboard, the evo 212 does indeed fit the I7-6700k and its a decent cooler but don't expect a lot of overclock potential.

 

[-kiddo-]

letting us know your GPU is very helpful, and while upgrading to skylake is advised as Haswell as no upgrade path the I7-4670k is still a fantastic choice, in all honesty what kind of budget do you have and where about are your from as this will help me decide if its worth the upgrade to skylake or not. also having a (K) processor in real world situations doesn't provide as much as you would think it would .

I can't really explain my budget since almost all high-end processors in my country are overpriced. All I can tell - my maximum is getting 6700K, new cheap motherboard and ddr4 ram for it.
I wanted to overclock it, that's why I chose a (K) processor. I have Cooler Master 212 EVO cooler and as I know - it fits 6700K.

to be able to overclock the I7-6700k you're going to need a Z170 motherboard and you wont be able to get a cheap motherboard, the evo 212 does indeed fit the I7-6700k and its a decent cooler but don't expect a lot of overclock potential.

I know all that, I already chose s1151, Z170 motherboard I can afford. I just want to know, if it's actually worth going for 6700K? Because all reviews I read splits into "skylake is overpriced, better just go for 4790k, you're not gonna notice difference" and "skylake is fine, you can confidently go for 6700k, you will not get disappointed"

 

[geofelt]

On a new build, I would pick I7-6700K. Mainly because it is newer tech and a bit faster per clock.

But, a i7-4790K is about as good and can typically clock to the same upper limits.
Perhaps 2% of samples can get to 4.9.
More likely, you are looking at 4.6 or 4.7 as a top clock for either.
If your case has decent airflow, a hyper212 will do most of the job but will be perhaps a multiplier or two short of your particular chips max.

My suggestion is to keep what I assume is a lga1150 overclockable motherboard and use a I7-4790K.
Use the savings to buy a top end cooler like a noctua NH-U14s.

Your i5-4690K is still a top gaming processor and should command a good price used on ebay.

 

[Ecky]

A 4790K and 6700K perform similarly. Skylake will have an edge, yes, but the difference will almost certainly be small enough that you won't be able to perceive it without looking at numbers. Anything that a 4790K would struggle in, a 6700K would also struggle in, just a hair less, so I advise just getting the Haswell i7.

 

[Hawkshot]

letting us know your GPU is very helpful, and while upgrading to skylake is advised as Haswell as no upgrade path the I7-4670k is still a fantastic choice, in all honesty what kind of budget do you have and where about are your from as this will help me decide if its worth the upgrade to skylake or not. also having a (K) processor in real world situations doesn't provide as much as you would think it would .

I can't really explain my budget since almost all high-end processors in my country are overpriced. All I can tell - my maximum is getting 6700K, new cheap motherboard and ddr4 ram for it.
I wanted to overclock it, that's why I chose a (K) processor. I have Cooler Master 212 EVO cooler and as I know - it fits 6700K.

to be able to overclock the I7-6700k you're going to need a Z170 motherboard and you wont be able to get a cheap motherboard, the evo 212 does indeed fit the I7-6700k and its a decent cooler but don't expect a lot of overclock potential.

I know all that, I already chose s1151, Z170 motherboard I can afford.

fair enough, well if you have the money for the I7-6700k and the Z170 motherboard I would say go for it as it offers you about a 5-10% performance increase over the I7-4670k and it offers you good upgradability where are Haswell cant offer you anything for potential upgrades.

 

[-kiddo-]

On a new build, I would pick I7-6700K. Mainly because it is newer tech and a bit faster per clock.

But, a i7-4790K is about as good and can typically clock to the same upper limits.
Perhaps 2% of samples can get to 4.9.
More likely, you are looking at 4.6 or 4.7 as a top clock for either.
If your case has decent airflow, a hyper212 will do most of the job but will be perhaps a multiplier or two short of your particular chips max.

My suggestion is to keep what I assume is a lga1150 overclockable motherboard and use a I7-4790K.
Use the savings to buy a top end cooler like a noctua NH-U14s.

Your i5-4690K is still a top gaming processor and should command a good price used on ebay.

So, do you think 4790k will be as good as 6700k when it comes to recording/streaming? And will 4790k be enough for 144hz monitor?

 

[-kiddo-]

A 4790K and 6700K perform similarly. Skylake will have an edge, yes, but the difference will almost certainly be small enough that you won't be able to perceive it without looking at numbers. Anything that a 4790K would struggle in, a 6700K would also struggle in, just a hair less, so I advise just getting the Haswell i7.

Well, as benchmarks tell, 4790k is the same in rendering/recording as 6700k, but it gives less fps in games. That's the only thing that worrying me. That it will not produce enough fps for me and I need as much fps as I can get for my 144hz monitor.

 

[Hawkshot]

A 4790K and 6700K perform similarly. Skylake will have an edge, yes, but the difference will almost certainly be small enough that you won't be able to perceive it without looking at numbers. Anything that a 4790K would struggle in, a 6700K would also struggle in, just a hair less, so I advise just getting the Haswell i7.

Well, as benchmarks tell, 4790k is the same in rendering/recording as 6700k, but it gives less fps in games. That's the only thing that worrying me. That it will not produce enough fps for me and I need as much fps as I can get for my 144hz monitor.

Honestly you are only looking at about a 5-7 fps maximum increase between the I7-4690k and the I7-6700k from the tests ive done, its not massive.

 

[-kiddo-]

A 4790K and 6700K perform similarly. Skylake will have an edge, yes, but the difference will almost certainly be small enough that you won't be able to perceive it without looking at numbers. Anything that a 4790K would struggle in, a 6700K would also struggle in, just a hair less, so I advise just getting the Haswell i7.

Well, as benchmarks tell, 4790k is the same in rendering/recording as 6700k, but it gives less fps in games. That's the only thing that worrying me. That it will not produce enough fps for me and I need as much fps as I can get for my 144hz monitor.

Honestly you are only looking at about a 5-7 fps maximum increase between the I7-4690k and the I7-6700k from the tests ive done, its not massive.

Yeah, but when I will record/stream, I will still have some fps loss, not that big as I have now, but still. For example I will have like 100fps while im not recording with 4790k and 110fps with 6700k, but when I will be recording/streaming, I will have 90 with 4790k and 100 with 6700k. That's how it works, right? And as far as I know, the difference will be pretty noticeable on 144hz monitor.

 

[Ecky]

I would absolutely not try to stream at 144hz. Cap it at 60 or 75fps. There is no CPU in existence that will not have frame drops above ~75fps in a majority of titles.

 

[Hawkshot]

A 4790K and 6700K perform similarly. Skylake will have an edge, yes, but the difference will almost certainly be small enough that you won't be able to perceive it without looking at numbers. Anything that a 4790K would struggle in, a 6700K would also struggle in, just a hair less, so I advise just getting the Haswell i7.

Well, as benchmarks tell, 4790k is the same in rendering/recording as 6700k, but it gives less fps in games. That's the only thing that worrying me. That it will not produce enough fps for me and I need as much fps as I can get for my 144hz monitor.

Honestly you are only looking at about a 5-7 fps maximum increase between the I7-4690k and the I7-6700k from the tests ive done, its not massive.

Yeah, but when I will record/stream, I will still have some fps loss. For example I will have like 100fps while im not recording with 4790k and 110fps with 6700k, but when I will be recording/streaming, I will have 90 with 4790k and 100 with 6700k. That's how it works, right? And as far as I know, the difference will be pretty noticeable on 144hz monitor.

as they are I7's I doubt you will see any drop in fps what so ever when you turn on your streamlining software. I have an I5-6600k and even when I turn on OBS I have no fps drops that's without the extra 4 threads the i7 offers, but yes, if a game is running at 100fps on the I7-4790k and 107fps on the i7-6700k with a 144Mhz monitor you should be able to see the difference.

 

[geofelt]

Some games are cpu limited and some are graphics limited.

If your games are cpu limited, then the characteristics of that limitation becomes important.
For multiplayer games with many participants, more threads with a I7 is a plus and you should do better.
If your games are sims, strategy or mmo types,, they tend to be limited by single thread core performance.
Those do not typically need high fps performance anyway.
Fast action shooters tend to be graphics limited so cpu performance differences will be minor.

 

[-kiddo-]

I would absolutely not try to stream at 144hz. Cap it at 60 or 75fps. There is no CPU in existence that will not have frame drops above ~75fps in a majority of titles.

I didn't mean Im gonna stream 144 fps. If I will stream, I will do it 60fps for sure. I meant that I want to see stable 140 fps on my screen. Even when I stream or record.

 

[-kiddo-]

Some games are cpu limited and some are graphics limited.

If your games are cpu limited, then the characteristics of that limitation becomes important.
For multiplayer games with many participants, more threads with a I7 is a plus and you should do better.
If your games are sims, strategy or mmo types,, they tend to be limited by single thread core performance.
Those do not typically need high fps performance anyway.
Fast action shooters tend to be graphics limited so cpu performance differences will be minor.

I currently got into Overwatch and as far as I know it's cpu limited. Overall I play more fps games than else, sometimes I may play csgo ( I know this game will look fine even with i3 processor ), Arma 3, CoD. I rarely play MOBA, MMO type of games, maybe some new releases, but not for a long time.

 

[synphul]

I think you're expecting too much. There's no cpu that I'm aware of which will give you constant solid 140fps, even a 6700k. Just because 144hz monitors exist doesn't mean today's hardware can do it. Pair it with a 5960x oc'd on an x99 board with 64gb of ram and 3x gtx 1080's in sli and you're probably not going to maintain 140fps.

Only you can decide what's 'worth it' but I wouldn't spend $500+ to get a couple more fps going to skylake. I understand you're not in the u.s. so your prices may vary but it's looking like roughly $335 for a 4790k or $450-500 for the 6700k by the time you factor in the motherboard, ddr4 ram and make sure you have a decent cooler since the 6700k doesn't ship with one.

In addition I'm not sure how low you'd have to lower the quality settings on overwatch to get over 100fps with the 390 gpu. At 1080p ultra settings the 390x (stronger than the 390 you have) was able to average only 115fps, dropping to 91fps and even as low as 60fps, a far cry from the 140fps you're seeking. That's paired with an i7 5930k and 16gb of ddr4.
http://www.gamersnexus.net/game-bench/2200-overwatch-gpu-benchmark-and-fps-tests

Add streaming to that and your fps are going to drop even further, likely below 90fps.

 

[-kiddo-]

I think you're expecting too much. There's no cpu that I'm aware of which will give you constant solid 140fps, even a 6700k. Just because 144hz monitors exist doesn't mean today's hardware can do it. Pair it with a 5960x oc'd on an x99 board with 64gb of ram and 3x gtx 1080's in sli and you're probably not going to maintain 140fps.

Only you can decide what's 'worth it' but I wouldn't spend $500+ to get a couple more fps going to skylake. I understand you're not in the u.s. so your prices may vary but it's looking like roughly $335 for a 4790k or $450-500 for the 6700k by the time you factor in the motherboard, ddr4 ram and make sure you have a decent cooler since the 6700k doesn't ship with one.

In addition I'm not sure how low you'd have to lower the quality settings on overwatch to get over 100fps with the 390 gpu. At 1080p ultra settings the 390x (stronger than the 390 you have) was able to average only 115fps, dropping to 91fps and even as low as 60fps, a far cry from the 140fps you're seeking. That's paired with an i7 5930k and 16gb of ddr4.
http://www.gamersnexus.net/game-bench/2200-overwatch-gpu-benchmark-and-fps-tests

Add streaming to that and your fps are going to drop even further, likely below 90fps.

Okay, I have average of 140 fps right now with my i5-4690K, not maxed out settings and not the lowest (I have texture/texture filtering/model quality and some other settings on high and few on low). I don't play offline games, maybe only new releases, so I'm don't really care if I'll have less than 144fps in offline games.. As I said I can afford all upgrades that will be needed for 6700k. I didn't open this thread to ask if it's worth to spend some extra cash to get 6700k instead of 4790k. I started it to understand if it's worth switching to 6700k than to 4790k performance-wise.

 

[synphul]

I didn't say anything about going from the i5 to an i7, I was comparing the i7's and when you mentioned you wanted x amount of fps wanted you to realize that unless you turn settings down, you may not get what you're after. Even adding an i7, if you begin streaming those games your fps will drop with either i7. I was pointing out the cost difference between them, in the end it's your decision. Money aside, the best quad core you're going to get at the moment is the 6700k, it's all that's available.

Others have pointed out there's little difference between the two i7's. You want to stream without loss of fps, that's not going to happen unless you use a devoted separate machine to encoding/streaming while gaming on the other.

Using obs, this user had 15-20fps hit when streaming/encoding and a 4790k.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Twitch/comments/3v5wa4/1520_fps_drop_when_streaming_or_recording_in_obs/

This has a short explanation of using a dual system for streaming to prevent fps loss.
http://www.highgroundgaming.com/streaming/best-capture-cards/

Yes I understand you're asking between two cpu's, but at the end of the day differences between the two may not achieve your actual goal which is to stream without fps loss. On the cpu front, if a couple fps mean that much to you and money isn't an issue, go for the newest i7. People don't need to debate which one is faster even if it's slightly faster and considerably more than a drop in place solution like the 4790k. If you're debating them then cost is important to you to some degree and only you can decide if the cost is worth it.

 

[frank_hnd]

I would sell the i5 and get the i7-4790K.
you already have a build and it is not worth changing it completely for HT.

 

[-kiddo-]

I didn't say anything about going from the i5 to an i7, I was comparing the i7's and when you mentioned you wanted x amount of fps wanted you to realize that unless you turn settings down, you may not get what you're after. Even adding an i7, if you begin streaming those games your fps will drop with either i7. I was pointing out the cost difference between them, in the end it's your decision. Money aside, the best quad core you're going to get at the moment is the 6700k, it's all that's available.

Others have pointed out there's little difference between the two i7's. You want to stream without loss of fps, that's not going to happen unless you use a devoted separate machine to encoding/streaming while gaming on the other.

Using obs, this user had 15-20fps hit when streaming/encoding and a 4790k.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Twitch/comments/3v5wa4/1520_fps_drop_when_streaming_or_recording_in_obs/

This has a short explanation of using a dual system for streaming to prevent fps loss.
http://www.highgroundgaming.com/streaming/best-capture-cards/

Yes I understand you're asking between two cpu's, but at the end of the day differences between the two may not achieve your actual goal which is to stream without fps loss. On the cpu front, if a couple fps mean that much to you and money isn't an issue, go for the newest i7. People don't need to debate which one is faster even if it's slightly faster and considerably more than a drop in place solution like the 4790k. If you're debating them then cost is important to you to some degree and only you can decide if the cost is worth it.

You gave me an idea lol. Build a streaming pc with my old cpu (i5) and it's leftovers and make a dual-pc setup.