Shotta06 :
atomicWAR :
Shotta06 :
82C is warm but as long as your staying less then 85C you should be ok. i7 7700k are known to run hot, even too hot at stock setttings. Honestly the i7 6700K is a better CPU IMO for OCing do to the crappy TIM on the 7700K considering they have the same IPC (instructions per clock). Anyways I wouldn't stress your temps to hard. You could try reapplying your CPU paste and if your still not happy you could look into de-lidding your CPU to bring temps down
6700K is not a better CPU.... Not by any benchmark I've seen. How do you figure ?
IPC is the exact same as kaby lake (ie 4ghz/ same OC on both chips gets same scores). It does not have the heat issues kaby lake has due to bad tim...though both use it. Intel even had a huge press release saying you should not over clock their overclocking i7 7700k due to heat issues. The i7 7700K is known to jump up to 90C at random with no load which effects the long term viability of the chip. Those are my big reasons. Granted kaby lake when working properly does OC better then skylake but all the other issues over shadow it IMHO. Do a google search if you don't believe me. Here's one bit on it here below...
http://www.pcgamer.com/intels-tells-core-i7-7700k-owners-to-stop-overclocking-to-avoid-high-temps/
So, why is that EVERY benchmark with stock 7700K better and or equal to a 6700k OC'D to 4.6ghz. Yes at stock 4.2ghz for the 7700k a 6700k can go head to head with a non OC'd 7700k. But with the correct knowledge and good cooler you can achieve 4.8 GHz even 5 GHz with a 7700k stable. Stock 7700k>6700k stock. OC 7700K>6700K OC.
show me where? at same clocks it kaby lake at best has a 7% lead and at worst is tied even.
http://wccftech.com/intel-core-i7-7700k-vs-core-i7-6700k-cpu-performance-tests/
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i7-7700K_vs_6700K_Game_Performance/
http://www.tweaktown.com/news/55219/7700k-vs-6700k-much-hotter-barely-faster/index.html
EVERYTHING I have read a said clock for clock skylake and kaby lake are extremely close in performance. The numbers do just barely lean in kaby lakes favor, never denied it. I said its faults were a bigger problem then a chips that performs near identically, though older, were. I had a chance to build my nephew an i7 7700k rig. This was very early into the launch. But because of the heat issues (intel had yet to announce anything) I went with the i7 6700K because I felt it was a safer bet for him. I was right. Within a month or so the chatter on the 7700 blew up. Where you're coming up with numbers like a stock i7 7700K at 4.2ghz will beat a i7 6700K @4.6GHZ I have not ever seen. Won't say they don't exist but they have not been in the mainstream tech media AFAIK. You can show me facts or at this point I'll assume troll. I have stated my opinion and backed it up with facts. Please do the same. Also note that that i7 6700k can OC to 4.8ghz...sometimes even 5ghz though as i stated before kaby lake does OC a little better so you may hit higher numbers more often when comparing a handful of cpus. Though in the end the heat issues plagues the i7 7700k make it a less the ideal choice IMO for overclockers or even the non-OC crowd. That's just my two cents based on the facts I have read. Show me something new and different it may sway me another way.