I7 6770K or I7 5820K Processor?

News & General Discussion
1

Hi, i will upgrade my system for Game Development and Unity. I’m thinking of these Processors:

i7 5820K (6 Cores 12 Threads) or i7 6770K (4 Cores 8 Threads)
I am thinking in changing my video Card to GeForce GTX 970M or 980M
and a good 16GB DDR4 ram. (thinking A-Data for design)

My questions are;
1- Is i7 6700K’s performance per core’s better than i7 5820k for 3D Unity game design? or Should I buy the i7 5820K since it has 2 more cores?
2- Which is better for multi core power and 3D gaming design?
and
3- What GeForce Video Card would be better for this purpose?

Thanks in advance
Castana

2

  1. Wait for Skylake based

  2. Skylake based

  3. Any that state that they explicitly support Direct X 12

2 Likes
3

I don’t think you can put a mobile based GPU in your upgraded desktop.

3 Likes
4

The 6000 series is Skylake. Just as 5000 is Broadwell and 4000 is Haswell. :wink:

1 Like
5

I though they might of been but when I looked there was a thread that claimed to have a user using the CPU in 2014…or maybe that was Google auto-correct.

Anyway, if those are Skylake you go for the one with more threads. If you buy the one with more cores you’ll want 32GB RAM.

1 Like
6

Most likely it was correcting the “6770” as there isn’t an actual processor with that number. There is a 6700 though.

1 Like
7

That’s the one in the thread.

1 Like
8

You should just get a 4790K, since it doesn’t require a new motherboard, and the 6700K isn’t that much faster.

–Eric

2 Likes
9

4790K: 4GHz, 4.5GHz turbo boost. Clear overall winner from a bang for the buck perspective.
58xx: Slower per core, and far hotter, more power draw.
6700K: Close to the 4790K, but only 4.2GHz turbo boost. Slight advantage in multi-core, but not one you’d notice. Still worse at single-core than 4790K.

Building Unity stuff and compiling code in that and/or VS? You should just get 8 or 16GB RAM, depending on how heavy your 3D scenes are. Maybe more if you’re going really crazy.

That’s point 1 and 2 :slight_smile:

Point 3:
A GTX 970 or similar will be fine, as the 980 again is a case of too much extra money for too little benefit. What resolutions are you designing for? At higher than 1440p you start gaining something from a 980. But remember that the vast majority of your potential audience have ratty systems, so sitting on a gaming beast can actually be somewhat of a drawback as a developer :wink:

I upgraded my Windows systemfrom an i5 to an i7, and for Unity or gaming I haven’t noticed a bit of difference (same GPU). The one thing that speeds up all my work is the SSD in each system. Working off a HDD on my i7-4790K gaming beast is slower than my i5 MBP with a PCIe-based SSD, or even my Mac mini with a SATA SSD.

So, to summarise:
1.Wrong question and no :slight_smile: (6700K is better performance, but it’s a moot point since 4790K is just as good)
2.They all add up to the same total performance score, so more cores aren’t really better with the current CPUs. Maybe a 14-core Xeon adds some benefit, but the price is far beyond what I’d want to shell out.
3.Anything above 960. Get a 980 or equivalent AMD if you feel that you deserve it :slight_smile:

4 Likes
10

I’m guessing you are already using SSDs…

1 Like
11

Hi All,
Thanks for your advices about this topic !
Castana1962
Pd. To goat. I am not using SSDs yet , for it, Could you advice any good of it?

12

I just tell people to get the largest Samsung 850 EVOs they can afford and not worry about anything else :slight_smile:

3 Likes
13

And you are asking about upgrading CPUs and GPUs and memory for speed? Upgrade HD 1st.

You can buy a Sata SSDs of 500GB for $200 (and less) and 1TB $300 and more (or close to 1TB).

1 Like
14

Did you notice that the 850 EVOs have a 2TB model now? If I were going to spend ~$700 on a drive though I doubt I would purchase one that is limited to SATA. I’d rather get one with a faster drive connection.

By the way I highly recommend PCPartPicker. Not only does it scan multiple sites for their prices, but it’ll tell you whether a part will work with another if you design a system configuration with it.

https://pcpartpicker.com/parts/internal-hard-drive/

2 Likes
15

Meh. I am the PC part picker, plus they don’t have any links to shops relevant to me.

If you’re looking at a 2TB PCIe SSD, I’m sure you’re no longer paying pocket change like $700 (plus VAT, if in Europe).

16

PCPartPicker is awesome. I just used it recently to spec out my latest system upgrade.

1 Like
17

Wait, what shops do you buy from then? It has all the major shops with the best prices. What am I missing?

1 Like
18

I strongly recommend picking up a smaller SSD, and then a much larger HDD, or hybrid drive to sit alongside the SSD. Something in the 128 - 256 Gigabyte range should be good for an SSD, and then a 1-2 Terabyte hard drive as your long-term storage device. I have a rig like this, and install most of my regularly-used applications and operating system on the SSD, and have most of my Steam library and media on the HDD. I have plenty of room to spare this way, and get very nice performance. This approach is also a lot easier on the wallet.

1 Like
19

I have a 1 TB samsung EVO SSD which did not cost too much. And next to it is the 3TB classic hard drive (penuts). I actually recommend using a larger SSD as these perform a lot better than smaller SSDs and Unity is accelerated by SSD (particularly enlighten).

2 Likes
20

I’d avoid getting a 128GB SSD. It’s too small to be practical and the price difference isn’t meaningful. The 850 EVO’s 256GB is only ~$20 more than its 128GB model. The 512GB one is closer to a real difference but it is still not double.

Currently Windows 10 is sitting at 19GB, Visual Studio 2015 at 34GB, Unity at 6.6GB, and Unreal at 16GB. This is already 3/4th of a 128GB drive and I’ve only scratched the surface of my regularly used applications list.

2 Likes