Core i7 6950X / 6900K / 6850K & 6800K Processor Review

#5281857

iancook221188

2016-05-31 08:23

disappointed in the prise hopefully it is just this one chip that is the bad overclocker

#5281868

Xuanzang

2016-05-31 08:46

Nice review there. 🙂 http://s33.postimg.org/95yh7cvr3/sammy_griner_success_kid_meme.jpg imgupload

#5281873

shamus21

2016-05-31 08:58

How come you always get poor quality CPU`s Hilbert, don`t intel like much 🙂

#5281874

Hilbert Hagedoorn

Administrator

2016-05-31 09:06

How come you always get poor quality CPU`s Hilbert, don`t intel like much 🙂

Hey what can I say .. at least I achieved 4.4 GHz on all cores, it just required many volts with our sample. Perhaps with few BIOS updates temps will stabilize a bit better.

#5281879

jura11

2016-05-31 09:34

Nice one HH,just that price for 6950x,I expected around $1000 for that one,but that price I think is close to Xeon Thanks,Jura

#5281882

MegaFalloutFan

2016-05-31 09:38

I have to say that IMO the review sucked, especially in video game department, instead of doing a proper last gen vs new gen comparison so people with previous Gen could see if its worth upgrading, we got top of the line Intels compared vs low cost AMDs that not really in the same price/performance category. Honestly, I have absolutely no idea now how fast 6800K vs 5820K in video games and if its worth upgrading, if it can be as easily overclocked to 4.5Ghz and how hot its compared to 5820K.

#5281886

Hilbert Hagedoorn

Administrator

2016-05-31 09:51

I have to say that IMO the review sucked

Thanks so much !

#5281890

jura11

2016-05-31 09:56

Hi HH Assume are have tested ES sample or did you tested retail sample? If its ES then I would expect poor OC Thanks,Jura

#5281891

Warboy

2016-05-31 09:58

Hey what can I say .. at least I achieved 4.4 GHz on all cores, it just required many volts with our sample. Perhaps with few BIOS updates temps will stabilize a bit better.

Seems you didn't try pushing uncore which is helpful for memory bandwidth and better L3 performance. I heard Intel was going to "unofficially" support Uncore overclocking with BWE.

#5281892

MainFrame Alpha

2016-05-31 09:59

when i woke up this morning i did not see this one coming... honestly HH how long have you been sitting on this one... good one 🤓 Great review as always, although the price tag OC performance on the big guns are disappointing, still a six core upgrade on a one of those brand new X99s would be something from my old companion mobe, when ever such a combo may arrive here, if it ever arrives here knowing where here is :3eyes:and never forget the insane price tag it is gonna show up with for the whole package.:bang: still for every day use and gaming i don know is it worth it to choose an X99 over a Z170 combo specially noting that 6700K can go head to head with the big size over priced brother.

#5281893

BLEH!

2016-05-31 10:00

This may be an upgrade path for me if it supports win 7, cos of weird hardware limitations I'm stuck there for now (firewire soundcard). Good review, HH, cheers, but that OC performance is a bit... meh.

#5281895

MainFrame Alpha

2016-05-31 10:03

I have to say that IMO the review sucked, especially in video game department, instead of doing a proper last gen vs new gen comparison so people with previous Gen could see if its worth upgrading, we got top of the line Intels compared vs low cost AMDs that not really in the same price/performance category. Honestly, I have absolutely no idea now how fast 6800K vs 5820K in video games and if its worth upgrading, if it can be as easily overclocked to 4.5Ghz and how hot its compared to 5820K.

Dude, if you wanna compare performance there are plenty of sites and software for that, giving the time HH was given for the review and effort i guess the benchmarks are more than enough to give you a clear view on over all performance comparison.

#5281898

Ryu5uzaku

2016-05-31 10:07

Ok. Now I am interested. Which would be the best option out of these to get? As in well either of the 6-core cpus I guess. Great review. Could be my next upgrade step.

#5281901

Lowice

2016-05-31 10:11

So no need for me to upgrade my i7 3820 when it is only used for gaming then.

#5281903

Hilbert Hagedoorn

Administrator

2016-05-31 10:11

Ok. Now I am interested. Which would be the best option out of these to get? As in well either of the 6-core cpus I guess. Great review. Could be my next upgrade step.

The 6800K has the sweet spot if 6 cores are enough for you as well as 28 PCIe Gen 3.0 lanes (opposed to 40). Being a K model you'll have the six cores at 4 GHz in no time eliminating the per core disadvantage.

#5281905

Vipu2

2016-05-31 10:16

And new CPUs requiring Win 10 lol. I will be upgrading to Skylake or something at some point I guess, because I don't want Win 10 right now.

Where does this info come from? I didnt see about win10 req in this review.

#5281906

Ryu5uzaku

2016-05-31 10:19

The 6800K has the sweet spot if 6 cores are enough for you as well as 28 PCIe Gen 3.0 lanes (opposed to 40). Being a K model you'll have the six cores at 4 GHz in no time eliminating the per core disadvantage.

Ok. It seems so. I don't need 40 lanes for sure, since I will be back to single card configuration. And the price difference between 6800K and 6900K is huge. Thanks for the input 🙂 I will be upgrading later this summer so 6800K it will be most likely.

#5281927

weasel

2016-05-31 11:04

Very nice review HH good work again.Its a pitty if its true you can only use these newer cpu's on win 10.I'm running windows 10 on my second system from the beginning and i'm not really impressed.But all in all there will come a time we shall have to lay windows 7 to rest but not for now.(for me) 🙂 If the cpu's supported win 7 i would consider buying a 6900K immediately.

#5281935

Yogi

2016-05-31 11:27

Out of curiosity, does anybody know if AMD's Summit Ridge will be competing against any of Intel's Haswell-E line up?

#5281936

alanm

2016-05-31 11:30

Awesome review. A rarity among CPU reviews in that it includes gaming benches at 1440p. In another thread where we were discussing CPU performance at high resolutions, guru 'vase' made the insightful comment:

cpu workload of 3d games is a combination of processing game logic / calculations (not affected by any graphical changes like resolution or other parameters) and drawcalls (not affected by resolution itself!). -> if you cap your fps at a point that is always in the "delivery zone" and raise or lower the resolution there is no impact on the cpu (given you can max the capped fps at all those resolutions) if a graphical option changes the amount of objects to be rendered on the screen (mesh increase ..etc.) then drawcalls are increased and cpu load will raise even for same fps. => resolution increase in a static fps environment dont shift a load, they are just more taxing to the GPU which may result in the GPU reaching 100% utilization and a resulting fps decrease -> followed by CPU utilization decrease because less fps means less drawcalls.

I think we've reached the stage where 1440p GPU performance can now reveal more of a CPUs potential for bottlenecking than before at high res. Of course this wont be much apparent when most of the CPUs tested are all high end and close to one another in this review (indicating GPU reached its limits), but the AMD processors are weak enough to demonstrate high res bottlenecking. And of course things can vary dramatically from game to game. Just wish we had more variance in the Intel chips used, ie, mainstream 2500k, 2600k to get a fuller picture. Still, thanks for a great review.