Performance differences between i5-6600K vs. i5-6600 vs. i5-6600T

J

JediFonger

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Messages
2,777
i've been out of the PC-building/modding field for quite a many years.

just got myself a skylake rig using i5-6600T for work and noticed the CPU is dogone slow!

if i got the 6600K or 6600, will that be faster?

this is the list of skylake processors: Comparison List Update: All Skylake Models - CPUs > CPU Specs - Reviews - ocaholic

6600k is t 3.5ghz

6600 is 3.3

6600t is at 2.7


i just assumed frequency didn't matter as much and these newer processor SKUs revolve around power/energy saving modes. but i didn't realize i was also taking a performance hit by going with 6600t

thoughts?

PS can't get the i7 cause it's a wee bit beyond budget
 
Why not just wait a bit, save a few more Drachma and then get the Core i7. If you are doing any productivity work with your PC and not just gaming, having a hyperthreaded processor could be a performance boost.

The T series processors are Ultra-Low Power processors designed for notebooks and 2-in-1's and similar devices that are most likely battery powered or partially battery powered.
 
it's a work budget thing (dont need to get into that). the long story short is ultimately i want to get a single socket based system revolving around a 2011 socket system board. this is now just a stepping stone for the time being. i think when i get there and i use xeon, all these things will be not an issue. but i think i made a mistake in getting the 6600T. just need a temporary work-around.

but i am correct right? the t series perform way alower than the K
 
If you have a Z170 Mobo, you can get atleast a 4.2 Ghz on the 6600T with little effort and mediocre cooling. This will make day and night difference in day to day tasks.
Other mobos may be able to lock it to its max turbo.

I went from 2.7ghz to 4.7ghz on my 6400 and it is very noticable.
 
have asus q170, that is an interesting thought.... i use noctua 9 somn cooling. i haven't OC in a long time.
 
JediFonger said:
have asus q170, that is an interesting thought.... i use noctua 9 somn cooling. i haven't OC in a long time.
Click to expand...

You can't overclock on a Q170 board, that's buisiness-focused.

Just buy the i5 6600 and call it a day. It's the same cost as the processor you bought, but about 30% faster.

And next time, do some research instead of wasting someone else's money. You should ALWAYS ask us :D
 
I think an interesting comparison would be i5-6600T versus G4400. That Pentium has the advantage of more watts.
WheresWaldo said:
The T series processors are Ultra-Low Power processors designed for notebooks and 2-in-1's and similar devices that are most likely battery powered or partially battery powered.
Click to expand...
Are you sure you're not thinking of Skylake-U rather than Skylake-T? I can't remember ever seeing a "T" chip in a portable computer. If it exists then I would like to see an example.
Edit: When I say portable I mean powered by battery.
 
Last edited:
the_servicer said:
I think an interesting comparison would be i5-6600T versus G4400. That Pentium has the advantage of more watts.
.
Click to expand...

The Pentium is no faster at single-threaded tasks. But it's 1/3 the price, because it's higher power, and only two cores, and a weaker integrated GPU.

Intel makes several flavors of the i5. A full-power 65w version, a half-power 35w version. They all cost about the same price, and the 35w version is just there for people who want to build very small quiet systems, where price is not so important. But you sacrifice 30% of your peak performance for that low power, which kinda defeats the whole concept behind getting the i5.

The 3.7 GHz Core i3 6100 is a far better value than the 2.7 GHz i5 6600T, and it costs about half as much and at 51w it uses only slightly higher power.
 
Last edited:
Yes I was thinking U even though I saw T.

the_servicer said:
I think an interesting comparison would be i5-6600T versus G4400. That Pentium has the advantage of more watts.

Are you sure you're not thinking of Skylake-U rather than Skylake-T? I can't remember ever seeing a "T" chip in a portable computer. If it exists then I would like to see an example.
Edit: When I say portable I mean powered by battery.
Click to expand...
 
defaultluser said:
The Pentium is no faster at single-threaded tasks. But it's 1/3 the price, because it's higher power, and only two cores, and a weaker integrated GPU.

Intel makes several flavors of the i5. A full-power 65w version, a half-power 35w version. They all cost about the same price, and the 35w version is just there for people who want to build very small quiet systems, where price is not so important. But you sacrifice 30% of your peak performance for that low power, which kinda defeats the whole concept behind getting the i5.

The 3.7 GHz Core i3 6100 is a far better value than the 2.7 GHz i5 6600T, and it costs about half as much and at 51w it uses only slightly higher power.
Click to expand...

You are forgetting the full power 95W i5s like the one in my sig.
 
defaultluser said:
The Pentium is no faster at single-threaded tasks. But it's 1/3 the price, because it's higher power, and only two cores, and a weaker integrated GPU.

Intel makes several flavors of the i5. A full-power 65w version, a half-power 35w version. They all cost about the same price, and the 35w version is just there for people who want to build very small quiet systems, where price is not so important. But you sacrifice 30% of your peak performance for that low power, which kinda defeats the whole concept behind getting the i5.

The 3.7 GHz Core i3 6100 is a far better value than the 2.7 GHz i5 6600T, and it costs about half as much and at 51w it uses only slightly higher power.
Click to expand...

I am used to using CPU w/ 90W power. But I'm confused as I haven't keep track of these half power CPU

from this bench mark link

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html

a i5-6600 has a benchmark of 7741

and the i5-6600T has a benchmark of 7318

so why is JediFonger said he "takes a performance hit"?

my Xeon is 3 yr. old, and the benchmark is only 4598 and it's running at 90W
 
wow cant believe it's been more than a year... i ended up getting approved for i7-6700 regular and called it a day. it is most def a huge improvement... but like night/day not really. i dunno what it is but every once in awhile i'll see some 'stutters' even in 2D desktop mode.

i've experienced this from back in amd mp2800x2, amd phenom t1100 6core and now on a new to me i7-6700. so weird! it can get so bad that my foobar2000 will choke on musicplayback in the background. very odd. am i pushinf these cpu's beyond what they're capable of?
 
We can't begin to give you any performance insight if you don't tell us what you're running simultaneously.

Tell us what your applications are and how many you typically run at-once?

How much ram do you have?

Also, does your system have an SSD?

If it's just audio problems, you might be having latency issues. There's drivers and custom software that can add serious latency .
 
i7-6700
64gb ram
1tb samsung 850pro
geforce 1060 6gb driving 1x 4k, 3x2k
mobo driving the other 4k

w7x64
waterfox, chrome, ie, outlook, slack, lync sometimes the other msoffice packages and foobar in background. ram is barely used. cpu temps maxes out at 32C ish maybe 35 cant recall.

cpu turbo was enabled, noctua 120mm


my previous build ran similar apps but was:
phenomii t1100
16gb ram
gigabyte 890fxa ud5 v2
same everything else

prior to that
mp2800 dually
tyan 2895
max ram cant remember now
no ssd but fast 10k rpm raptor drives
radeon 4890 max edition his
 
upload_2017-10-9_10-19-21.png


going to disable CPU turbo mode... (which is always on default in the past)
 
Yup, you'll have to do some research on your own. You might try joining another forum with more audio people. They tend to deal with latency issues more often, and can give you a more in-depth list of suggestions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top