1151 vs 2011v3

R

runffs

n00b
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
53
Well boys and girls the day has finally arrived. It's upgrade time and I would like some input as to the best way to go. Which pathway do you think has the best lifespan? Upgrade possibilities?

Main uses are some D3 and Civ V and basic business software. I do some Autocad and inventor 2014.

I currently have a socket 775 Asus p5w64ws pRo motherboard with a q6700 core 2 duo oc to 3.3ghz with 8gb DDR2 400mhz ram. I have dual radeon 280x video cards but those could be changed for Nvidia to allow an hdmi 2.0 samsung configuration.

I am looking to go either 1151 or 2011v3. What are your thoughts?

Leaning towards the 1151 but lack of the 6700k is a hinderance. Of course I've waiting since 2003 so I could probably hold of a few more weeks if it's the best path.

What say you?
 
You could always do the LGA 775 mod while you wait for a 6700k. 280x CF on a C2Q is just brutal!
 
Last edited:
Are you going to be overclocking? If so, I'd opt for the 5820K and enjoy the extra cores. Sounds like you keep your rigs for a years, so I think the extra cores would benefit you over time.
 
All depends on cost and OP's budget. If parts are cheap where you are and cost no problem with the latest and greatest, the 5820k hands down. Otherwise the 1151 stuff is fairly decent too without breaking the bank much.
 
Great feedback.

Budget is pretty much open.

Yes I do intend an OC. Not the wild pushing the envelope like I used to but hey, I'll take free speed.

Is the 5830k just a better binned 5820k?
 
I'd do 5820k. Plus it's been out for a while. Being an "early adopter" has always screwed me. We have a better idea of which motherboards are best and they've been updated and such to resolve issues.

I got a 5960x a while back and it's been great. OCs to 4.6 at 1.35V rock solid. Generally 5820ks OC better.
 
Well, I wasn't really considering going stupid until i read the reviews to the 18 core Xeon. I am now considering it after reading this:

Faster than usain bolt with half a pound of sausages down his pants, being chased by a starved cheetah riding a dodge tomahawk.
Can warp space and create microscopic black holes under heavy loads. I lost my wife, kids and cat in one of said black holes.....which was an unexpected bonus.
 
runffs said:
Great feedback.

Budget is pretty much open.

Yes I do intend an OC. Not the wild pushing the envelope like I used to but hey, I'll take free speed.

Is the 5830k just a better binned 5820k?
Click to expand...

5930k has more PCIe lanes available to it. 40 vs. 28 IIRC. I bought the 5930 since I figure I can do full x16/x16 SLI and still have room for a full speed PCIe SSD at some point. As far as OCing, I haven't read up on if it's better or worse than 5820k.
 
I am in the same situation and I am just about ready to go with 2011v3. If it were 1 year ago, the choice between 1150 and 2011v3 would make me lean towards 1150 mainly due to the cost of DDR4. But now that DDR4 has somewhat normalized since Skylake has arrived, the cost difference between 1151 and 2011v3 is marginal. The only real reason to go with Skylake/LGA 1151 vs 2011v3 is the power consumption. Although TBH, I feel like the power consumption difference is worth it because you get at least 2 extra cores to make up for it.
 
I just realized that the 6700K only supports 16 pcie lanes, there goes my dream of PCIE SSDs.
 
M76 said:
I just realized that the 6700K only supports 16 pcie lanes, there goes my dream of PCIE SSDs.
Click to expand...

16 PCIe 3.0 lanes that are typically used for graphics, in addition to the 20 PCIe 3.0 lanes supported via the PCH, which is connected to the CPU using the new gen DMI 3.0.
 
M76 said:
I just realized that the 6700K only supports 16 pcie lanes, there goes my dream of PCIE SSDs.
Click to expand...

Z170 PCH lanes are all 3.0, almost every board has an x4 3.0 M.2 slot and can run a PCI-E slot at x4 too in addition to the two x8 routed thru the CPU... PCI-E/M.2 SSD are perfectly viable, two in RAID might get bottlenecked if you could actually use them to full capacity but that's a pretty narrow usage case...
 
I opted for Z170/Skylake... For most of what I'm doing (gaming, photo work, and coding) clock speed and IPC will win out over two extra cores (even if the gap is as relatively small as 400MHz + the IPC difference). They'd be handy when editing video but that's about it for me.

Less heat, about $75-125 cheaper (because I'm nowhere near a Microcenter, not that it mattered much), slightly more modern feature set (USB Type C, etc), and I like the typical Z170 layout better... That is, in terms of slot placement for SLI/CF + sound card + possibly an SSD if it runs too hot on M.2.

The first ASUS Z170 boards seemed more mature at launch than X99 were, possibly ever... The Haswell-E IMC is finicky but memory OC wasn't a big factor for me one way or the other. You can't go wrong either way really, just make sure you know exactly why you're opting for one or the other.

If you'll really benefit from the extra cores (now, not in some indefinite point in the future when X or Y is better threaded), then you'll probably already know it. If you don't, then look up some tests, I was surprised how little 6+ cores helped with PS/Lr. I wouldn't know about AutoCAD, probably more multi threaded tho.
 
Last edited:
Impulse said:
Z170 PCH lanes are all 3.0, almost every board has an x4 3.0 M.2 slot and can run a PCI-E slot at x4 too in addition to the two x8 routed thru the CPU... PCI-E/M.2 SSD are perfectly viable, two in RAID might get bottlenecked if you could actually use them to full capacity but that's a pretty narrow usage case...
Click to expand...

Thanks I didn't know the M.2 was independent from the CPU.
 
You actually end up with the same amount of lanes with Skylake as with a 5820, just comes down to how they're split... The 5820K provides 28 lanes, the X99 adds 8 PCI-E 2.0 lanes; 36 total. The main advantage there is you can run three x8 slots off the CPU for tri-SLI if you're into that.

With Skylake you have 16 lanes, then 20 more PCI-E 3.0 lanes from the Z170 PCH; 36 total... So you're only gonna get two x8 slots off the CPU, no tri-SLI, but there's now plenty of lanes to go around for storage etc and everything is 3.0 (unlike Z97 which only gave you another 8 2.0).

Now if you're looking at a 5830K or better then you get 40 lanes off the CPU (48 total), X99 can be confusing like that, tho high end Z170 boards can be equally confusing in how they distribute things around. Either way you're looking at a big big jump from a C2D. :p

(although you said Q6700, that was a C2Q, big jump either way!)
 
Last edited:
I'm in the same boat as the OP. My htpc/gaming/server system has a Q9550 right now(original Q6600). I am debating going to a E5 2620V3 or a 6700K. I dont think I need 40 lanes because I will have a raid card and one SSD, likely I will never have PCIE based storage or anything more than dual SLI. The only thing I can see benefiting me by having extra cores is faster plex stream transcoding, faster high def video encoding and more cores to share amongst two or three VM's.

The only thing I am skeptical about is the reliability of the X99 boards. Seems like most boards are plagued with issues and that is a huge turn off because above all else I need this system to be dead stable. My current system has a gigabyte UD3R and it has been SOLID for the last, 10 years maybe and the last 3 running 24/7. So I wonder if the issues have been resolved because I hate being an early adopter. On the other hand, maybe getting a proven 4770 is the way to go.

I guess what I am looking for thoughts and experience with the X99 systems.
 
Last edited:
same situation. Looking at replacing my current rig and cant decide between a 5820 or a 6700. I'm not building tomorrow, but within the next 2-3 months. The 2 extra cores on the 5820 would be pretty nice but the fact that [H] has been praising the Z170 chipset for its maturity has me leaning towards the 6700.

The costs between the chips is very similar since I can take a weekend trip to ATL to visit friends and the Micro-Center :D
 
I'm wondering if the price of the 6700 and their mobos will come down in the next month or 2? The reason why I can't make up my mind btween the 5820k and the 6700k is I'm unsure if I even need the 2 extra cores. My computer is an all around media center/htpc. I have it hooked up to my projector in the living room. It's used for gaming, webbrowsing, netflix, torrents, and gaming.

I leave the machine running 24/7 so the lower power draw of the 6700k is nice, but I also leave plenty of things running int he background running such as my torrent program and Plex. If I am about to play a game most of the time the only thing I close would be my browser.

So the 2 extra cores of the 5820k do appeal to me in the multitasking aspect, but I'm not sure if it would make much of a difference. My OC'd 4 core phenom 2 seems to do alright.
 
TMCM said:
My computer is an all around media center/htpc. I have it hooked up to my projector in the living room. It's used for gaming, webbrowsing, netflix, torrents, and gaming.
Click to expand...

For this use, a 6700K will be plenty, faster and use less energy.
 
mda said:
For this use, a 6700K will be plenty, faster and use less energy.
Click to expand...

but will those background activities hog up enough resources to warrant getting a 5820? I'm not a bleeding edge gamer by any means. Just see my sig for my current machine, but I will buy it and use it for 5+ years with the only upgrade being GPUs every 2-3 years.
 
TMCM said:
but will those background activities hog up enough resources to warrant getting a 5820? I'm not a bleeding edge gamer by any means. Just see my sig for my current machine, but I will buy it and use it for 5+ years with the only upgrade being GPUs every 2-3 years.
Click to expand...
You dont need a 6 core/12 thread cpu to do what you are doing. Even an i5 would cope just fine and a Skylake i7 is way more than plenty.
 
misterbobby said:
You dont need a 6 core/12 thread cpu to do what you are doing. Even an i5 would cope just fine and a Skylake i7 is way more than plenty.
Click to expand...

I'd go a step further and say the i5 is probably good enough for most people. If you "need" the i7, the 5820k is going to perform those tasks faster anyway.
 
I went with a 5820k. The more cores the better. I don't like the idea of paying for an IGP that I will never use. If I was going for a basic box, I would go Intel NUC with an Iris IGP.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top