# X99 vs Z170 - which to prefer?



## Deleted member 138597 (Aug 27, 2015)

X99 & Z170 platforms are almost same in price. So tell me which is better, X99 or Z170? Z170 does seems to have more PCIe 3.0 lanes, USB ports and bandwith but lacks on SATA storage (although I care least about it). So, Z170 does look better on paper but how is it in real world? Is it _really_ better than X99 (PCH only)?

ark.intel.com/compare/81761,90591


----------



## RejZoR (Aug 27, 2015)

Actually, X99 has more lanes and I think even with basic 5820K CPU. On X99 you can actually run 2 graphic cards with PCIe x16 mode on both where Z170 can only do 2x PCIe x8 mode. I mean, even my ancient X58 can run 2x PCIe x16. Intel kinda reserved this to the highest end...

Skylake is certainly the way to go product node wise, however as things stand now, hexa cores sound more appealing.
Firstly, 6700k is actually a very crappy overclocker. Considering it's running at 4,2GHz and people brag about "extreme" overclocks and then they only get up to 4,7 GHz. If this is "extreme", then what's 5820K going from 3,3GHz to 4,5GHz? Also, with DX12, a lot of games displayed a huge benefit from more cores. So, even basic 5820K has 6 physical cores and 12 threads. Which is significant for today's "conditions". I mean, Skylake is still exactly the same configuration as prehistoric Core i7 920... Hell, even i7 980X was a hexa core and that was like 5+ years ago...

6700k caught my attention due to 16nm, but frankly, X99 with 5820K sounds like a better option...


----------



## Devon68 (Aug 27, 2015)

Only for gaming the X99 is not worth it. It's great and all but price/performance is just not there.


----------



## RejZoR (Aug 27, 2015)

It clocks really well. It's a 6 core. It'll matter for DX12. So it's future proof. Because of first two factors, it's also a really good cruncher. Skylake only has benefit at power efficiency. If you need the grunt, 5820K is the only way to go.


----------



## ne6togadno (Aug 27, 2015)

instead of asking for every part. give us a budget, link to the shop you will buy from and what you need pc for (resolution of your monitor too). we will give you full builds to chose from.


----------



## Deleted member 138597 (Aug 27, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> Actually, X99 has more lanes and I think even with basic 5820K CPU. On X99 you can actually run 2 graphic cards with PCIe x16 mode on both where Z170 can only do 2x PCIe x8 mode. I mean, even my ancient X58 can run 2x PCIe x16. Intel kinda reserved this to the highest end...
> 
> Skylake is certainly the way to go product node wise, however as things stand now, hexa cores sound more appealing.
> Firstly, 6700k is actually a very crappy overclocker. Considering it's running at 4,2GHz and people brag about "extreme" overclocks and then they only get up to 4,7 GHz. If this is "extreme", then what's 5820K going from 3,3GHz to 4,5GHz? Also, with DX12, a lot of games displayed a huge benefit from more cores. So, even basic 5820K has 6 physical cores and 12 threads. Which is significant for today's "conditions". I mean, Skylake is still exactly the same configuration as prehistoric Core i7 920... Hell, even i7 980X was a hexa core and that was like 5+ years ago...
> ...





RejZoR said:


> It clocks really well. It's a 6 core. It'll matter for DX12. So it's future proof. Because of first two factors, it's also a really good cruncher. Skylake only has benefit at power efficiency. If you need the grunt, 5820K is the only way to go.



So as it stands, even though Z170 is bringing "more" and "new", Haswell-E + X99 is a much better option than Skylake.


----------



## RejZoR (Aug 27, 2015)

I'd say yes. Skylake is tempting since it's so new, but the lack of extra cores (4C/8T is really an outdated design for 2015 high end). I was all hyped for the Skylake, but I'm also leaning towards 5820K and X99 now. Seeing how ridiculously long my current X58 platform with most basic CPU for it kept me running for so long I have a very good confidence in these as well. It is a bit more expensive, but then again I was looking at Sabertooth X99 motherboard so that's understandable... CPU itself is around the same price 5820K vs 6700K...


----------



## R-T-B (Aug 27, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> I'd say yes. Skylake is tempting since it's so new, but the lack of extra cores (4C/8T is really an outdated design for 2015 high end). I was all hyped for the Skylake, but I'm also leaning towards 5820K and X99 now. Seeing how ridiculously long my current X58 platform with most basic CPU for it kept me running for so long I have a very good confidence in these as well. It is a bit more expensive, but then again I was looking at Sabertooth X99 motherboard so that's understandable... CPU itself is around the same price 5820K vs 6700K...



The Sabertooth is a nice piece of hardware man.  My favorite X99 board so far, and I go through them like new pairs of shoes (3 since launch, trust me, my wallet hates me).

Given the choice between Skylake and X99 on mobos alone, I'd go with X99 just for that board.  And the additional cores doesn't hurt either.

The only real question I have if I were upgrading now vs soon is whether or not Skylake-E will be released.


----------



## GhostRyder (Aug 27, 2015)

Shamonto Hasan Easha said:


> X99 & Z170 platforms are almost same in price. So tell me which is better, X99 or Z170? Z170 does seems to have more PCIe 3.0 lanes, USB ports and bandwith but lacks on SATA storage (although I care least about it). So, Z170 does look better on paper but how is it in real world? Is it _really_ better than X99 (PCH only)?
> 
> ark.intel.com/compare/81761,90591


 I prefer the X99 especially now because the new skylake processors barely have any upgrade CPU wise.  You can now get a 5820K and a cheaper X99 motherboard for not much more (Around $50+ bucks) than a 6700K and Z170 motherboard depending on the price of the Z170 board and you end up with 2 cores and 4 more threads total.

For gaming, they may perform similarly but the 5820K having more cores might be better in the long run.


----------



## Schmuckley (Aug 27, 2015)

I'm going to say z170 for 2 reasons:
1) Intel realized that FIVR is fail and removed it on z170.
2) Noteworthy higher IPC for gaming.
I'm having some x99 regret right now.


----------



## RejZoR (Aug 27, 2015)

And FIVR is suppose to make a comeback after Skylake and its refresh...


----------



## n-ster (Aug 27, 2015)

Is there any features the Z170 has that X99 can't have? So far they both seem to have USB 3.1 (including Type-C) and M.2 x4, which are what many would care about

In terms of price, at least here in Canada, it can be a decent difference. 100-150$ more for the motherboard, i7 6700K is maybe 50$ cheaper than the 5820K, the i5 6600K is ~180$ cheaper. The i7 6700K is surprising performing very close to the 5820K in multi-threaded and beats it easily in single threaded applications. Saving 300$ and going i5 6600K seems like a good compromise, and you have to admire the 6600K's power consumption!


----------



## Deleted member 138597 (Aug 28, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> And FIVR is suppose to make a comeback after Skylake and its refresh...


Wait, what? Why? Standalone FIVR is much better. Would you tell me where did you get the info?


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Aug 28, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> Actually, X99 has more lanes and I think even with basic 5820K CPU. On X99 you can actually run 2 graphic cards with PCIe x16 mode on both where Z170 can only do 2x PCIe x8 mode. I mean, even my ancient X58 can run 2x PCIe x16. Intel kinda reserved this to the highest end...
> 
> Skylake is certainly the way to go product node wise, however as things stand now, hexa cores sound more appealing.
> Firstly, 6700k is actually a very crappy overclocker. Considering it's running at 4,2GHz and people brag about "extreme" overclocks and then they only get up to 4,7 GHz. If this is "extreme", then what's 5820K going from 3,3GHz to 4,5GHz? Also, with DX12, a lot of games displayed a huge benefit from more cores. So, even basic 5820K has 6 physical cores and 12 threads. Which is significant for today's "conditions". I mean, Skylake is still exactly the same configuration as prehistoric Core i7 920... Hell, even i7 980X was a hexa core and that was like 5+ years ago...
> ...


5820k can only do x16 x8  multi GPU config,or x8 x8 x8. 5920 and 5960x can do x16 x16


----------



## RejZoR (Aug 28, 2015)

It's weird how they dumbed down PCIe lanes for graphic cards. My X58 with the most basic CPU you can stick into it, the i7 920 and I can have full dual x16. It's "just" v2.0 but still, it was max available back then. I know x8 has a minimal difference, but it's high end platform, one would expect a bit more even when using only 5820K CPU. It was one of major reasons why I've gone X58 back then, consumer versions were far more gimped in this regard. And even though I don't use multi-gfx configuration, it's nice to have full options available on system that you can use for 5+ years (like I have and still am).


----------



## Deleted member 138597 (Aug 28, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> It's weird how they dumbed down PCIe lanes for graphic cards. My X58 with the most basic CPU you can stick into it, the i7 920 and I can have full dual x16. It's "just" v2.0 but still, it was max available back then. I know x8 has a minimal difference, but it's high end platform, one would expect a bit more even when using only 5820K CPU. It was one of major reasons why I've gone X58 back then, consumer versions were far more gimped in this regard. And even though I don't use multi-gfx configuration, it's nice to have full options available on system that you can use for 5+ years (like I have and still am).



Actually, that's what happens when you own the market, and there's none to challenge.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Aug 28, 2015)

I think Z170 is generally better than X99 because it's a big step forward in terms of technology.  Z170 will not be better than the next HEDT chipset though because it will lose that technical edge.


----------



## GhostRyder (Aug 28, 2015)

Shamonto Hasan Easha said:


> X99 & Z170 platforms are almost same in price. So tell me which is better, X99 or Z170? Z170 does seems to have more PCIe 3.0 lanes, USB ports and bandwith but lacks on SATA storage (although I care least about it). So, Z170 does look better on paper but how is it in real world? Is it _really_ better than X99 (PCH only)?
> 
> ark.intel.com/compare/81761,90591


 Actually, X99 even on the lowest 5820K has more PCIE lanes without including boards that have the PLX chips.

If you want my opinion, I would say X99 is a better value at the moment over the Z170 and an i7.  The IPC performance of the two chips are almost identical with very slight edge to the 6700K, however the 5820K has more cores and threads available which in the end can be better in the long run for gamers if DX12 takes off soon or games begin to really take into account more cores/threads.  As for the rest of the features the Z170 has, yes they are quite nice but the reality if the differences they make is probably going to be very minimal in the real world IMHO.  I have seen the many different reviews of the 6700K and the Z170 chipset and to me its only about a few updates on the chipset which make it cool.

In the end, your going to have to decide if the updated features mean more than having extra cores and threads.  Because if it was me in this situation, I would not hesitate to choose the X99 platform as I feel your getting more value from the processor than you are with the 6700K.


----------



## Aquinus (Aug 28, 2015)

The core question to any new build has yet to be asked so, I'm going to ask it: *What do you intend to use this computer for?
*
If the goal is gaming, I would probably find it hard to justify X99 unless there is a special caveat as to the purpose of the build but, most people won't need the cores or the PCI-E lanes that X99 offers.


----------



## peche (Aug 28, 2015)

well 
http://ark.intel.com/compare/88195,82932
Comparison at specs vs specs ... does not show any real benefit on the 6700K, 5820K show more interesting features, also price on 5820K is minimal taking on consideration that is 6C / 12T, can offer mooarr for working, gamming and also in my humble opinion will be little bit moar future proof, 

my main question about this will be temps...


----------



## RejZoR (Aug 29, 2015)

Well, 5820K has more cores and is made on older node. So, naturally, it'll be hotter. And it also has voltage regulator inside the CPU which also contribute some heat whwere voltage regulator on Skylake are external and are located on motherboard.


----------



## Scrizz (Aug 29, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> I'd say yes. Skylake is tempting since it's so new, but the lack of extra cores (4C/8T is really an outdated design for 2015 high end). I was all hyped for the Skylake, but I'm also leaning towards 5820K and X99 now. Seeing how ridiculously long my current X58 platform with most basic CPU for it kept me running for so long I have a very good confidence in these as well. It is a bit more expensive, but then again I was looking at Sabertooth X99 motherboard so that's understandable... CPU itself is around the same price 5820K vs 6700K...



kinda off topic

My x58 with i7 970 was great. If you can find a 970 for a good price, it'll make your rig much faster and cooler.


----------



## RejZoR (Aug 29, 2015)

I'm already running my i7 920 at 3.9 GHz with Turbo at 1.3V with all the power saving features enabled. Anything beyond this and I have to disable powe saving stuf to even get a stable desktop boot. So I kidna decided to stick at this point.


----------



## xkm1948 (Aug 29, 2015)

X99 for sure. Great platform that will last you a very long time.


----------



## Deleted member 138597 (Aug 29, 2015)

Yeah, me too is thinking that X99 is a better option, _and value_, considering you can get two cores and 12 more PCIe lanes than i7 for just ~$50. Because you wanted to know what I'd want with it, I want more of OCing & productivity than strictly gaming from the platform. Skylake's granular BCLK adjustment, removal of FIVR (fever) and better OCability of memory with it is what attracts me still. But as a matter of fact, and as it had been, SL-E should be the better choice, right?


----------



## R-T-B (Aug 29, 2015)

If they make Skylake-E...  Well, I mean they will of course, but who's to say if it will be X99 compatible?

I sure hope so, as do all X99 owners...  but this is Intel.  I wouldn't put it beyond them to make a new socket.


----------



## Deleted member 138597 (Aug 29, 2015)

Yeah, I'm also doubting SL-E would be compatible with 2011-v3, and it's very hard to guess too. Broadwell doesn't look like it will ever make to HEDT, and SL-E is still more than 1.5 years away. God knows what Intel's gonna do!


----------



## RejZoR (Aug 29, 2015)

It most certainly won't be compatible. Haswell and Skylake are two radically different CPU's. If anything, power delivery is so different it makes them entirely incompatible. Haswell has on-chip voltage regulator, Skylake has the voltage regulator on the motherboard. Unless if they design Skylake-E with voltage regulator on the CPU, I don't see it happening.


----------



## Ferrum Master (Aug 29, 2015)

Yeah, upgrade to Skylake yer all so I can pick up a used X99 for pennies


----------



## R-T-B (Aug 29, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> It most certainly won't be compatible. Haswell and Skylake are two radically different CPU's. If anything, power delivery is so different it makes them entirely incompatible. Haswell has on-chip voltage regulator, Skylake has the voltage regulator on the motherboard. Unless if they design Skylake-E with voltage regulator on the CPU, I don't see it happening.



That's a very good point.  Completely forgot about the differences with the voltage regulators...


----------



## Aquinus (Aug 29, 2015)

Shamonto Hasan Easha said:


> Yeah, me too is thinking that X99 is a better option, _and value_, considering you can get two cores and 12 more PCIe lanes than i7 for just ~$50. Because you wanted to know what I'd want with it, I want more of OCing & productivity than strictly gaming from the platform. Skylake's granular BCLK adjustment, removal of FIVR (fever) and better OCability of memory with it is what attracts me still. But as a matter of fact, and as it had been, SL-E should be the better choice, right?


I still don't understand where any of the features of X99 actually benefit you. Sure, you get quad-channel memory, more cores, and more PCI-E lanes. None of that matters if you never use it. The point of my question before was to make sure you're getting something you'll actually use as opposed to just getting it to show off your e-peen. Unless you have a task in mind that will utilize those PCI-E lanes or cores, it's kind of a waste of the platform as you're paying more for stuff that you'll never use.

So could you be a sport and answer my initial question?


Aquinus said:


> The core question to any new build has yet to be asked so, I'm going to ask it: *What do you intend to use this computer for?
> *
> If the goal is gaming, I would probably find it hard to justify X99 unless there is a special caveat as to the purpose of the build but, most people won't need the cores or the PCI-E lanes that X99 offers.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Aug 29, 2015)

Looking at the cheapest X99 option (which is still more expensive than Z170+6700K) the benefits are more DIMMs and more SATA ports.  The former...I don't see how that's an advantage seeing how you can get 16 GB sticks of RAM now and the latter, you're better off getting a SATA/RAID card anyway.  Of course there's more cores but unless you spend a lot of time encoding crap, I can't particularly call that an advantage either.  The higher clockspeed of the 6700K is more advantageous than more cores that will be mostly idle.

Clarify:
5820K (3.3 GHz x 6) + X99 has 28 PCI Express 3.0 lanes
6700K (4.0 GHz x 4) + Z170 has 20 PCI Express 3.0 lanes

If all cores are loaded to 100%, 5820K has about 18% more throughput than 6700K.


----------



## RejZoR (Aug 29, 2015)

18% at stock clocks or same as 6700K ? If it's at stock, then imagine what's the difference when you crank it up to 4,2GHz and more...


----------



## Aquinus (Aug 29, 2015)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Clarify:
> 5820K (3.3 GHz x 6) + X99 has 28 PCI Express 3.0 lanes
> 6700K (4.0 GHz x 4) + Z170 has 20 PCI Express 3.0 lanes


I want to correct you here.

5820K = 28 PCI-E Lanes @ 3.0
X99 = up to 8 PCI-E lanes @ 2.0
6700K = 16 PCI-E lanes @ 3.0
Z170 = Up to 20 PCI-E lanes @ 3.0

Do a little bit of math and you get:
5820K + X99 = up to 36 lanes (28@3.0, 8@2.0 mixed.)
6700K + Z170 = up to 36 lanes (36@3.0)

My point being that the Z170 is more flexible than PCHs in the past. Plus Ford's point about clock speed is usually important when it comes to games. It makes no sense to go X99 for gaming unless you're planning on driving 3 or more GPUs in which case you're wanting just the big PCI-E root complex, not even the cores. If you're encoding or rendering all day long, then maybe the cores will be worth it but I see no reason why the OP needs such hardware. I've been asking...


----------



## Deleted member 138597 (Aug 29, 2015)

I think I did tell my point. As I said, I want edge on above average productivities, like encoding movies, creating animations, photo editing and illustrating, compressing large files regularly, great overclockability, handling dual GPU with ultrafast storage and ofcourse, gaming (4K). All these does make X99 the choice, but if 6700K does the job similarly (within acceptable range) as 5820K in multithreaded works and OCability (even willing to delid if that helps anyway), I honestly don't have much of a problem. If I should consider 6700K as a compromise, I want to know if advantages of Z170 and Skylake does close the gap. If 5820K still lives the competition, then X99 obviously wins regardless of the advantage of Z170. That's kinda the whole point of the thread.



Aquinus said:


> I want to correct you here.
> 
> 5820K = 28 PCI-E Lanes @ 3.0
> X99 = up to 8 PCI-E lanes @ 2.0
> ...



actually, the math is like this:
5820K + X99 = upto 32 lanes (28@3.0, actual 4@3.0)
6700K + Z170 = 36 lanes

see another sub-point of the thread?



RejZoR said:


> 18% at stock clocks or same as 6700K ? If it's at stock, then imagine what's the difference when you crank it up to 4,2GHz and more...


and another sub-point.


----------



## Aquinus (Aug 29, 2015)

Shamonto Hasan Easha said:


> I think I did tell my point. As I said, I want edge on above average productivities, like encoding movies, creating animations, photo editing and illustrating, compressing large files regularly, great overclockability, handling dual GPU with ultrafast storage and ofcourse, gaming (4K). All these does make X99 the choice, but if 6700K does the job similarly (within acceptable range) as 5820K in multithreaded works and OCability (even willing to delid if that helps anyway), I honestly don't have much of a problem. If I should consider 6700K as a compromise, I want to know if advantages of Z170 and Skylake does close the gap. If 5820K still lives the competition, then X99 obviously wins regardless of the advantage of Z170. That's kinda the whole point of the thread.


Your statement before is vague and so is this one. What is the primary intent of this machine? You say that you want:


Shamonto Hasan Easha said:


> I want edge on above average productivities, like encoding movies, creating animations, photo editing and illustrating, compressing large files regularly, great overclockability, handling dual GPU with ultrafast storage and ofcourse, gaming (4K).


How much of your time do you spend doing all of those things as a percentage of the time you spend on the computer? My concern is that you want "the best" for things you very well might not be doing all the time. A 6700K and 5820K are both going to get you were you want to go with anything you want to use the machine for according to your list. The question is what is the most important? If more than 50% of the computer's purpose is for gaming, you would be nuts to not go with a 6700K. More cores only gets you a benefit in special circumstances where higher clocks will almost always result in better performance.


Shamonto Hasan Easha said:


> 5820K + X99 = upto 32 lanes (28@3.0, actual 4@3.0)


How about we do some quoting from Intel?






Edit: Learn to the use edit button! Jeez!


----------



## Deleted member 138597 (Aug 29, 2015)

Aquinus said:


> Your statement before is vague and so is this one. What is the primary intent of this machine?



I'll say I'm being inefficient in explaining myself. Let's say about "the very core" intent - gaming & productivity, at 45% & 55% of my time. OCing is just "do-once" type thing, as you know.



Aquinus said:


> How about we do some quoting from Intel?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



As a matter of fact, those 8 lanes are Gen2, while Z170 has 20 Gen3 lanes. That's what I've been asking, whether that should matter, and how does it throw up in real world, anything that would put skylake to advantage.

And I do know to use the edit button. But it's real pain in arse to use it often using my phone.


----------



## Tatty_One (Aug 29, 2015)

Shamonto Hasan Easha said:


> I'll say I'm being inefficient in explaining myself. Let's say about "the very core" intent - gaming & productivity, at 45% & 55% of my time. OCing is just "do-once" type thing, as you know.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I would suggest you start getting some practice in then.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Aug 29, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> 18% at stock clocks or same as 6700K ? If it's at stock, then imagine what's the difference when you crank it up to 4,2GHz and more...


Yeah, stock and no turbo; turbo has an inverse relationship with CPU load so at 100% load, it's pretty safe to assume turbo isn't engaged.  The math I used is:
3.3 GHz * 100% * 6 = 19.8
4.0 GHz * 105% * 4 = 16.8

The % is to account for architectural improvements--might be a little bit on the low side for Skylake compared to Haswell-E but close enough.


In terms of PCI lanes, X99 only comes out on top with 5930K or better which costs $200 more for only 0.2 GHz bump in clocks:
3.5 GHz * 100% * 6 = 21.0 (25% over 6700K)


----------



## RejZoR (Aug 29, 2015)

The jump from 5820 to higher end CPU's is ridiculous in terms of price and al you get is more PCIe lanes. Clocks are hardly any higher. Except the most high end CPU which has 8C/16T configuration. But once you get into that territory, you're buying it because you already have a quad-SLi which means you're already loaded and you're not really looking at the price anyway...

It was quite similar with i7 920 back then. Up to 980X, it really didn't make much difference if you were willing to overclock it a bit. 980X was a different beast since it has more cores. The rest were basically just different stock clocks.


----------



## Schmuckley (Aug 30, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> I'm already running my i7 920 at 3.9 GHz with Turbo at 1.3V with all the power saving features enabled. Anything beyond this and I have to disable powe saving stuf to even get a stable desktop boot. So I kidna decided to stick at this point.


So..x5650 and done?
They are pretty nice.
Z170 I would guarantee has a decent IPC advantage over x99.
z97 did even.
It's noteworthy.


----------



## RejZoR (Aug 31, 2015)

Biggest problem I've noticed, ASUS has no ROG boards for X99 other than Rampage V Extreme (same for Sabertooth X99 which I do like) which is out of this world expensive. Which makes X99 a rather big no no (at least for me), even though I was quite focused on the 5820K due to 6 cores. I'm ready to pay premium for high end hardware, but I'm not ready to pay that much. And I want ROG board because I have one now and it's the best thing I've ever owned. But I don't need all the hardcore overclocking stuff that comes with the Extreme model.

6700K on the other hand, has the Maximus VIII Hero which is as high end as one can imagine but has no fiddly extreme overclocker stuff. And costs slightly over 200€. Compared to almost 500€ Extreme or almost 400€ Sabertooth X99, it is quite a difference...

So, this is my final conclussion. I'm gonna fiddle some more with my i7 920 and if it'll continue to be a pain in my rear (it's kinda acting funny only when OC'ed), I'll grab 6700K with Maximus VIII Hero and go brave with 32GB RAM. I think this should last me for another 5+ years.


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 4, 2015)

So, after needing freaking 10 minutes to boot my system from cold today and all the stores where I wanted to buy 6700K say "delivery date unknown" my full rage mode exploded and I've gone with the X99 platform instead. I don't have the nerves to wait almost whole more year for AMD Zen or whatever Intel will have.

Core i7 5820K
ASUS Sabertooth X99
32GB Kingston HyperX Fury DDR4

It's 250€ more than Skylake build, but I'll have 2 cores (4 threads) more and 16GB more RAM. Long term I think it'll last longer with zero upgrades for the next 5 years easily.

Overclock, I plan on mild OC to 4GHz with Turbo enabled so I'll match the 6700K clock without too much stress on the system.

Hopefully I get it next week.


----------



## OneMoar (Sep 4, 2015)

Schmuckley said:


> So..x5650 and done?
> They are pretty nice.
> Z170 I would guarantee has a decent IPC advantage over x99.
> z97 did even.
> It's noteworthy.


you would be wrong. ... again


----------



## Vlada011 (Sep 4, 2015)

For me personally X99 is better platform but Z170 is excellent too.
More improvements than previous years. Only X99 is somehow more serious PSU better for overclocking because Intel looks like only keep real overclocking for Xtreme platform. Special for i7-5960X. He overclocked on almost half of own fabric frequency... 
His improvements are far better than i7-4790K stock vs i7-4790K 5.0GHz. But two other processors with 6 cores are great too... 
They work around 700MHz OC with stock voltage. You don't need to remove IHS, nothing... on 4.3GHz temps are still around 75-76C with simple AIO. 
4.3GHz is 1GHz overclocking. And even with 6 cores that's not so much problem as 1GHz for 4790K or 6700K. Nobody will keep 5820K on fabric speed...
People will keep on similar clock as i7-6700K.... We could compare i7-5820K not with 3820/4820... 5820K/5930K only could be compared with 3960X and 4960X.
Same Cache, same number of cores, quad channel only advantage DDR4. If someone plan to change CPU every 2 year than maybe is even better option Skylake...
But who want to keep CPU with 2-3 different graphic cards series better choice is i7-5820K on 4.0-4.2GHz 24/7.


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 4, 2015)

The main problem with 6700K is that it's already clocked so high. i7 920 was amazing because it was a 2,66GHz CPU that clocked up to 4,5GHz without LN2 or extreme water cooling. It's a MASSIVE overclock. Same goes for 5820K. 3,3GHz to 4,5GHz is pretty substantial. And it packs 2 more cores compared to 6700K.

I mean, 6700K totally defeats the point in spending high money on "overclocker" motherboard. What are you going to overclock it to? 4,7 GHz which is the usual overclock people get as max? From 4,2GHz it sounds and feels pathetic and totally not worth any kind of premium spent on expensive mobo. It's a great out of the box replacement for i7 920 though. Slam it into a cheap motherboard and you're ready to go without any overclocking with performance of OC-ed i7 920 + the IPC bonus. Downside is that those cheap Z170 boards are absolutely robbed of any goodies which are only left on 200+ € boards. And that sucks.


----------



## Mexx (Sep 5, 2015)

Hi guys, I was reading all your passionate posts looking for an answer about that question that haunt me for weeks now : should I upgrade my current Z77 to a Z170 or a X99 or maybe even keep my current config and wait since it is already a very powerful one. Then I noticed you mentioned several times that multi GPU config could justify additional PCI lanes hence an advantage to the X99. 
In my specific case, I have to think about that since I'm probably a rare exception with two Asus AresIII in my system (yes, two water cooled R9 290x2 so a quad fire GPU configuration). For the rest my i7 is water cooled and overclocked to 4.7ghz, I have 16gb of 2400mhz DDR3, 6 SSDs in raid 0 and all of this linked on a Sabertooth Z77. I mainly use it for gaming in 4k on 3 displays at 5760x1080. So what do you recommend me to do based on everything that has been said in this post ? Thanks in advance !


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 5, 2015)

If you have quad CrossfireX, X99 is the only way to go my friend. And you'll need a 40 lane version of CPU, the Core i7 59xxK models. For regular SLi and CrossfireX with 2 cards (single GPU) even 28 lane 5820K is enough. But for what you have, you need max utilization. Especially with AMD which does all communications through PCIe slots. I mean if you want to make out the most from your setup, you'll need two full PCIe x16 slots and you can't have those on Z170 or X99 with 28 lane CPU like 5820K (which only works in x16/x8 mode as well).

Considering how much you already spent on graphic cards, I think you'll go with the highest end model with 8 cores. Coz only that would make sense for your setup.

Also, one thing is known, there is Broadwell-E planned for X99, a shrinked 14nm version of Haswell-E processors. It is however not 100% known yet if it'll still be usable on LGA2011-v3 socket or will Intel release it under LGA2011-v4 or something. Hopefully it'll remain compatible with v3. That would be really cool.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Sep 5, 2015)

Schmuckley said:


> So..x5650 and done?
> They are pretty nice.
> Z170 I would guarantee has a decent IPC advantage over x99.
> z97 did even.
> It's noteworthy.



Do you even know what IPC is? And understand it has zero to do with the chipset?


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 5, 2015)

From what I've seen, Skylakes aren't any better than Haswell-E clock to clock (IPC). I also don't see any mention of AES instructions on 6700K where 5820K and up have it. Donno why, maybe since enthusiast is considered to work with encryption ro something.


----------



## vega22 (Sep 5, 2015)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> Do you even know what IPC is? And understand it has zero to do with the chipset?



do intel often release chipsets with out new cpu to go with them?

could it be maybe he is talking about the cpu that match the chipsets?

he is totally wrong about z97 being better, them being the same shit sold as new, but past that...


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Sep 5, 2015)

marsey99 said:


> do intel often release chipsets with out new cpu to go with them?
> 
> could it be maybe he is talking about the cpu that match the chipsets?
> 
> he is totally wrong about z97 being better, them being the same shit sold as new, but past that...



Sure, but either way hes wrong.


----------



## Schmuckley (Sep 6, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> Biggest problem I've noticed, ASUS has no ROG boards for X99 other than Rampage V Extreme (same for Sabertooth X99 which I do like) which is out of this world expensive. Which makes X99 a rather big no no (at least for me), even though I was quite focused on the 5820K due to 6 cores. I'm ready to pay premium for high end hardware, but I'm not ready to pay that much. And I want ROG board because I have one now and it's the best thing I've ever owned. But I don't need all the hardcore overclocking stuff that comes with the Extreme model.
> 
> 6700K on the other hand, has the Maximus VIII Hero which is as high end as one can imagine but has no fiddly extreme overclocker stuff. And costs slightly over 200€. Compared to almost 500€ Extreme or almost 400€ Sabertooth X99, it is quite a difference...
> 
> So, this is my final conclussion. I'm gonna fiddle some more with my i7 920 and if it'll continue to be a pain in my rear (it's kinda acting funny only when OC'ed), I'll grab 6700K with Maximus VIII Hero and go brave with 32GB RAM. I think this should last me for another 5+ years.



I'd fiddle with a 32nm Xeon x5650-60 for $70 if I was you.It has more cores and bigger cache, too.
They're binned higher than 920s...even the W3520s are better binned than 920s.

As for all you jokers saying z97/z170 doesn't have an IPC advantage over x99;Good luck proving that,because I can prove that it does.
For one thing z97/z170 cache clocks much higher than x99.
For another DDR3 is mature and has lower latency than DDR4.


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 6, 2015)

I'm not gonna buy another LGA1366 CPU if I want to get rid of the motherboard. I'd buy a new mobo if there was any to buy (new). I'm not going to buy used one of dubious quality... So, there's that.


----------



## Schmuckley (Sep 6, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> I'm not gonna buy another LGA1366 CPU if I want to get rid of the motherboard. I'd buy a new mobo if there was any to buy (new). I'm not going to buy used one of dubious quality... So, there's that.



$70 versus laying out about $540 There's also that 
..and you could sell a 920 for about $30.
Tcase on x5660 is 81c.They are tanks.


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 6, 2015)

Schmuckley said:


> I'd fiddle with a 32nm Xeon x5650-60 for $70 if I was you.It has more cores and bigger cache, too.
> They're binned higher than 920s...even the W3520s are better binned than 920s.
> 
> As for all you jokers saying z97/z170 doesn't have an IPC advantage over x99;Good luck proving that,because I can prove that it does.
> ...



Uh...  "clocks higher" does not prove anything about IPC whatsoever.

I suggest you read up on what IPC is.


----------



## Schmuckley (Sep 6, 2015)

R-T-B said:


> Uh...  "clocks higher" does not prove anything about IPC whatsoever.
> 
> I suggest you read up on what IPC is.



They also process more Instructions Per Clock.

I suggest you study up on which platform gets better SuperPi (single-threaded benchmark) 32m times at a set frequency.
It's not x99.


----------



## Aquinus (Sep 6, 2015)

Okay guys, lets stop fighting about this. @Schmuckley is right that IPC on skt1151/1150 CPUs is going to be better than skt2011-3. In reality, it's not going to be very noticeable. SuperPi might show differences, but unlike most applications, memory frequency and latency can impact SuperPi's results. With that said, none of this changes the fact that more cores means more heat and higher power draw. As a result, skt2011-3 much like my 2011, doesn't clock as high as its mainstream counterpart.

I think push comes to shove, both platforms will feel exactly the same when gaming which is why I advocated for the cheaper of the two unless there was a particular reason someone wanted to go skt2011-3. For me, expandability was important. My last platform I ran into an issue where I needed more memory than the platform could hold so, I planned for that. At the time I also wanted a second 6870 and wasn't sure if I wanted to add other PCI-E devices after. Then to put icing on the cake, I needed a platform that could drive my RAID-5 and a SSD RAID-0. So for me, skt2011 and the 3820 (a quad-core,) would give me everything I wanted because in reality, I know that unless I'm encoding video, I won't need another two cores (which would have costs twice as much I might add.)

So it boils down to what you need and I think what _most (not all,)_ of the gamers here need is a computer , not a workstation. That's my opinion, people might disagree with me but, that's how I look at it. I don't like spending extra money unless there is a good reason for it.


----------



## BiggieShady (Sep 6, 2015)

Unlocked Broadwell i7, the one with L4 Cache eDram, stands out IMO


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Sep 6, 2015)

Aquinus said:


> Okay guys, lets stop fighting about this. @Schmuckley is right that IPC on skt1151/1150 CPUs is going to be better than skt2011-3. In reality, it's not going to be very noticeable. SuperPi might show differences, but unlike most applications, memory frequency and latency can impact SuperPi's results. With that said, none of this changes the fact that more cores means more heat and higher power draw. As a result, skt2011-3 much like my 2011, doesn't clock as high as its mainstream counterpart.
> 
> I think push comes to shove, both platforms will feel exactly the same when gaming which is why I advocated for the cheaper of the two unless there was a particular reason someone wanted to go skt2011-3. For me, expandability was important. My last platform I ran into an issue where I needed more memory than the platform could hold so, I planned for that. At the time I also wanted a second 6870 and wasn't sure if I wanted to add other PCI-E devices after. Then to put icing on the cake, I needed a platform that could drive my RAID-5 and a SSD RAID-0. So for me, skt2011 and the 3820 (a quad-core,) would give me everything I wanted because in reality, I know that unless I'm encoding video, I won't need another two cores (which would have costs twice as much I might add.)
> 
> So it boils down to what you need and I think what _most (not all,)_ of the gamers here need is a computer , not a workstation. That's my opinion, people might disagree with me but, that's how I look at it. I don't like spending extra money unless there is a good reason for it.



Being that Haswell E and Skylake are slightly different architectures right? Wouldnt Skylake E or whatever the HDET platform is going to be have pretty much the same IPC when at the same clocks as 1151?

If so, comparing IPC to current 1151 to current 2011 CPUs, is kind of like comparing apples or oranges IMO.



Schmuckley said:


> I'd fiddle with a 32nm Xeon x5650-60 for $70 if I was you.It has more cores and bigger cache, too.
> They're binned higher than 920s...even the W3520s are better binned than 920s.
> 
> As for all you jokers saying z97/z170 doesn't have an IPC advantage over x99;Good luck proving that,because I can prove that it does.
> ...



Show us some of your benchmarks to prove your position. Even though @Aquinus has proven your position for the most part, id love to see you be able too.


----------



## Aquinus (Sep 6, 2015)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> If so, comparing IPC to current 1151 to current 2011 CPUs, is kind of like comparing apples or oranges IMO.


I humbly disagree. Apples and oranges would be like comparing IPC on an ARM CPU compared to an x86 CPU. 1151 and 2011 are going to be different but they're still both X86 processors doing the same instructions more or less, the same way. Intel hasn't made a new architecture since Core 2, they've been simply improving upon what they already have for the last decade or so. Apple and oranges in that respect would be like Intel versus AMD or Intel Core versus Intel Netburst. The difference in architectures is what makes IPC important though and clock speed not as relevant.

It's only apples and oranges if you're talking about clock speed because IPC isn't a constant between the two.


MxPhenom 216 said:


> Show us some of your benchmarks to prove your position. Even though @Aquinus has proven your position for the most part, id love to see you be able too.


I too would like to see that as well.


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 6, 2015)

Schmuckley said:


> $70 versus laying out about $540 There's also that
> ..and you could sell a 920 for about $30.
> Tcase on x5660 is 81c.They are tanks.



You don't understand, the mobo I have has specific problems with LAN which then drag a lot of other specific things together so I want to get rid of it. It still works flawlessly for everything else, so problem is solved with a PCI LAN card. But since I use dedicated soundcard and a beefy graphic card on a microATX board, graphic card gets deprived of fresh air by the soundcard underneath. I'll sell it for something and it'll still work great for someone who will just run the onboard audio chip (which is far from bad, but I just want my Sound Blaster Z).


----------



## Schmuckley (Sep 7, 2015)

Okay.I'm now going to post some SuperPi 32m scores from HwBot to prove my point.
I happen to know this because I've run both platforms and talked to some other people.
SuperPi 32m 5Ghz run:
First place on Hwbot for 5Ghz is this for 1150:
http://hwbot.org/submission/2895491_bullant_superpi___32m_core_i7_4790k_5min_53sec_890ms

First place on Hwbot for 5Ghz with 2011-V3 is this:
http://hwbot.org/submission/2883802_lau_kin_lam_superpi___32m_core_i7_5960x_5min_57sec_766ms

Like @Aquinus said,it's not a huge difference;yet an advantage of single-thread performance is something 1150/1151 does have.

Cache clocks higher,DDR3 has lower latency even at same speeds.This all adds up to an IPC advantage.


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 7, 2015)

Schmuckley said:


> They also process more Instructions Per Clock.
> 
> I suggest you study up on which platform gets better SuperPi (single-threaded benchmark) 32m times at a set frequency.
> It's not x99.



I humbly recant.  It would seem you are right here.


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 8, 2015)

Bloody hell, never do bank transfer orders on Friday. The weekend ruins it all! Anyway, the Sabertooth X99 with 5820K and 32 gigs of RAM has finally shipped out. Can't wait to assemble this monster


----------



## peche (Sep 8, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> Bloody hell, never do bank transfer orders on Friday. The weekend ruins it all! Anyway, the Sabertooth X99 with 5820K and 32 gigs of RAM has finally shipped out. Can't wait to assemble this monster


we cant wait to see pics.... !


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 10, 2015)

I think I'll just transplant the system from X58 to X99. I'm not in the mood of full OS reinstallation. Gotta uninstall all drivers, restore MS AHCI driver for HDD/SSD so it won't BSOD at boot. If all goes well, I'll save quite some hours. If not, I'll have to reinstall it. After 24 hours at work in 2 days, I'm in deseprate need for some fiddling with the PC  This kind of stuff relaxes me


----------



## peche (Sep 10, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> I think I'll just transplant the system from X58 to X99. I'm not in the mood of full OS reinstallation. Gotta uninstall all drivers, restore MS AHCI driver for HDD/SSD so it won't BSOD at boot. If all goes well, I'll save quite some hours. If not, I'll have to reinstall it. After 24 hours at work in 2 days, I'm in deseprate need for some fiddling with the PC  This kind of stuff relaxes me


i always done full install, back files in other drives and never use to save files from old install... i now that is pretty boring but fresh installs rulez...!


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 10, 2015)

I transplanted from X58 to X99 successfully, so I know it can be done.


----------



## Aquinus (Sep 10, 2015)

R-T-B said:


> I transplanted from X58 to X99 successfully, so I know it can be done.


...but how can you resist the temptation of a silky smooth clean install? I like Windows 10 a lot more after clean installing it, that's for sure. The upgrade "worked" and everything "worked" but things were just behaving weird.


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 11, 2015)

Nice. The system is running. That little fan is a bit stupid. Can't even set it at speed lower than 60% or so. I think it'll soon kindly fuck off and get replaced by a Noiseblocker... Do like the fact that ALL fans in the system are now controlled by a motherboard and I still have some left empty. No more fiddling with resistors and 12V->5V converters/adapters.

Only thing I don't get it in UEFI is how bloody do I change the ratios. Only way seems to be using OC Tuner which does it on it's own and sets it to 4100MHz. But if I try to change settings myself, they are nonclickable. Ugh!?

EDIT:
Also, I forgot to mention how I've gone ghetto with the cooler. I had 6700K in mind where my Antec 920 is compatible with. But then I switched to 5820K and totally forgot about the cooler lol. Of course it didn't fit. So I removed the plastic, retrofitted the bracket, holding metal cross which luckily has the exact same width between holes and just screwed it together. It's actually slightly tighter now and it's not really moving anywhere. Not perfect but 5820K is running at 33°C on desktop, so I think it's cooling fine. It'll be ok till I get a proper cooler for 2011 socket


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 11, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> Nice. The system is running. That little fan is a bit stupid. Can't even set it at speed lower than 60% or so. I think it'll soon kindly fuck off and get replaced by a Noiseblocker... Do like the fact that ALL fans in the system are now controlled by a motherboard and I still have some left empty. No more fiddling with resistors and 12V->5V converters/adapters.
> 
> Only thing I don't get it in UEFI is how bloody do I change the ratios. Only way seems to be using OC Tuner which does it on it's own and sets it to 4100MHz. But if I try to change settings myself, they are nonclickable. Ugh!?



You can only set turbo ratios on recent processors I think.  (Someone correct me if I am wrong.)  The base clock ratio is locked to stock.

There are clever ways around this, such as setting wattage limits so it basically turbo's forever, but...   yeah that was one thing that kinda irked me.  It's why I tend to BCLK overclock despite it being tougher on the whole system.

I've found the little fan makes little difference.  You can probably ditch it.  It wasn't as noisy as I was expecting for a small, high RPM fan, but it is always going to be a small, high RPM fan regardless.  You can probably ditch it or find better.
'

Curious if yours was a Sunon as well?


Aquinus said:


> ...but how can you resist the temptation of a silky smooth clean install? I like Windows 10 a lot more after clean installing it, that's for sure. The upgrade "worked" and everything "worked" but things were just behaving weird.



I lasted about a week.  After that, the bug got me.  No real oddities I just couldn't stand the idea of it being "unclean" lol.


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 11, 2015)

Yeah, it's Sunon.

I don't get the overclocking with UEFI or 5820K. It feels so stupid and clumsy compared to old BIOS on X58. Setting multipliers there was straight forward as hell. Here, half of the stuff just seems to be locked into some AUTO mode even though you select Manual option for the parameters. It just doesn't allow me to adjust it. But if I use OC Tuner, those very same parameters just magically change and the Turbo clock is 4100MHz. Why is it either locked or under ASUS control? It's so stupid.


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 11, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> Yeah, it's Sunon.
> 
> I don't get the overclocking with UEFI or 5820K. It feels so stupid and clumsy compared to old BIOS on X58. Setting multipliers there was straight forward as hell. Here, half of the stuff just seems to be locked into some AUTO mode even though you select Manual option for the parameters. It just doesn't allow me to adjust it. But if I use OC Tuner, those very same parameters just magically change and the Turbo clock is 4100MHz. Why is it either locked or under ASUS control? It's so stupid.



Have you tried the "Classic Mode" display?  Really simplified things for me.  I don't remember the key that enabled it, but it's there and it's still full UEFI, just in a more traditional BIOS display style.


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 11, 2015)

Oh my god, never mind, I'm such a retard. I could change the ratios all along, but I expected a blinking underscore or a dropdown menu when clicking on each core ratio selection. You have to click in the core ratio field and just type in the number. ASUS should certainly make this a bit more clearly visually that entry is changeable from AUTO. Instead I had a feeling it was locked in AUTO and I wasn't allowed to change it. LOL

So, I just slammed in 42 ratio for first two cores and 40 for the rest and it's now running at 4GHz with 4,2GHz Turbo and CPU-Z is showing a voltage of 1.185V when CPU is under stress. I just left CPU Voltage in AUTO and seems perfectly reasonable for 4GHz. Overlocking has never been easier lol 

4,2GHz in Turbo was my target, to emulate 6700K clocks which I originally wanted, but now with more cores. It's plenty fast and won't put unnecessary stress on the system.

Now that I actually use X99 system, I think I did a right choice going with it instead of Z170. This is really nice  Sure it lacks USB 3.1 reversable type, but frankly, I lived perfectly fine with USB 2.0 till this very moment and now I have classic USB 3.0 and USB 3.1 all over the place. It's fine.


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 11, 2015)

That sounds more like it.


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 11, 2015)

Ok, here it is. I don't mind visible cables at the bottom, the case doesn't have window anyway, but I've tied them nicel at the back with zip ties. The noisy Sabertooth VRM fan got replaced by Noiseblocker MX-2 and I've conveniently installed another one at the back using zip tie through 2 holes in the motherbvoard (that just happen to be in the right place  ) to actively cool the VRM components at the back. The backplate is nicely transmitting heat and the fan is cooling it slightly faster. They are both dead silent. I'm not leavin anything to chances this time around XD

Final build, AiO will be replaced in the near future with something taht' actualyl designed for LGA2011 (see the silver washers that are holding it on screws  )...




Fan at the back of the motherboard, cooling backside VRM components...




Oh and I've actually plugged all the unused SATA/USB/PCIe ports and slots inside the case with the protective caps. Didn't use fake RAM sticks to allow actual RAM sticks to cool a bit better. Sabertooth X99 is indeed a really badass motherboard and I think going with X99 instead of Z170 was a good decision. It may prove wrong in the future, but as things stand this moment, it looks and feels like an incredible platform despite not being brand new.


----------



## BiggieShady (Sep 11, 2015)

Congratz  you need to post more pics in http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/your-pc-atm.65012/page-1099


----------



## Arjai (Sep 11, 2015)

Shamonto Hasan Easha said:


> X99 & Z170 platforms are almost same in price. So tell me which is better, X99 or Z170? Z170 does seems to have more PCIe 3.0 lanes, USB ports and bandwith but lacks on SATA storage (although I care least about it). So, Z170 does look better on paper but how is it in real world? Is it _really_ better than X99 (PCH only)?
> 
> ark.intel.com/compare/81761,90591





FordGT90Concept said:


> Looking at the cheapest X99 option (which is still more expensive than Z170+6700K) the benefits are more DIMMs and more SATA ports.  The former...I don't see how that's an advantage seeing how you can get 16 GB sticks of RAM now and the latter, you're better off getting a SATA/RAID card anyway.  Of course there's more cores but unless you spend a lot of time encoding crap, I can't particularly call that an advantage either.  The higher clockspeed of the 6700K is more advantageous than more cores that will be mostly idle.
> 
> Clarify:
> 5820K (3.3 GHz x 6) + X99 has 28 PCI Express 3.0 lanes
> ...


Get more cores, Join the TPU WCG Crunching team. That way people can stop asking you about justifying it!! Then, buy a couple, three, GPU's then join the TPU Folding team, that way you can justify all those PCI lanes.

But in the end, you will have a KICK ASS MB and CPU. Whereas, z170 is new, it is not Kickass New. 

Buy what you can, best that you can. Justify noone, when it is time to upgrade, again, you have the best to sell. Not some middle of the road z170. Nobody will want that board in two years.

/Rant


----------



## Pill Monster (Sep 12, 2015)

Schmuckley said:


> Okay.I'm now going to post some SuperPi 32m scores from HwBot to prove my point.
> I happen to know this because I've run both platforms and talked to some other people.
> SuperPi 32m 5Ghz run:
> First place on Hwbot for 5Ghz is this for 1150:
> ...


I



Schmuckley said:


> I'd fiddle with a 32nm Xeon x5650-60 for $70 if I was you.It has more cores and bigger cache, too.
> They're binned higher than 920s...even the W3520s are better binned than 920s.
> 
> As for all you jokers saying z97/z170 doesn't have an IPC advantage over x99;Good luck proving that,because I can prove that it does.
> ...



IPC/CPI performance is the sum of CPU architecture, round trip latency (RAM---->Cache----->RAM), and the compiler used.
Chipsets were removed from the equation 10 years ago when the FSB became obsolete.

RAM and motherboard are mutually exclusive btw, .It's not uncommon to see a mix & match of sockets, chipsets and RAM......





*
***Edited cuz my connection died halfway thru.


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 12, 2015)

> Buy what you can, best that you can. Justify noone, when it is time to upgrade, again, you have the best to sell. Not some middle of the road z170. Nobody will want that board in two years.



While I don't disagree with your basic point, I will point out that I expect z170 to be doing pretty fine in 2 years at the current rate of development.  Heck, people are still buying LGA1156 boards.  Not for top dollar but I see them move in the low dollar range from time to time.


----------



## Schmuckley (Sep 13, 2015)

R-T-B said:


> While I don't disagree with your basic point, I will point out that I expect z170 to be doing pretty fine in 2 years at the current rate of development.  Heck, people are still buying LGA1156 boards.  Not for top dollar but I see them move in the low dollar range from time to time.


Show me where to get cheap 1156 boards.
I know about 5 people that want one.
One just paid $120 for T-Powah! i55 (really a fantastic board)
Looks like puke.


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 13, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> Ok, here it is. I don't mind visible cables at the bottom, the case doesn't have window anyway, but I've tied them nicel at the back with zip ties. The noisy Sabertooth VRM fan got replaced by Noiseblocker MX-2 and I've conveniently installed another one at the back using zip tie through 2 holes in the motherbvoard (that just happen to be in the right place  ) to actively cool the VRM components at the back. The backplate is nicely transmitting heat and the fan is cooling it slightly faster. They are both dead silent. I'm not leavin anything to chances this time around XD
> 
> Final build, AiO will be replaced in the near future with something taht' actualyl designed for LGA2011 (see the silver washers that are holding it on screws  )...
> 
> ...





Glad you are enjoying your sabertooth x99! Here are some tips from a fellow sabertooth x99 owner:

1. Do not leave vCore on auto. Use fully manual mode. There are some sabertooth x99 owners over overclock forum fried their haswell-e using auto vcore.

2. These boards tend to overvolt by default. So I would not recommend more than 1.15V for a 4G OC. I am doing 4.2G OC with just 1.175 vCore.

3. There is an option in the BIOS QFAn setting for the assistant fan. You can choose fan auto off option for it to become silent. After choosing that you will have a very quiet and efficient VRM cooling fan.


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 13, 2015)

I've set VCore to Adaptive with +200 mV offset. I've tried manual, but then it had 1.2V even when idling. But with Adaptive, in idle it drops VCore down to 0.95V. At load it's 1.150V. At 4.5 GHz 

As for the VRM fan, it was too noisy even at low RPM. Supid thing is, you can't even set it under 60%. Yet again some Asian nonsense. They ALWAYS have to do something dumb like this just to annoy everyone or something. It sucks that it's using some weird tiny PWM connector and not standard 4pin fan connector, at least the fan is standard 40mm. I've replaced it with Noiseblocker 40mm fan that I had and plugged it to some other fan port. It's now running at max speed at all times and it's absolutely silent. I'm just missing the shutdown cooldown and reverse spin for dust cleaning. Gotta find these micro connectors and rewire it myself for that specific fan port.
But for now, this will do it. I can feel some air coming out at the back and cooler above VRM is hardly warm. Which is good 

Anything else I should worry about Sabertooth X99 and 5820K ? Like making specific voltages fixed so they dont' go haywire in AUTO or something like that? For X58, people found out long time after release that boards tend to up the RAM voltage beyond 1.65V if set to AUTO and that could damage hardware. Anything problematic like this on X99 ?


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 13, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> I've set VCore to Adaptive with +200 mV offset. I've tried manual, but then it had 1.2V even when idling. But with Adaptive, in idle it drops VCore down to 0.95V. At load it's 1.150V. At 4.5 GHz
> 
> As for the VRM fan, it was too noisy even at low RPM. Supid thing is, you can't even set it under 60%. Yet again some Asian nonsense. They ALWAYS have to do something dumb like this just to annoy everyone or something. It sucks that it's using some weird tiny PWM connector and not standard 4pin fan connector, at least the fan is standard 40mm. I've replaced it with Noiseblocker 40mm fan that I had and plugged it to some other fan port. It's now running at max speed at all times and it's absolutely silent. I'm just missing the shutdown cooldown and reverse spin for dust cleaning. Gotta find these micro connectors and rewire it myself for that specific fan port.
> But for now, this will do it. I can feel some air coming out at the back and cooler above VRM is hardly warm. Which is good
> ...



I used adaptive vcore and I had encountered CPU Over voltage Warning during BIOS POST, twice. It was scary. From then on I never touched adaptive vCore ever again.  Yes the ASUS board love to overvolt. I set mine to fully manual mode and input a 1.145 vCore and ended up getting 1.175 vCore. Another reason I dont do auto vCore is due to Windows 10's aggressive power saving. I had tons of BSOD after upgrading to WIndows 10 with the same overclock. After disabling auto vCore my BSOD frequency has dropped a lot. Right now Windows 10 is not ready for Sabertooth X99. There are lots of driver issues(PCProbe II driver causing BSOD, AISuite III causing BSOD, bad OC stability due to old BIOS and etc.)

If you OC is stable I would highly recommend you adjust the cache ratio. I set all my 6 cores to run at 4.2G and the cache to run at 4G. The cache freq matters a lot to memory performance.


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 13, 2015)

Windows 10 and AISUite III:

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?62006-Windows-10-AI-Suite-3/page5


it is an awesome tool, but not worth the BSOD it creates.


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 13, 2015)

I'm not using Windows 10, because it's a pile of steaming manure. Tried it, tried to love it and hated it even more. No thanks. Win8.1 is not the latest and greatest, but at least it works and isn't annoying the fuck out of me.

Btw, as for voltage, Adaptive actually restrains it. It's not adaptive to infinity. If you set it to +200 mV it'll stay within that range. I did set Loadline to L1 as advised by Cadaveca. On AUTO it was setting it to L9 which is max loadline. I don't think it's needed since I don't experience any stability issues and I've loaded CPU hard, played games etc.

I'm more concerned over voltages for other parameters which I left on AUTO...


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 13, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> I'm not using Windows 10, because it's a pile of steaming manure. Tried it, tried to love it and hated it even more. No thanks. Win8.1 is not the latest and greatest, but at least it works and isn't annoying the fuck out of me.
> 
> Btw, as for voltage, Adaptive actually restrains it. It's not adaptive to infinity. If you set it to +200 mV it'll stay within that range. I did set Loadline to L1 as advised by Cadaveca. On AUTO it was setting it to L9 which is max loadline. I don't think it's needed since I don't experience any stability issues and I've loaded CPU hard, played games etc.
> 
> I'm more concerned over voltages for other parameters which I left on AUTO...




Oh and Another thing I almost forgot. Set CPU Input Volt to 1.85~1.9 based on how much you OC. If you are shooting for 4.5~4.6G set it to 1.9. The auto settings for this tend to fluctuate a lot.


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 13, 2015)

Input already seems to be within that range. Haven't seen it above 1.9V.

I guess ASUS fixed certain things with latest BIOS for Sabertooth X99...


----------



## erixx (Sep 14, 2015)

on my sabertooth z97 as soon as I OC a littel bit, VRM temps go skyhigh (from 30 to 60 on idle) so now i do not OC at all.
The armor fans I keep them always on, but slow.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 14, 2015)

I'm pleased with Z170/i7-6700K.  Kind of disappointed the GAMING M7 doesn't have the same UEFI motherboard layout/overview my older MSI board does but, meh.  It cold boots ridiculously fast.


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 14, 2015)

Schmuckley said:


> Show me where to get cheap 1156 boards.
> I know about 5 people that want one.
> One just paid $120 for T-Powah! i55 (really a fantastic board)
> Looks like puke.



4th Dimension Computers, Downtown Olympia, WA.  They buy "old" computers and then tear them apart and sell stuff like that dirt cheap on a regular basis.  (Note I used "old" with air quotes.  I mean old as in people who think spyware on their computer means it's "old")



xkm1948 said:


> I used adaptive vcore and I had encountered CPU Over voltage Warning during BIOS POST, twice. It was scary. From then on I never touched adaptive vCore ever again.  Yes the ASUS board love to overvolt. I set mine to fully manual mode and input a 1.145 vCore and ended up getting 1.175 vCore. Another reason I dont do auto vCore is due to Windows 10's aggressive power saving. I had tons of BSOD after upgrading to WIndows 10 with the same overclock. After disabling auto vCore my BSOD frequency has dropped a lot. Right now Windows 10 is not ready for Sabertooth X99. There are lots of driver issues(PCProbe II driver causing BSOD, AISuite III causing BSOD, bad OC stability due to old BIOS and etc.)
> 
> If you OC is stable I would highly recommend you adjust the cache ratio. I set all my 6 cores to run at 4.2G and the cache to run at 4G. The cache freq matters a lot to memory performance.



I can confirm that 1.8v bug, but it's actually CAUSED by fully manual mode in at least a few cases, myself included.  I have seen it when I switched to fully manual mode and used some of the OC Socket features presented there, fortunately I shut it down quick when that bug reared it's ugly head.

The latest bios seems to have completely addressed it for me.




RejZoR said:


> I guess ASUS fixed certain things with latest BIOS for Sabertooth X99...



Pretty sure that's the truth.  I know I as a manufacturer would consider that at the top of my "todo" list, so seems likely.


----------



## Pill Monster (Sep 14, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> I'm not using Windows 10, because it's a pile of steaming manure. Tried it, tried to love it and hated it even more. No thanks. Win8.1 is not the latest and greatest, but at least it works and isn't annoying the fuck out of me.
> 
> Btw, as for voltage, Adaptive actually restrains it. It's not adaptive to infinity. If you set it to +200 mV it'll stay within that range. I did set Loadline to L1 as advised by Cadaveca. On AUTO it was setting it to L9 which is max loadline. I don't think it's needed since I don't experience any stability issues and I've loaded CPU hard, played games etc.
> 
> I'm more concerned over voltages for other parameters which I left on AUTO...


Yeah when overclocking on ASUS don't set vcore to Auto because it will overvolt every time.  Also in order for speedstep to work offset voltage must be used, if vcore is set to manual it won't drop.

Even between AMD and Intel platforms a lot of the bios vrm options are identical.


Btw I would suggest avoiding the overbloated AI Suite and stick with bios for overclocking.


----------



## Mexx (Sep 15, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> If you have quad CrossfireX, X99 is the only way to go my friend. And you'll need a 40 lane version of CPU, the Core i7 59xxK models. For regular SLi and CrossfireX with 2 cards (single GPU) even 28 lane 5820K is enough. But for what you have, you need max utilization. Especially with AMD which does all communications through PCIe slots. I mean if you want to make out the most from your setup, you'll need two full PCIe x16 slots and you can't have those on Z170 or X99 with 28 lane CPU like 5820K (which only works in x16/x8 mode as well).
> 
> Considering how much you already spent on graphic cards, I think you'll go with the highest end model with 8 cores. Coz only that would make sense for your setup.
> 
> Also, one thing is known, there is Broadwell-E planned for X99, a shrinked 14nm version of Haswell-E processors. It is however not 100% known yet if it'll still be usable on LGA2011-v3 socket or will Intel release it under LGA2011-v4 or something. Hopefully it'll remain compatible with v3. That would be really cool.



Thank you very much RejZor for your inputs. Just for my curiosity, with my quad-fire made possible with only 2 Pcie cards, do I have to consider I'll need 4x16 Pcie lanes or just 2x16Pcie lanes ? I would say only 2 since it is the max capacity of the Pcie 3.0 slot of the MB. Am I correct ? Thanks again !


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 15, 2015)

Yes, you are correct. For quad setups that utilize two dual GPU cards you'll only occupy 2x PCIe slots, meaning you only need 2x PCIe x16. But since two GPU's have to share same PCIe slot bandwidth, it's absolutely critical that both cards have full PCIe x16 available. Meaning X99 with 5820K CPU or Z170 with any CPU won't work well since they switch into 16x/8x mode with two graphic cards. Only X99 with 59xxK processor will run in full 16x/16x mode. Or potentially a motherboard with extra PLX chipsets, but I haven't really studied how that works in regards of PCIe lanes and connectivity of them to the CPU and native chipset.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 15, 2015)

FYI, my system (see specs) takes 20 seconds to cold boot to the Windows 10 desktop.  I don't know how that compares to competing products.  I'm using Fast Boot (not MSI Fast Boot) and GPT partition.

Don't dual GPU cards have something that effectively is a PLX chip on them?


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 15, 2015)

They do, for inter-GPU communications (between two GPU's on the same PCB). But in the end, data has to leave graphic card through actual PCIe and get in sync with other graphic card and CPU.


----------



## erixx (Sep 15, 2015)

PLX is as old as the original hamburger from Hamburg... it has been on many SLI/dual Ati (crossfire or something they call it  mobos since long.


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 16, 2015)

Sabertooth X99 just got the 1901 BIOS. ASUS stated it has improved stability. And it is true. I can now use all the power saving functions again while maintain a stable overclocking. Setting +175mv in adaptive mode with  a 4.3GHz overclock in CPU. No more BSOD in windows 10 is great.


----------



## Mexx (Sep 16, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> Yes, you are correct. For quad setups that utilize two dual GPU cards you'll only occupy 2x PCIe slots, meaning you only need 2x PCIe x16. But since two GPU's have to share same PCIe slot bandwidth, it's absolutely critical that both cards have full PCIe x16 available. Meaning X99 with 5820K CPU or Z170 with any CPU won't work well since they switch into 16x/8x mode with two graphic cards. Only X99 with 59xxK processor will run in full 16x/16x mode. Or potentially a motherboard with extra PLX chipsets, but I haven't really studied how that works in regards of PCIe lanes and connectivity of them to the CPU and native chipset.



One more think (maybe ;-)... I then decided to move to the x99 platform as suggested and I'm interested in the Asus Rampage V Extreme but after having read the specs and the manual I have some concerns you may be able to clarify for me. Once I'll have connected my two GPUs in the pcie slots at x16/x16,I guess I won't be able to connect anything else to any other pcie slots without down rating one of my 2 GPU from x16 to x8. Am I correct ? I really wanted to use a HyperX pcie SSD and a M2 SSD; but it is probably more than what the mobo could handle, right ? If I'm correct, does anyone has other options or workarounds to propose ? Thanks guys !


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 16, 2015)

That's a bit beyond my knowledge and reviews don't really dive into that direction. I've only seen mentions of multi GPU setups and how that corresponds to usage of PCIe lanes, but no one really explains how things change if you use 2 graphic cards and HyperX kit along with M.2.

I think you'll end up in x16/x8 or even x8/x8 modes for graphic cards with so many lanes dedicated to SSD's.

I don't know how much help this will be, but it might be useful. I watched this few days ago and he talked quite a bit about PCIe lanes and HyperX/M.2 drives...









It's for Z170, but you may extract some info out of it how many lanes are eaten by the storage mediums on those super fast ports...

I'm still on regular HDD paired with SSD cache so I don't even hit the 500MB/s bus limit...


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 16, 2015)

Also, don't try to use ASUS MyLogo on Sabertooth X99. It properly scared me today. Wanted to slam SHODAN as boot screen on my Sabertooth like I did with Rampage II Gene. I've done the same and system refused to boot, just cycling like mad. It scared the shit out of me. And after some fiddling with it, it finally booted. Now I'm no touching that thing even though I'd want a high resolution image of it as boot screen.

ASUS, check this thing out and tell the users what resolution is allowed. 1920x1080 apparently isn't and instead of refusing it during selection it almost bricks the system. Damn.


----------



## Mexx (Sep 16, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> That's a bit beyond my knowledge and reviews don't really dive into that direction. I've only seen mentions of multi GPU setups and how that corresponds to usage of PCIe lanes, but no one really explains how things change if you use 2 graphic cards and HyperX kit along with M.2.
> 
> I think you'll end up in x16/x8 or even x8/x8 modes for graphic cards with so many lanes dedicated to SSD's.
> 
> ...



Thank you RejZor !
Does anyone in his thread has an idea concerning this particular case ?


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 16, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> That's a bit beyond my knowledge and reviews don't really dive into that direction. I've only seen mentions of multi GPU setups and how that corresponds to usage of PCIe lanes, but no one really explains how things change if you use 2 graphic cards and HyperX kit along with M.2.


My MSI motherboard manual has pictures of all possible combinations.  If memory serves, it shuffles between the lesser PCI Express slots, M.2 slots (has two), and SATA Express (has two).  I'd recommend downloading the motherboard manual from the manufacturer.


----------



## Freezer (Sep 17, 2015)

X99 - i75820K, but that's only because I'm bias and like my new week old system   ....


Really, you're only spending a couple hundred more for the X99 - i75820K or you could break even on the type of MB you choose. Than again it all depends on what features you want and future expandability.


----------



## GerardFreeman (Sep 17, 2015)

After all this reading comments about what platform is better, I came to a conclusion on what platform  I want to build on. The X99. The board I'm waiting on to back into stock on New Egg is the MSI X99A Godlike motherboard. If you guys think there is a better x99 board, let me know. But for now I think I made the right choice.


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 17, 2015)

Top tier MSI boards seem to be built really well so I think you should be fine.


----------



## Mexx (Sep 19, 2015)

Any comments and thoughts about MSI X99A vs ASUS X99 Rampage V extreme ? Which one seems the best for you and why ?


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 19, 2015)

Between R5E and X99A Godlike, I would say MSI. It is newly released. The board looks way cooler. These two are both top of the line model. Grab what looks best for you.

Oh lord the RGB LED on the Godlike is fantastic!  I am very tempted to sell my sabertooth x99 for the Godlike!!!

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B014VITZPM/?tag=tec06d-20


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 19, 2015)

Well f*uck me side ways, sync LED with music? MSI you crazy sons of b*itches.











This would go great with my FuryX LED. Awesome red led for the entire theme!  And Corsair K70 Red LED. Sooooooooo tempting


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 19, 2015)

Oh cmon, no this bullshit again. My X99 won't wake up properly from sleep. It fires up when I press a keyboard button, spins the fans, starts loading something since I see HDD activity and then it just shuts down COMPLETELY. WTF!? This god damn hybrid sleep never works right. And I've gone the length of resizing boot partition to accomodate massive almost 32GB hibernation file (thanks to 32GB RAM lol). And now it's this broken mess. Argh. 1K € spent so I'm still experiencing same crap. Do I have to really change my PSU as well or what?!


----------



## hat (Sep 19, 2015)

Why does it seem sleep never works for anybody ever?


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 19, 2015)

Gotta try it if it does the same for normal shutdown, but I used that before even with OC and it was fine. Gotta retry it. Hybrid is nice since resident data is safe even if power goes out when PC is in standby. Which is nice.


----------



## Aquinus (Sep 19, 2015)

hat said:


> Why does it seem sleep never works for anybody ever?


Sleeping started working for me once I upgraded from Windows 7 to 10. Funny how that works. I had always had issues with the machine not properly going to sleep since I built it and only recently did it start working. I suspect that it's drivers since a machine won't even give you an option to sleep until most of the drivers are even installed. It's probably how a device is waking up that's causing such issues but, it's just a guess.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 19, 2015)

xkm1948 said:


> Well f*uck me side ways, sync LED with music? MSI you crazy sons of b*itches.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


There's a slew of boards with similar light features for Z170 chipset as well. MSI, ASUS, Gigabyte have all sent me boards that have multi-color LEDs with various lighting stuff similar to found on NVidia reference VGAs. If the nvdia vgas lit up in different colors... man...

still not sure how the light on the fury cards works.


----------



## erixx (Sep 21, 2015)

reJzOR i WONDER *why you took the Saber over the X99-S *for example...? I like it a lot....  

Btw: most of the energy and clever features that have been promised on mobos for 10 years just recently started to work for me. But now Win10 seems to not like suspension, it is up and running most of the time (even nights), or keyboard leds running when suspended...


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 21, 2015)

erixx said:


> reJzOR i WONDER *why you took the Saber over the X99-S *for example...? I like it a lot....
> 
> Btw: most of the energy and clever features that have been promised on mobos for 10 years just recently started to work for me. But now Win10 seems to not like suspension, it is up and running most of the time (even nights), or keyboard leds running when suspended...



Is the X99-S basically an updated X99-A?  It looks like it.  The X99-A is a decent board, but having owned both I can say the Sabertooth is a slight cut above it.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 21, 2015)

-S is the down-bin of the Deluxe, -A is a "value-oriented" board (less x16 slots, no SATA Express, etc).


http://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/1937-asus-x99-motherboard-comparison


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 26, 2015)

erixx said:


> reJzOR i WONDER *why you took the Saber over the X99-S *for example...? I like it a lot....
> 
> Btw: most of the energy and clever features that have been promised on mobos for 10 years just recently started to work for me. But now Win10 seems to not like suspension, it is up and running most of the time (even nights), or keyboard leds running when suspended...



Mostly durability. I'll use this system for a while and I want it to be in the same shape after 5+ years as it is today.


----------



## davidm71 (Sep 26, 2015)

I just spent some time comparing scores on 3dMark website of 5820k vs 6700K with a single 290X and I found slight advantage to the 5820K but for all intensive purposes the scores were almost equal. 
I think you should spend time investing in features and not x99 vs Z170. For example I wish I knew there were boards that had dual m.2 ports you can run in raid. I would go for quality and future use.
Like the future is 4K gaming therefor plan on 32GB ram lowest cas rating DDR4. Go with a board that has good power phases and two 8 pin power plugs for overclocking support. Quad channel memory is a benefit no doubt. USB 3.1 would be nice but not a deal killer.  More lanes for future multi gpu setups. So I vote for X99 by a nose. Personally I plan to only use my 5820K till Broadwell-E comes out.


----------



## davidm71 (Sep 26, 2015)

Also the distiction between -A and -S is meaningless as different board vendors use it in different ways. I think the MSI GodLike is an X99-A board..


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 26, 2015)

davidm71 said:


> I just spent some time comparing scores on 3dMark website of 5820k vs 6700K with a single 290X and I found slight advantage to the 5820K but for all intensive purposes the scores were almost equal.
> I think you should spend time investing in features and not x99 vs Z170. For example I wish I knew there were boards that had dual m.2 ports you can run in raid. I would go for quality and future use.
> Like the future is 4K gaming therefor plan on 32GB ram lowest cas rating DDR4. Go with a board that has good power phases and two 8 pin power plugs for overclocking support. Quad channel memory is a benefit no doubt. USB 3.1 would be nice but not a deal killer.  More lanes for future multi gpu setups. So I vote for X99 by a nose. Personally I plan to only use my 5820K till Broadwell-E comes out.



5820K is better in all regards. More cores and clocks equally high as 6700K. The fact it has quad channel memory is also helping a lot.

As for USB 3.1, you do have them on X99. Only thing X99 lacks is the reversible USB. But considering you only get one on Z170, I wouldn't make big of a deal about it.


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 12, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> 5820K is better in all regards. More cores and clocks equally high as 6700K. The fact it has quad channel memory is also helping a lot.
> 
> As for USB 3.1, you do have them on X99. Only thing X99 lacks is the reversible USB. But considering you only get one on Z170, I wouldn't make big of a deal about it.



I found my 6700k clocked a bit better per core.  But I won't lie, you were right to stay with X99.  It was just an experiment on my part, it's what I do with my spare time...  many of my neighbors hobbies are more expensive tbh.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Oct 12, 2015)

I'm liking the 250w power draw at the UPS.  That's CPU at 100% load and GPU at <10% (2D clocks at the moment).


----------



## loften (Nov 27, 2015)

hi,, it's been a while...  this thread is pretty sweet.. i enjoyed reading it..  i have been wanting to upgrade for a few years now but i just keep pushing it off...  i personally quit gaming and benching.. needed to sleep,, work.. getting old..  kids took computers over many years ago...  i wait for this and wait for that and by the time i think i am ready something new comes out and i have to start researching all over. not like the old socket A days where everything interchanged for years..  meanwhile the old i5 750- p55 ftw is still limping along.. i have updated things in over the years,, many different gpu's, ssd's, os's to keep it somewhat fast.. for the most part it is well ready to retire.. had to drop the 4.4 24-7 down to 4.2 the last year.. still at 1.46 volts... think my tx850 is dying... cold boot hardware initiation issues i think.. tried all the tricks.  have to start, power up for a second, shut down.. re start to get it to post window or it just endless loops.. been doing this for 2 months now lol.. anyway it sits right next to the old 24-7 asus maximus with i forget which 775 cpu in it @ 3.8 all dusty on air..  hope you all have/had a good turkey day.. food coma..


----------



## RejZoR (Nov 27, 2015)

Boot bugs are common on many boards. I had it on my ASUS X58 as well. Just when overclocked. When stock it was all fine.

Honestly, you'll be able to shuffle most of the old gear into new system. Except CPU, RAM and motherboard, obviously.


----------



## Ebo (Nov 27, 2015)

X99 you get more of everything, the "advantages" X170 has right now with newer CPU will change when next batch comes out for our platform, then its time to upgrade again.


----------



## the54thvoid (Nov 27, 2015)

Add in fuel to fire- with Broadwell E going to be X99 compatible with BIOS updates, X99 gets a few more years as well.  Skylake E (if it exists) will not be on z170 (surely not?)


----------



## erixx (Nov 27, 2015)

X99-X: I had many cold and warm boot and reboot issues, OCed and not, seeing only the 2 words : American Megatrends (bigger letters than normal). Unplug PSU and restarted fine. I believe it is (was) memory related.
Now, with new bios version 2001 and a fresh Win10 install it is all over: boots, suspensions, overclocked to 4500, RAM set to 2666@14-14-14, : as happy as i can be!
I don't want USB-C stuff (have no devices that use it).
+ what 54thVoid says... quite a future proof platform!


----------



## Vlada011 (Nov 27, 2015)

I will maybe upgrade on i7-6850K because few lanes more if I found cheap as Haswell-E.
Because i7-5930K and i7-6850K anyway have more PCI-E lanes than Z170 and Skylake together and you can use how do you want.
If USB 3.1 Flash drivers become available I will by adapter from Silvestone and make modification on my I/O Panel.
ASUS should offer Rampage 5 Extreme without OC Panel.
OC Panel cost 100$ and seriously influence on price of motherboard.
Without him board could be 50-70$ cheaper and ASUS would sell much more boards.
If they done that with Rampage 5 Extreme Black to offer two version they will sell many boards.

Z170 is good platform, better than Z68, Z77, Z87 and Z97...
But people who like Xtreme no reason to think about Skylake, they will get same only with more cores, without cheap paste and Internal GPU only later.
It's much better when you have board with huge socket and CPU same design as
Intel Xeon E5-2699 v3 with 18 cores and 45MB Cache. In hand they look identical.
I don't know why people decide to choose little Skylake with paste over i7-5820K when any i7 is strong enough in single applications and so small advantage in single threaded applications is really not important.
Are you aware before few days Skylake i7-6700K cost more on Newegg and Amazon than 
i7-5930K in Microcenter. And still cost more. I never saw price of i7 mainstream 435$.
While i7-5930K on discount cost 399$.


----------



## RejZoR (Nov 27, 2015)

Decent alternative to Rampage V Extreme is Sabertooth X99 (because I know what it is like because I had the exact same dilemma, wanted high end but not quite Rampage V Extreme which is stupendously expensive). It's cheaper and has less of unneeded stuff but is still an incredibly capable board even for overclocking. Maybe even more with actively cooled VRM and I've even slammed a fan on rear MOSFET cooling plate. Or maybe even ASUS X99-A which is the bottom X99 but still offers some kit and decent OC capability. But yeah, they should offer like Rampage V Hero, somewhat the same thing as Rampage VIII Hero. It's high end but not ridiculous top end.


----------



## Ebo (Nov 27, 2015)

I cant really see the problem, Broadwell-E will be on socket 2011-V3, and even mabye Skylake-E. Mabye its time to upgrade when Broadwell-E comes out.


----------



## Schmuckley (Nov 30, 2015)

hmm..i gotta z97 board fer cheap..allofasudden


----------



## erixx (Nov 30, 2015)

12249 in Firemark 3DMark.... allofasudda!!!


----------



## Mexx (Dec 2, 2015)

Hi guys, so for the ones who followed me and my crazy powerful rig earlier on this thread (RejZoR for example), I finally decided to upgrade my rig and to take advantage of the Cyber Monday and store closure deals Tigerdirect offered yesterday in Miami (really too bad that TD will close its last store... :-((
So I bought a 5960x with a Rampage V and 32gb of 2800 Adata DDR4. Very very good deal !!
What I cannot decide now is what storage technology should I chose knowing the limitation of the board (shared slots) having "only" 40 pcie lanes and having 2 pcie slots already at x16 with my two Asus ARES III.
What I'm looking for is max speed on different supports to optimize video editing as well as fast game & Win 10 loading. 
Thanks in advance for all your suggestions and recommendations.


----------



## RejZoR (Dec 2, 2015)

Check if Rampage V Extreme has a shared 3rd PCIe x16. If not or you don't need 3rd graphic card, using M.2 NVMe SSD is the only way to go imo. It is crazy fast and doesn't restrict airflow inside the case. And I think you can already get 1TB M.2 variants. As I can see you're loaded so this shouldn't be an issue. But izt's CRAZY fast. We're talking 2GB/s read and 1.5GB/s write on high end models.


----------



## Mexx (Dec 2, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> Check if Rampage V Extreme has a shared 3rd PCIe x16. If not or you don't need 3rd graphic card, using M.2 NVMe SSD is the only way to go imo. It is crazy fast and doesn't restrict airflow inside the case. And I think you can already get 1TB M.2 variants. As I can see you're loaded so this shouldn't be an issue. But izt's CRAZY fast. We're talking 2GB/s read and 1.5GB/s write on high end models.


Thank you RejZoR for your prompt reply and advice. I'm not sure to understand what you mean by "shared 3rd pcie x16"... I'm already in quadfire but only with two cards since each of them carry 2 GPUs. Do you think I should go with a M.2 ssd like the Samsung 952 or with a pcie card like the Intel 750 or the Kingston HyperX Predator or something else ? Thanks again


----------



## RejZoR (Dec 2, 2015)

The number of GPU's is not important. The number of PCIe x16 slots occupied is. Well, at least for my Sabertooth X99 that is. Using a graphic card in 3rd PCIe x16 slot means it'll work even slower or even be disabled (or disable M.2). Dunno how it is with that on Rampage V Extreme.

As for the SSD, I think currently the best option is Samsung 950 Pro NVMe.
http://www.samsung.com/global/busin...SSD/global/html/ssd950pro/specifications.html

It's currently the fastest M.2 module known to me. It isn't the largest however. Would 512 GB be enough for you? This one has insane sequential speeds, insane IOPS and Samsung seems to be one of the most reliable ones lately. I'm using a more modest Samsung 951 128GB for my HDD+SSD cache and it's jolly fast. M.2 is also bootable so you should be able to run entire system off this M.2 module alone. You can then throw out HDD cages and improve airflow even further. Rampage V Extreme only has 1x M.2 slot afaik, so that'll be your limitation. Still, if you're not a data hoarder like I am, 512GB should be fine. And a huge external HDD for movies and stuff that is useful in portable form anyway (so you can stick it to TV and watch directly from it).


----------



## Mexx (Dec 2, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> The number of GPU's is not important. The number of PCIe x16 slots occupied is. Well, at least for my Sabertooth X99 that is. Using a graphic card in 3rd PCIe x16 slot means it'll work even slower or even be disabled (or disable M.2). Dunno how it is with that on Rampage V Extreme.
> 
> As for the SSD, I think currently the best option is Samsung 950 Pro NVMe.
> http://www.samsung.com/global/busin...SSD/global/html/ssd950pro/specifications.html
> ...


What about The Intel 750 (much higher iops) or 4 ssd Samsung 850 pro in raid 0 ?


----------



## eidairaman1 (Dec 2, 2015)

X99 all the way


----------



## Mexx (Dec 4, 2015)

So I made my choice : Samsung 950 Pro it will be !
Thanks guys
PS: I also noticed that with the two Asus Ares 3 at x16, the card won't have any other pcie 3.0 at x4 speed, preventing me to use an Intel 750 pcie ssd at full speed (which is strange to me...). Indeed, when I count the total lanes I'll use : x16(Ares#1) + x16 (Ares#2) + x4(M.2 ssd) = 36 lanes. So since I use a 5960x with 40 lanes, where are the 4 remaining ones ? Thanks for your lights if anyone has an idea...


----------



## RejZoR (Dec 4, 2015)

Max X99 PCIe specs:

PCIe1 = 16 lanes (16 for both, 40 and 28 lanes CPU's)
PCIe2 = 16 lanes (just 8 lanes for 28 lanes CPU)
PCie3 = 8 lanes (just 4 lanes for 28 lanes CPU or even 0 lanes on my Sabertooth X99 if I use M.2 slot!)

16+16+8 = 40 (this is for your 5960x)
16+8+4 = 28 (this is for my 5820k)

I hope you understand it this way


----------



## Mexx (Dec 5, 2015)

So why the MB Manuel doesn't seems (to me...) to allow the use of a third pcie 3.0 slot at x4 when two pcie 3.0 slots are already populated by two x16 GPUs ?
I'd love to have :
Pcie x16-1 : Asus ares3 (16 lanes)
Pcie x16/x8-3 : Asus ares3 (16 lanes)
Pcie x8-4: Intel 750 Series SSD (4 lanes)
M.2 slot : Samsung 950 SSD (4 lanes)
See Manual photo below...
Thank you,


----------



## MMAAA (Dec 5, 2015)

newest


----------



## eidairaman1 (Dec 6, 2015)

Mekki kabbadj said:


> So why the MB Manuel doesn't seems (to me...) to allow the use of a third pcie 3.0 slot at x4 when two pcie 3.0 slots are already populated by two x16 GPUs ?
> I'd love to have :
> Pcie x16-1 : Asus ares3 (16 lanes)
> Pcie x16/x8-3 : Asus ares3 (16 lanes)
> ...



theres a hand that points at the limitation of the motherboard


----------



## Schmuckley (Dec 6, 2015)

I wouldn't recommend Super-expensive Rampage when x99 Champion gets it done beautifully.


----------



## Mexx (Dec 7, 2015)

Schmuckley said:


> I wouldn't recommend Super-expensive Rampage when x99 Champion gets it done beautifully.


You're right and I totally agree with you but I really like the Rampage's extremely wide coverage over the net, its remote control with digital display plus I was lucky enough to get a good deal during Cyber Monday...



eidairaman1 said:


> theres a hand that points at the limitation of the motherboard


Thank you for your reply eidairaman1 but I'm not sure to understand : would you please clarify ? Thx


----------



## xkm1948 (Dec 7, 2015)

Loving my X99+5820k every single day. Saves me tons of time for my daily work. I will probably grab an octa core Broadwell-E when they come out next year. The X series platform should be able to last a good 5~6 years. Very worthy investment.


----------



## Schmuckley (Dec 7, 2015)

Mekki kabbadj said:


> You're right and I totally agree with you but I really like the Rampage's extremely wide coverage over the net, its remote control with digital display plus I was lucky enough to get a good deal during Cyber Monday...


Remote or not..It doesn't out-OC x99 OC Champion.


----------



## The N (Dec 12, 2015)

well, better to be latest with z170 with CL cooling


----------



## Ascalaphus (Feb 6, 2016)

x99.


----------



## RejZoR (Feb 6, 2016)

I was expecting 5820K to be quite hot because it's not 14nm like Skylake, but considering it's a hexa core running at 4.5GHz (OC), it's ridiculously cool while using 22nm node. It just churns out tons of compute power and easily takes the crown from 6700k price/performance wise.

6700k is excellent for those who want fast CPU out of the box and has an integrated GPU if that's enough for your needs. For the rest, X99 is just way better imo. Better value as a whole when you overclock it.


----------



## hat (Feb 8, 2016)

RejZoR said:


> I was expecting 5820K to be quite hot because it's not 14nm like Skylake, but considering it's a hexa core running at 4.5GHz (OC), it's ridiculously cool while using 22nm node. It just churns out tons of compute power and easily takes the crown from 6700k price/performance wise.
> 
> 6700k is excellent for those who want fast CPU out of the box and has an integrated GPU if that's enough for your needs. For the rest, X99 is just way better imo. Better value as a whole when you overclock it.


Part of that cool running is probably thanks to the soldered IHS...


----------



## Ion Garcia (Apr 23, 2016)

RejZoR said:


> Actually, X99 has more lanes and I think even with basic 5820K CPU. On X99 you can actually run 2 graphic cards with PCIe x16 mode on both where Z170 can only do 2x PCIe x8 mode. I mean, even my ancient X58 can run 2x PCIe x16. Intel kinda reserved this to the highest end...
> 
> Skylake is certainly the way to go product node wise, however as things stand now, hexa cores sound more appealing.
> Firstly, 6700k is actually a very crappy overclocker. Considering it's running at 4,2GHz and people brag about "extreme" overclocks and then they only get up to 4,7 GHz. If this is "extreme", then what's 5820K going from 3,3GHz to 4,5GHz? Also, with DX12, a lot of games displayed a huge benefit from more cores. So, even basic 5820K has 6 physical cores and 12 threads. Which is significant for today's "conditions". I mean, Skylake is still exactly the same configuration as prehistoric Core i7 920... Hell, even i7 980X was a hexa core and that was like 5+ years ago...
> ...



I agree with everything you said except the part about the 6700k not being very over lockable. Sure, it doesn't do an overclock that surpasses 1ghz, BUT I personally have one and I have it overclocked to 5ghz! And it runs at 30-35C idle. I'm using a swiftech h220 X2, and just for anyone interested, it is an INSANE cooler! At 4ghz, my 6700k runs at 15C... So, it is pretty dang overclockable but not as much as other x99 chipset CPUs, but then again, the 6700k is able to hit 5ghz very easily with no problems. Just wanted to share that with you


----------



## RejZoR (Apr 23, 2016)

How can it run at 15°C under load if your idle is 30-35°C ?  My 5820 is running at 28°C idle. with a set of 2 more cores and around 70°C during typical gaming with the cooler in my specs. With a fan running in Silent profile which is inaudible. At 4.5 GHz.


----------



## n-ster (Apr 23, 2016)

RejZoR said:


> How can it run at 15°C under load if your idle is 30-35°C ?  My 5820 is running at 28°C idle. with a set of 2 more cores and around 70°C during typical gaming with the cooler in my specs. With a fan running in Silent profile which is inaudible. At 4.5 GHz.



15C idle at 4ghz, 30-35C idle at 5ghz


----------



## Devon68 (Apr 23, 2016)

> 15C idle at 4ghz


Not possible. Picture or it didn't happen.


----------



## dorsetknob (Apr 23, 2016)

I Call New Member Bullshit


Ion Garcia said:


> BUT I personally have one and I have it overclocked to 5ghz! And it runs at 30-35C idle. I'm using a swiftech h220 X2, and just for anyone interested, it is an INSANE cooler! At 4ghz, my 6700k runs at 15C... So, it is pretty dang overclockable



Load Temps will ALWAYS be higher than Idle
In Order for you to extract an apology from me you will need to post PROOF

Edit 
PS welcome to TPU


----------



## RejZoR (Apr 23, 2016)

To achieve 15°C you'd have to have room temperature of what, 5°C? 10°C tops. It doesn't matter if you have a 10kW pump and a radiator the size of your room with Delta fans on it screaming at 25k RPM. You cannot go below room temperature without LN, DICE or PhaseChange. In best case scenario you'd equalize CPU idle temp with the room temp.

And realistically, most 6700K's I've seen have hit a hard wall at 4.7GHz. getting 4.8 out of it or more means you're quite lucky. Don't get me wrong, it's still a great CPU. Especially if you plan on running it stock. Something where 5820K that I have is a bit underwhelming. Every 5820K can EASILY run at same clocks as 6700K by default.


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 23, 2016)

Maybe he's an Eskimo...

Or is that racist now?


----------



## RejZoR (Apr 23, 2016)

Stop being such an Eskimophobe.


----------



## the54thvoid (Apr 23, 2016)

R-T-B said:


> Maybe he's an Eskimo...
> 
> Or is that racist now?



Inuit is the term I believe.  Could be Alaskan, Siberian or a Bullshitarian.

Either way, the real question is, will Skylake-E (if it is road mapped) use X170 or a new socket....


----------



## dorsetknob (Apr 23, 2016)

the54thvoid said:


> Either way, the real question is, will Skylake-E (if it is road mapped) use X170 or a new socket....



Simple Answer
Intel what with laying off Staff need more Sales  To Maximize Profits so it will be New Socket and Chip-set to boost Sales
( SCREW the Consumer Profits first )


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 24, 2016)

RejZoR said:


> Stop being such an Eskimophobe.



Frog's don't do well in igloo's, I can't help it!


----------



## dorsetknob (Apr 24, 2016)

R-T-B said:


> Frog's don't do well in Igloo's, I can't help it!











they just need to learn to build igloo's


----------



## Caring1 (Apr 24, 2016)

R-T-B said:


> Maybe he's an Eskimo...
> 
> Or is that racist now?


The PC term is INUIT.
edit: beaten to the punch.


----------



## RejZoR (Apr 24, 2016)

Devon68 said:


> Not possible. Picture or it didn't happen.



Of course it's possible. If it's winter and you place a case outside, you could easily achieve this or even lower. But in a regular room temperature of 20-25°C, not possible with any kind of air or water cooling.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Apr 25, 2016)

Ion Garcia said:


> I agree with everything you said except the part about the 6700k not being very over lockable. Sure, it doesn't do an overclock that surpasses 1ghz, BUT I personally have one and I have it overclocked to 5ghz! And it runs at 30-35C idle. I'm using a swiftech h220 X2, and just for anyone interested, it is an INSANE cooler! At 4ghz, my 6700k runs at 15C... So, it is pretty dang overclockable but not as much as other x99 chipset CPUs, but then again, the 6700k is able to hit 5ghz very easily with no problems. Just wanted to share that with you



8350 at 5.1GHz on Air here.


----------



## cdawall (Apr 25, 2016)

Ion Garcia said:


> I agree with everything you said except the part about the 6700k not being very over lockable. Sure, it doesn't do an overclock that surpasses 1ghz, BUT I personally have one and I have it overclocked to 5ghz! And it runs at 30-35C idle. I'm using a swiftech h220 X2, and just for anyone interested, it is an INSANE cooler! At 4ghz, my 6700k runs at 15C... So, it is pretty dang overclockable but not as much as other x99 chipset CPUs, but then again, the 6700k is able to hit 5ghz very easily with no problems. Just wanted to share that with you



15C based off of what temps? Either your CPU sensor is wrong or you are reading the wrong temps.


----------



## broken pixel (Apr 25, 2016)

The N said:


> well, better to be latest with z170 with CL cooling



Latest is not always the best choice depending on what one needs or wants from their puter build. I have been using the intel X series chipsets since the X48 finding the resale value of the X series mainboards maintain their value for resale as to help cut the cost during upgrading to the latest & greatest of silicon tech, if you have that itch. Sell the food stamps, cherry pick the children's college funds & the wife's anniversary gift savings.

The Z170 does have benefits over the X99 since the Z170 chipset supports M.2 pci-e SSD RAID configurations, but not all Z170 MB will support M.2 RAID. Most X99 MB support 128GB of DDR4 maybe more & the ability to utilize three or four GPU's at 16x 3.0 bus speeds. So far I have been able to recycle the enthusiast hardware & still maintain my e- penis while only having to actually spend half the cost or less for the latest & greatest to decipher the meaning of dimensional existences & traverse within them.


----------



## RejZoR (Apr 25, 2016)

M.2 is still pointless if you want huge high end SSD storage, because you can't get any 2TB M.2 SSD drives yet. 512GB 950 Pro from Samsung is the only big one so far. I had to resort back to SATA because of that.


----------



## Schmuckley (Apr 25, 2016)

RejZoR said:


> To achieve 15°C you'd have to have room temperature of what, 5°C? 10°C tops. It doesn't matter if you have a 10kW pump and a radiator the size of your room with Delta fans on it screaming at 25k RPM. *You cannot go below room temperature without LN, DICE or PhaseChange*. In best case scenario you'd equalize CPU idle temp with the room temp.
> 
> And realistically, most 6700K's I've seen have hit a hard wall at 4.7GHz. getting 4.8 out of it or more means you're quite lucky. Don't get me wrong, it's still a great CPU. Especially if you plan on running it stock. Something where 5820K that I have is a bit underwhelming. Every 5820K can EASILY run at same clocks as 6700K by default.



The bolded is incorrect my dear sir.
Open loop system maintains res water 6-11c below ambient.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1503843/my-bong-cooler-build-log-evaporative-cooling/0_100


----------



## EarthDog (Apr 25, 2016)

That is correct within the context they are talking about. If you want to go otuside of the context and talk about rare 'bong' cooling to prove a point.........



Ion Garcia said:


> I agree with everything you said except the part about the 6700k not being very over lockable. Sure, it doesn't do an overclock that surpasses 1ghz, BUT I personally have one and I have it overclocked to 5ghz! And it runs at 30-35C idle. I'm using a swiftech h220 X2, and just for anyone interested, it is an INSANE cooler! At 4ghz, my 6700k runs at 15C... So, it is pretty dang overclockable but not as much as other x99 chipset CPUs, but then again, the 6700k is able to hit 5ghz very easily with no problems. Just wanted to share that with you


LOLOLOLOLOLOL... So let me get this straight... it runs 30-35C idle on an H220 x2. Then a sentence later you say it runs at 15C.....


1. Make sense. 
2. Hitting 5GHz 'very easily with no problems' on Skylake is horse crap. There are very VERY few that can be 24/7 stable using ambient cooling methods and be under a voltage that won't kill the CPU...


----------



## dorsetknob (Apr 25, 2016)

We Probably been 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	





Ion Garcia was last seen: Saturday at 7:13 PM for his one and only post


----------



## eidairaman1 (Apr 26, 2016)

m.2 is like AGP, a slot that cant fit other stuff in it


----------



## trog100 (Apr 28, 2016)

my cpu idles at around 4 C over ambient.. it currently reads 27 C.. my room temp is 23 C.. depending on the time of year and the weather my room temp is between 20 C and 30 C.. this puts my cpu idle temps between 24 C and 34 C..

if my room temps were 0 C (ouch) my cpu would idle at 4 C.. not a lot of brain power needed to figure this one out.. 

6 cores 12 threads running balls out at 4.5 gig is gonna generate a lot more heat than 4 cores 8 threads running balls out at 4.5 gig.. not a lot of brain power needed to figure that one out ether.. 

if this aint happening (as would be mostly the case) it simply means most of those 12 threads aint being used.. 

cpu benchmarks will show the benefits of more cores.. very little else will.. 



trog


----------



## EarthDog (Apr 28, 2016)

trog100 said:


> 6 cores 12 threads running balls out at 4.5 gig is gonna generate a lot more heat than 4 cores 8 threads running balls out at 4.5 gig.. not a lot of brain power needed to figure that one out ether..


That actually depends on the CPU, its rated TDP, and the voltage required to get said CPU to 4.5Ghz. That said, typically, you are correct... but there are plenty of examples otherwise (think Xeon chips vs regular chips). 



trog100 said:


> cpu benchmarks will show the benefits of more cores.. very little else will..


That also depends on what you are doing... Encoding, rendering, etc... uses CPU cores. Some people use their PC's for more than just email/internet/gaming.


----------



## trog100 (Apr 28, 2016)

some do most dont.. they are part of the "very little else" comment..

rated TPD is at a set clock speed and for sure it aint 4.5 gig with a 6 core 12 thread intel chip.. 

you are nit picking for the sake of nit picking.. as you often do.. he he

trog


----------



## EarthDog (Apr 28, 2016)

I am nitpicking, but you are making blanket statements that, because they are blanket statements, make it not true as a whole. Yes, I am a stickler for details. My apologies for the way I am (fact/detail oriented), I certainly know it can be off putting, particularly to those that make erroneous/overreaching statements.



trog100 said:


> rated TPD is at a set clock speed and for sure it aint 4.5 gig with 6 core 12 thread intel chip..


O f course it isn't. I am trying to expose you to the inconsistency in your post. There are 6c/12t CPUs (Xeon) with the same/similar TDPs to a 4c/8t CPU. So it isn't always true that it would use more power 'just because it has more cores'. As I said it will depend on the chips used and how much voltage it took to get there (among other variables like leakage, etc).


----------



## RejZoR (May 22, 2016)

Wow, I was copying Windows 10 ISO image to my external HDD drive and it was pushing data through at 40,5 MB/s. USB 3.0 port and USB 2.0 HDD hooked on it. The fastest I could ever get USB 2.0 on USB 2.0 port was a bit over 30 MB/s. Interesting. Has this always been like this or is this something new? I always thought 30 MB/s was the absolute limit of USB 2.0 devices, but it seems they can work faster if they are plugged into USB 3.x ports.


----------



## Jetster (May 22, 2016)

Its wont write at that speed but read yes. The buffer is probably helping


----------



## RejZoR (May 22, 2016)

Nope, it was writing, from SSD to USB 2.0 HDD. I don't think buffer has anything to do with it because in the exact same environment, but with USB 2.0 port, speeds never go above 30 MB/s. Unless only USB 3.0 ports use some sort of special buffer...


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 22, 2016)

USB 2.0 is 480 Mb/s maximum bandwidth (everything on the bus including overhead) or 60 MB/s.  I literally have every USB port filled on the back of my machine.

I plugged my 400+ MB/s read/write USB3 drive into one of my USB2 ports and copied a 268 MiB ZIP (Realtek drivers) to my 400/200 MB/s read/write SSD and it hit 40.7 MB/s before dropping to the 30s and finishing.  The opposite direction (SSD to USB2) peaked at 39 MB/s.

I repeated the test using USB3: 171 MB/s -> 130 dropping to 100 MB/s


----------



## MIRTAZAPINE (May 22, 2016)

It burst speed on the USB 2.0 which allow you to hit above 30MB/s, it would not last long though and the speed would even out eventually to below 30MB/s due to the overhead of the USB 2.0 protocol. Theoretically usb 2.0 have a speed of 60MB/s but that would not happen in real life practical use.

Running a usb 2 device on a usb 3 port would force the usb 3 port to be at usb 2 as the additional pins of usb 3 is not available to be use as it non-existent on the usb 2 cable connector.


----------

