Category | Desktop | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
---|---|---|
Target | mid-range | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Socket Compatibility | LGA1151 | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Integrated Graphics | Intel HD Graphics 530 | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Cooler Included | No | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Overclock Potential | 17 % | ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Year | 2015 Model | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Price | 242 USD | ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ |
Number of Cores | 4 Cores | ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Number of Threads | 4 Threads | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Core Frequency | 3.5 GHz | ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ |
Boost Frequency | 3.9 GHz | ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Max Stable Overclock | 4.6 GHz | ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ |
Power Consumption | 91 W | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Manufacturing Process | 14 nm | ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ |
L3 Cache | 6 MB | ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Maximum Supported Memory | 64 GB | ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ |
Price-Value Score | 63 % | ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Speed Score | 56 % | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Productivity Score | 33 % | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Gaming Score | 80 % | ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ |
Max 1080p Bottleneck | 38.6 % | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Max 1440p Bottleneck | 19.3 % | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Max 4K Bottleneck | 9.7 % | ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ |
Overall Score | 34/100 | ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
The Core i5-6600K is one of Intel's mid-range Desktop processors. It was released in 2015 with 4 cores and 4 threads. With base clock at 3.5GHz, max speed at 3.9GHz, and a 91W power rating. The Core i5-6600K is based on the Skylake-S 14nm family and is part of the Core i5 series.
Core i5-6600K is also the successor of Intel's last gen Core i5-4690K processor that was based on the Haswell Refresh and 22nm process and was released in 2014.
Intel Core i5 6th Generation, and the Skylake-S architecture itself, is notable because it leads 14nm processors to the mainstream for the first time. But, there’s a lot more going on under the hood than just a smaller manufacturing node.
That something is the Core i5-6600K. Intel cranks the TDP dial up to 91W on this 4-core 4-thread chip, making it the high-performance counterpart to the 65W Core i5-6500, which is basically the same 14nm chip built with the Skylake-S microarchitecture, but with a lower TDP rating. That chip came away from our first look at the Skylake-S series with an Editor's Choice award, going toe-to-toe with AMD's A12-9800, so it's fair to say we have high hopes for the higher-performance model. Intel still hasn't sampled the chip to the press, so we bought one at retail to put it under the microscope.
But we've also found that, after simple push-button overclocking, the Core i5-6500 offers similar performance to the Core i5-6600K, even when it is also overclocked. But for $70 less. The Core i5-6600K is an impressive chip and offers a better mixture of performance than AMD's A12-9800, no doubt, but in this case, value seekers might opt for its less expensive sibling.
As the higher-priced version of the Core i5-6500, the Core i5-6600K has higher base and Boost frequencies of 3.5 and 3.9 GHz, respectively. That's an increase in base frequency and a bump to boost clocks, but the real advantage should lay in the higher Package Power Tracking (PPT) envelope, which is a measurement of the maximum amount of power delivered to the socket. The Core i5-6500's PPT tops out at 65W, while the motherboard can pump up to 142W to the Core i5-6600K at peak performance. That opens up much more aggressive boost behavior, on both single and multiple cores, that could widen the performance gap beyond what we see on the spec sheet.
Intel Core i5 6 Generation is finally here, and the Intel Core i5-6600K might just be the poster child for what this generation of processors has in store for consumers. Sure, it might have stuck with the 4-core, 4-thread setup, which it inherited from its predecessor, the Core i5-4690K. However, with the new 14nm manufacturing process, it delivers a far better performance at lower power consumption.
This decision to 14nm has brought a beefy 15% boost to IPC (instructions per clock) performance. Effectively, compared to a Core i5 4-Generation processor at the same clock speed, you will get a straight 15% increase in performance. That’s not big enough to be evident in day-to-day workloads, but it does still mean something.
The Intel Core i5-6600K is another impressive release from Intel and its 6 Generation of Core i5 chips. With it, you’re getting 4-cores and 4-threads, with a boost clock of 3.9GHz. It may not be the strongest contender ever made on paper, but when you see and feel the actual performance gains it offers, you’re certainly getting a lot of bang for your $242 buck.
The Intel Core i5-6600K seems to be a decent performing chip that is readily available for $242 at your favorite retailer. The main competition for this processor is the A12-9800 4-Core unlocked desktop processor with Radeon R7 (on-die) graphics ($139 shipped).
If extended overclocking and boost frequencies are trivial matters to you, Intel also offers the Core i5-6500 at $192. It’s still outfitted with 4-cores and 4-threads, but clocks in at a slower 3.2GHz and maxes out at only 3.6GHz.
Now the biggest question is can Intel’s Core i5 processor play games? The answer is simply yes as it got a respectable gaming score of 80% in our benchmarks.
Fresh from a successful roll-out of mainstream Core i5 CPUs, Intel's attack on AMD now extends down into the mid-range with its Core i5-6600K processors, which the company is making available as of Aug 2015.
Below is a comparison of all graphics cards average FPS performance (using an average of 80+ games at ultra quality settings), combined with the Intel Core i5-6600K.
Graphics Card | Price | Cost Per Frame | Avg 1080p | Avg 1440p | Avg 4K |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 24GB | $ 1,599 | $ 6.6 | 242.9 FPS
|
244.3 FPS
|
173.3 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Ti 20GB | $ 799 | $ 3.5 | 226.7 FPS
|
228 FPS
|
161.7 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX 24GB | $ 999 | $ 4.6 | 219.3 FPS
|
216.5 FPS
|
139.8 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 16GB | $ 1,199 | $ 5.7 | 210.5 FPS
|
211.6 FPS
|
150.1 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti 12GB | $ 799 | $ 3.9 | 202.3 FPS
|
203.3 FPS
|
144.1 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT 20GB | $ 899 | $ 4.5 | 199.3 FPS
|
196.8 FPS
|
126.9 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 24GB | $ 1,499 | $ 7.9 | 189.2 FPS
|
183.5 FPS
|
122.5 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT 16GB | $ 1,099 | $ 6.1 | 181.1 FPS
|
178.9 FPS
|
115.4 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti 24GB | $ 1,999 | $ 11.2 | 178.1 FPS
|
179.1 FPS
|
127 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT 16GB | $ 999 | $ 5.6 | 177.4 FPS
|
173.1 FPS
|
113.6 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT 16GB | $ 649 | $ 3.9 | 167 FPS
|
162.9 FPS
|
107 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti 20GB | $ 799 | $ 4.8 | 165 FPS
|
163.2 FPS
|
113 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 10GB | $ 699 | $ 4.2 | 164.9 FPS
|
160 FPS
|
106.8 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 12GB | $ 599 | $ 3.8 | 159.2 FPS
|
156.1 FPS
|
109.4 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti 10GB | $ 599 | $ 4.2 | 141.5 FPS
|
138.4 FPS
|
94 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 6800 16GB | $ 579 | $ 4.4 | 132.3 FPS
|
129 FPS
|
84.7 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 8GB | $ 499 | $ 4 | 126.1 FPS
|
122.4 FPS
|
81.7 FPS
|
NVIDIA TITAN RTX 24GB | $ 2,499 | $ 21.6 | 115.8 FPS
|
116 FPS
|
78 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti 11GB | $ 1,299 | $ 11.5 | 112.8 FPS
|
113 FPS
|
75.9 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT 12GB | $ 479 | $ 4.3 | 111.3 FPS
|
109.4 FPS
|
70.8 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB 8GB | $ 399 | $ 3.6 | 109.5 FPS
|
108.8 FPS
|
74.8 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti 8GB | $ 399 | $ 3.9 | 103.4 FPS
|
102.9 FPS
|
70 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER 8GB | $ 699 | $ 6.8 | 102.3 FPS
|
101.5 FPS
|
67.8 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT 8GB | $ 399 | $ 4 | 98.7 FPS
|
97.5 FPS
|
64.3 FPS
|
NVIDIA TITAN V 12GB | $ 2,999 | $ 30.6 | 98.1 FPS
|
98.3 FPS
|
67.3 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 8GB | $ 299 | $ 3.1 | 98 FPS
|
97.9 FPS
|
67.3 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 7600 8GB | $ 269 | $ 2.7 | 98 FPS
|
96.8 FPS
|
63.7 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 8GB | $ 699 | $ 7.2 | 96.7 FPS
|
95 FPS
|
62.9 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT 8GB | $ 379 | $ 4.1 | 92.6 FPS
|
91 FPS
|
59.7 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti 11GB | $ 759 | $ 8.4 | 90.7 FPS
|
90.6 FPS
|
60.5 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER 8GB | $ 499 | $ 5.5 | 90.1 FPS
|
87.4 FPS
|
58.3 FPS
|
NVIDIA TITAN Xp 12GB | $ 1,199 | $ 13.5 | 88.9 FPS
|
87.4 FPS
|
59.7 FPS
|
AMD Radeon VII 16GB | $ 699 | $ 7.9 | 88.9 FPS
|
86.8 FPS
|
57 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 8GB | $ 399 | $ 4.6 | 86.6 FPS
|
84.5 FPS
|
55.4 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 8GB | $ 499 | $ 5.8 | 85.4 FPS
|
81.7 FPS
|
55.2 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 8GB | $ 200 | $ 2.3 | 85.4 FPS
|
84.5 FPS
|
58.1 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 12GB | $ 329 | $ 3.9 | 84.8 FPS
|
82.5 FPS
|
55.6 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER 8GB | $ 400 | $ 5 | 80.8 FPS
|
76 FPS
|
50.5 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 5700 8GB | $ 349 | $ 4.4 | 79.3 FPS
|
77.5 FPS
|
50.8 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 8GB | $ 499 | $ 6.5 | 77 FPS
|
74.1 FPS
|
48.7 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 6GB | $ 350 | $ 4.6 | 76.1 FPS
|
69.9 FPS
|
45.6 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT 6GB | $ 279 | $ 3.7 | 74.8 FPS
|
72.5 FPS
|
47.4 FPS
|
AMD Radeon R9 295X2 4GB | $ 1,499 | $ 20.8 | 72.2 FPS
|
68.4 FPS
|
47.9 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 8GB | $ 499 | $ 6.9 | 72 FPS
|
70.3 FPS
|
46 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti 8GB | $ 409 | $ 5.7 | 71.4 FPS
|
68.6 FPS
|
44.9 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti 6GB | $ 249 | $ 3.6 | 69.8 FPS
|
66.6 FPS
|
44.4 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X 12GB | $ 999 | $ 14.4 | 69.4 FPS
|
65.9 FPS
|
43.2 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6GB | $ 279 | $ 4.1 | 67.9 FPS
|
65.3 FPS
|
42.7 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 8GB | $ 399 | $ 5.9 | 67.5 FPS
|
65.7 FPS
|
43 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 8GB | $ 399 | $ 6.1 | 65.7 FPS
|
62.6 FPS
|
40.7 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER 6GB | $ 229 | $ 3.6 | 64 FPS
|
61.6 FPS
|
40.4 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti 6GB | $ 649 | $ 10.7 | 60.4 FPS
|
57.7 FPS
|
37.8 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 6GB | $ 220 | $ 3.7 | 60.2 FPS
|
57.9 FPS
|
37.9 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 590 8GB | $ 279 | $ 4.9 | 57.2 FPS
|
53.4 FPS
|
34.2 FPS
|
AMD Radeon R9 FURY X 4GB | $ 649 | $ 11.8 | 54.9 FPS
|
54.9 FPS
|
36.9 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER 4GB | $ 160 | $ 3 | 52.5 FPS
|
50.3 FPS
|
32.9 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT 8GB 8GB | $ 199 | $ 3.8 | 52 FPS
|
48.5 FPS
|
31 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 4GB | $ 549 | $ 10.6 | 51.8 FPS
|
49 FPS
|
32.3 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 580 8GB | $ 229 | $ 4.5 | 50.7 FPS
|
47.3 FPS
|
30.1 FPS
|
AMD Radeon R9 Nano 4GB | $ 649 | $ 13 | 49.9 FPS
|
49 FPS
|
32.8 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK 6GB | $ 999 | $ 20.6 | 48.4 FPS
|
45.4 FPS
|
31.2 FPS
|
AMD Radeon R9 FURY 4GB | $ 549 | $ 11.7 | 47.1 FPS
|
46.2 FPS
|
30.5 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6GB 6GB | $ 254 | $ 5.4 | 47 FPS
|
44.2 FPS
|
29 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT 4GB 4GB | $ 169 | $ 3.6 | 46.6 FPS
|
43.6 FPS
|
27.8 FPS
|
AMD Radeon R9 390X 8GB | $ 429 | $ 9.4 | 45.4 FPS
|
44.3 FPS
|
29.4 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3GB 3GB | $ 170 | $ 3.8 | 44.6 FPS
|
42.1 FPS
|
27.6 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 4GB | $ 329 | $ 7.5 | 43.9 FPS
|
40.9 FPS
|
27.9 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 480 8GB | $ 400 | $ 9.4 | 42.6 FPS
|
41.2 FPS
|
27.7 FPS
|
AMD Radeon R9 390 8GB | $ 329 | $ 7.8 | 42.4 FPS
|
40.4 FPS
|
25.3 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 570 4GB | $ 169 | $ 4 | 41.8 FPS
|
39.9 FPS
|
25.6 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 4GB | $ 149 | $ 3.7 | 40 FPS
|
38.1 FPS
|
24.9 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 470 4GB | $ 179 | $ 4.8 | 37.3 FPS
|
35.8 FPS
|
23.4 FPS
|
AMD Radeon R9 380X 4GB | $ 229 | $ 7.3 | 31.4 FPS
|
29.8 FPS
|
19.9 FPS
|
AMD Radeon R9 285 2GB | $ 249 | $ 8.8 | 28.2 FPS
|
26.8 FPS
|
16.9 FPS
|
AMD Radeon R9 380 2GB | $ 199 | $ 7.1 | 28 FPS
|
26.5 FPS
|
16.9 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti 4GB | $ 169 | $ 6.1 | 27.6 FPS
|
26.3 FPS
|
17.2 FPS
|
AMD Radeon R9 280 3GB | $ 279 | $ 10.2 | 27.3 FPS
|
26.2 FPS
|
16.2 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 2GB | $ 199 | $ 7.4 | 26.9 FPS
|
25.5 FPS
|
16.5 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | $ 169 | $ 7.2 | 23.5 FPS
|
22.1 FPS
|
14.2 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 560 4GB | $ 99 | $ 4.6 | 21.7 FPS
|
20.3 FPS
|
13 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 2GB | $ 159 | $ 7.5 | 21.3 FPS
|
19.8 FPS
|
13.2 FPS
|
AMD Radeon R7 370 2GB | $ 149 | $ 7.1 | 20.9 FPS
|
18.7 FPS
|
12.5 FPS
|
AMD Radeon R7 265 2GB | $ 149 | $ 7.2 | 20.7 FPS
|
18 FPS
|
12.1 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 460 4GB | $ 140 | $ 7.3 | 19.2 FPS
|
17.9 FPS
|
11.6 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti 2GB | $ 149 | $ 8.1 | 18.5 FPS
|
15.4 FPS
|
10.4 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 550 2GB | $ 79 | $ 5.2 | 15.1 FPS
|
14.3 FPS
|
9.1 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 2GB | $ 79 | $ 5.4 | 14.5 FPS
|
13.5 FPS
|
8.4 FPS
|
Hold off on just the mobo or wait for 4000 series entirely?
There is always something to wait for. For all we know Ryzen 4000 can get delayed now that we are getting a Ryzen 3000 refresh. Just get a B450 max + 3600 and start enjoying the boost in performance 6 months sooner.
I have heard that the 4000 series will be anything from a minor improvement to huge 20%+ improvement. Noone knows for sure but if you are happy to wait the zen 2 CPUs will be cheaper.
If not get a 3300x, can't lose to much selling it used because it is already pretty cheap. And don't worry about being only 4 cores, it's multicore performance is pretty close to a 6 core 1600af
Alternatively get a 3600 and forget about the 4000 series
I should also note that the i7 is on an HP 2B47 Odense motherboard and the i5 is on a MSI B150 Gaming M3.
Uggh. The OEM motherboard using DDR3 is unappealing, but there's very little performance difference, likely. The unlocked cpu with DDR4 is likely better, but you can't likely take advantage of the unlocked status with that mobo...Which is cheaper ? What do you want to do with it ?
We're right at the "crux" point where DDR3, used, is likely going to be worth more than DDR4...if selling pieces is a consideration...
I actually have both PCs in working order right now. I'm trying to decide which to use as my primary gaming rig.
How do the same generation of boards have different RAM?
So my current build is:
Intel Core I5 6600K
MSI gtx 1070 8gb
Gigabyte Z170X-Gaming 3
Kingston Fury Black 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4 2400MHz
I think my cpu is the bottleneck atm as i cant really multitask and see it at 100% usage a lot of the time.
Im okay with upgrading my motherboard aswell if needed, just wondering what would be an upgrade i would notice and allow me to not lag a lot of the time due to cpu usage. I'd be looking to spend around £400 maybe more if the upgrade is worth the investment.
Thanks in advance!
Ryzen 5 3600x and a b450 Motherboard should do the trick.
Jul 12, 2020 - A rivalry for the ages, and a question often asked and wondered about. Whenever you want to build or upgrade your PC, you have to make a decision: Buy an Intel or AMD processor?
Jul 5, 2020 - Does RAM size and speed affect your gaming performance? should you invest in a high performance RAM kit? Find out here.
Jul 24, 2023 No evil entity is more scary than Lilith herself, shrouded in darkness.
Jun 23, 2020 - Mid- and high-range builds perform very well for their price, and are better than the entry-level in terms of power, longevity, and reliability, and they offer more bang for your buck especially when looking at their price-by-year advantage.
Jun 11, 2020 - Pre-built systems are an attractive option for those who are less concerned with the minute details of every component in their build. Building your own PC is the best solution for those who want full control over every aspect of their build. It provides the most thorough customization options, from the CPU to the fans and lighting.
Jun 2, 2020 - How to find the Right CPU? Whether you’re building or upgrading a PC, the processor matters a lot. CPUAgent is the right tool to help you find and choose the right CPU for your needs.
Sep 03, 2020 - Save your CPU money and invest it in a powerful GPU instead. So, which affordable yet powerfulrt CPU strikes the best performance-price balance with the NVIDIA RTX 3070?
May 23, 2020 - The best performance to price value mid-range cpus are here. Find out more in this comprehensive review and summary of the Core i5-10600K vs Ryzen 5 3600X's capabilities.
May 22, 2020 - Which one is worth it, Core i7-10700K or Ryzen 7 3700X? Find out in this comprehensive review and summary of the Core i7-10700K vs Ryzen 7 3700X's capabilities.
May 21, 2020 - 10 cores vs 12 cores. Top-of-the-line very high-end cpus duke it out.
May 21, 2020 - In this massive comparison across 8 generations of Intel Core i5 series CPUs, we explore the performance improvements by generation and whether it is reasonable or not to upgrade to Intel's latest.
The Core i5-6600K looked good here against the recent Core i7 offerings, as well, lagging slightly behind, but staying fairly close to the 4th- and 5th-Generation options. POV Ray 3.7 This was the ...
The Core i7-6700K and Core i5-6600K fall into the Skylake-S category, but are distinguished by a couple of key features. The K denotes that these chips have unlocked multipliers, which means they ...
Core i5-6600K. Intel differentiates the two leading chips through both architecture snips and frequency alterations. We know all about the Core i5 losing hyperthreading, but some frequency is also ...
Skylake Core i5-6600K and Core i7 6700K processors for the desktop platform have been released. We test both processors, yet have separate reviews on each of these processors. A new chip, a new ...
6600K to Ryzen help?
Hey all,
I am thinking about upgrading my 6600K to Ryzen and I have a couple of questions because I'm a little torn on what to do. I am tempted to buy a B450 and a 3600. Should I be waiting for the 4000 chips? How much of an increase in performance would I actually be getting there? Secondly, should I be waiting for the B550 mobos instead of getting a B450 even if I just settle for the 3600?