Category | Desktop | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
---|---|---|
Target | high-end | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Socket Compatibility | LGA2011 | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Integrated Graphics | None | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Cooler Included | No | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Overclock Potential | 10 % | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Year | 2014 Model | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Price | 613 USD | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Number of Cores | 6 Cores | ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ |
Number of Threads | 12 Threads | ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ |
Core Frequency | 3.5 GHz | ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ |
Boost Frequency | 3.7 GHz | ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Max Stable Overclock | 4.1 GHz | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Power Consumption | 140 W | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Manufacturing Process | 22 nm | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
L3 Cache | 15 MB | ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ |
Maximum Supported Memory | 64 GB | ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ |
Price-Value Score | 56 % | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Speed Score | 52 % | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Productivity Score | 38 % | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Gaming Score | 79 % | ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ |
Max 1080p Bottleneck | 36.7 % | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Max 1440p Bottleneck | 18.4 % | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Max 4K Bottleneck | 9.2 % | ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ |
Overall Score | 30/100 | ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
The Core i7-5930K is one of Intel's high-end Desktop processors. It was released in 2014 with 6 cores and 12 threads. With base clock at 3.5GHz, max speed at 3.7GHz, and a 140W power rating. The Core i7-5930K is based on the Haswell-E 22nm family and is part of the Core i7 series.
Core i7-5930K is also the successor of Intel's last gen Core i7-4930K processor that was based on the Ivy Bridge E and 22nm process and was released in 2013.
Now, we're asking ourselves whether or not the Intel Core i7-5930K finally dethrones the FX-9590 as the de facto ruler of the mainstream processors. Ultimately, it depends: the Core i7-5930K doesn't reach the same single-core performance as AMD, but we're starting to see more games adopt multi-threaded CPUs, so that doesn't matter as much.
The Intel Core i7-5930K is an absolute behemoth of a processor, as it absolutely should be with its 6 cores, 12 threads and high price tag. If you’re looking for the absolute best processor money can buy on a mainstream processor, then look no further. Whether you’re playing PC games or even doing hardcore video and 3D work, the Intel Core i7-5930K can handle them with ease.
But we've also found that, after simple push-button overclocking, the Core i7-5820K offers similar performance to the Core i7-5930K, even when it is also overclocked. But for $70 less. The Core i7-5930K is an impressive chip and offers a better mixture of performance than AMD's FX-9590, no doubt, but in this case, value seekers might opt for its less expensive sibling.
As the higher-priced version of the Core i7-5820K, the Core i7-5930K has higher base and Boost frequencies of 3.5 and 3.7 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 i7-5820K's PPT tops out at 140W, while the motherboard can pump up to 142W to the Core i7-5930K 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.
The Intel Core i7-5930K was rolled out on Aug 2014 for $613, which puts it in the same general price range as the last-generation Core i7-4930K. This means that at least we're not seeing any considerable price jumps from generation to generation.
What this all means is that the Intel Core i7-5930K is an absolute beast when it comes to multi-threaded workloads, especially at this price point. If you're counting on doing some video editing or compiling one hell of an Excel spreadsheet, you're going to see firsthand a performance boost with the Core i7-5930K.
The Intel Graphics have been disabled and therefore the Core i7-5930K has no form of integrated graphics -- just like the FX-9590. This is meant to make the Core i7-5930K cheaper than the Core i7-4930K, even though AMD's list pricing doesn't make this apparent, in practice the Core i7-5930K can be had for $613 while the Core i7-4930K is still $670, making the newer chip 9% cheaper. It also means it’s cheaper than the FX-9590 which is currently retailing for $495.92.
Today we’ll be taking a closer look at the Intel Core i7-5930K 6-core desktop processor that was released in Aug 2014. Intel offers the Core i7-5930K without integrated graphics. It runs $613 shipped and is ideal for those that plan on using it a system with a dedicated graphics card.
If extended overclocking and boost frequencies are trivial matters to you, Intel also offers the Core i7-5820K at $410. It’s still outfitted with 6-cores and 12-threads, but clocks in at a slower 3.3GHz and maxes out at only 3.6GHz.
Now the biggest question is can Intel’s Core i7 processor play games? The answer is simply yes as it got a respectable gaming score of 79% in our benchmarks.
Regardless of those external factors, the Core i7-5930K proves it has the chops to be your main gaming system and a just as effective media creation platform – two things that are becoming intrinsically connected in this age of live-streaming, eSports and uploading gameplay videos.
That said, to squeeze out all the potential of this surprisingly potent high-end chip, you’ll want (and need) to splurge on an enthusiast-grade C602J, C606, X79 motherboard.
Fresh from a successful roll-out of mainstream Core i7 CPUs, Intel's attack on AMD now extends down into the high-end with its Core i7-5930K processors, which the company is making available as of Aug 2014.
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 i7-5930K.
Graphics Card | Price | Cost Per Frame | Avg 1080p | Avg 1440p | Avg 4K |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 24GB | $ 1,599 | $ 6.4 | 250.5 FPS
|
247.1 FPS
|
174.2 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Ti 20GB | $ 799 | $ 3.4 | 233.7 FPS
|
230.6 FPS
|
162.6 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX 24GB | $ 999 | $ 4.4 | 226.1 FPS
|
218.9 FPS
|
140.5 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 16GB | $ 1,199 | $ 5.5 | 217 FPS
|
214 FPS
|
150.9 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti 12GB | $ 799 | $ 3.8 | 208.5 FPS
|
205.5 FPS
|
144.9 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT 20GB | $ 899 | $ 4.4 | 205.5 FPS
|
199 FPS
|
127.6 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 24GB | $ 1,499 | $ 7.7 | 195.1 FPS
|
185.6 FPS
|
123.2 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT 16GB | $ 1,099 | $ 5.9 | 186.7 FPS
|
180.9 FPS
|
116 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti 24GB | $ 1,999 | $ 10.9 | 183.6 FPS
|
181.1 FPS
|
127.7 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT 16GB | $ 999 | $ 5.5 | 182.9 FPS
|
175 FPS
|
114.2 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT 16GB | $ 649 | $ 3.8 | 172.2 FPS
|
164.7 FPS
|
107.5 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti 20GB | $ 799 | $ 4.7 | 170.1 FPS
|
165 FPS
|
113.6 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 10GB | $ 699 | $ 4.1 | 170 FPS
|
161.7 FPS
|
107.3 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 12GB | $ 599 | $ 3.6 | 164.2 FPS
|
157.9 FPS
|
110 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti 10GB | $ 599 | $ 4.1 | 145.9 FPS
|
139.9 FPS
|
94.5 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 6800 16GB | $ 579 | $ 4.2 | 136.4 FPS
|
130.5 FPS
|
85.2 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 8GB | $ 499 | $ 3.8 | 130 FPS
|
123.8 FPS
|
82.1 FPS
|
NVIDIA TITAN RTX 24GB | $ 2,499 | $ 20.9 | 119.4 FPS
|
117.3 FPS
|
78.4 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti 11GB | $ 1,299 | $ 11.2 | 116.3 FPS
|
114.2 FPS
|
76.3 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT 12GB | $ 479 | $ 4.2 | 114.8 FPS
|
110.6 FPS
|
71.2 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB 8GB | $ 399 | $ 3.5 | 112.9 FPS
|
110 FPS
|
75.3 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti 8GB | $ 399 | $ 3.7 | 106.6 FPS
|
104.1 FPS
|
70.4 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER 8GB | $ 699 | $ 6.6 | 105.5 FPS
|
102.6 FPS
|
68.2 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT 8GB | $ 399 | $ 3.9 | 101.8 FPS
|
98.6 FPS
|
64.7 FPS
|
NVIDIA TITAN V 12GB | $ 2,999 | $ 29.7 | 101.1 FPS
|
99.4 FPS
|
67.7 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 8GB | $ 299 | $ 3 | 101.1 FPS
|
99 FPS
|
67.7 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 7600 8GB | $ 269 | $ 2.7 | 101 FPS
|
97.9 FPS
|
64.1 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 8GB | $ 699 | $ 7 | 99.7 FPS
|
96 FPS
|
63.3 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT 8GB | $ 379 | $ 4 | 95.5 FPS
|
92 FPS
|
60 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti 11GB | $ 759 | $ 8.1 | 93.5 FPS
|
91.6 FPS
|
60.8 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER 8GB | $ 499 | $ 5.4 | 92.9 FPS
|
88.4 FPS
|
58.6 FPS
|
NVIDIA TITAN Xp 12GB | $ 1,199 | $ 13.1 | 91.6 FPS
|
88.4 FPS
|
60 FPS
|
AMD Radeon VII 16GB | $ 699 | $ 7.6 | 91.6 FPS
|
87.8 FPS
|
57.3 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 8GB | $ 399 | $ 4.5 | 89.3 FPS
|
85.4 FPS
|
55.7 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 8GB | $ 499 | $ 5.7 | 88.1 FPS
|
82.6 FPS
|
55.5 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 8GB | $ 200 | $ 2.3 | 88.1 FPS
|
85.4 FPS
|
58.4 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 12GB | $ 329 | $ 3.8 | 87.4 FPS
|
83.4 FPS
|
55.9 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER 8GB | $ 400 | $ 4.8 | 83.3 FPS
|
76.9 FPS
|
50.7 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 5700 8GB | $ 349 | $ 4.3 | 81.8 FPS
|
78.3 FPS
|
51 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 8GB | $ 499 | $ 6.3 | 79.4 FPS
|
74.9 FPS
|
48.9 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 6GB | $ 350 | $ 4.5 | 78.4 FPS
|
70.7 FPS
|
45.8 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT 6GB | $ 279 | $ 3.6 | 77.2 FPS
|
73.3 FPS
|
47.6 FPS
|
AMD Radeon R9 295X2 4GB | $ 1,499 | $ 20.1 | 74.4 FPS
|
69.2 FPS
|
48.1 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 8GB | $ 499 | $ 6.7 | 74.2 FPS
|
71.1 FPS
|
46.2 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti 8GB | $ 409 | $ 5.6 | 73.6 FPS
|
69.4 FPS
|
45.2 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti 6GB | $ 249 | $ 3.5 | 72 FPS
|
67.4 FPS
|
44.7 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X 12GB | $ 999 | $ 14 | 71.5 FPS
|
66.6 FPS
|
43.5 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6GB | $ 279 | $ 4 | 70 FPS
|
66 FPS
|
43 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 8GB | $ 399 | $ 5.7 | 69.6 FPS
|
66.5 FPS
|
43.3 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 8GB | $ 399 | $ 5.9 | 67.7 FPS
|
63.3 FPS
|
41 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER 6GB | $ 229 | $ 3.5 | 66 FPS
|
62.3 FPS
|
40.7 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti 6GB | $ 649 | $ 10.4 | 62.2 FPS
|
58.4 FPS
|
38 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 6GB | $ 220 | $ 3.5 | 62.1 FPS
|
58.6 FPS
|
38.1 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 590 8GB | $ 279 | $ 4.7 | 58.9 FPS
|
53.9 FPS
|
34.4 FPS
|
AMD Radeon R9 FURY X 4GB | $ 649 | $ 11.5 | 56.5 FPS
|
55.5 FPS
|
37.1 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER 4GB | $ 160 | $ 3 | 54.1 FPS
|
50.9 FPS
|
33.1 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT 8GB 8GB | $ 199 | $ 3.7 | 53.6 FPS
|
49.1 FPS
|
31.2 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 4GB | $ 549 | $ 10.3 | 53.4 FPS
|
49.5 FPS
|
32.5 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 580 8GB | $ 229 | $ 4.4 | 52.3 FPS
|
47.8 FPS
|
30.3 FPS
|
AMD Radeon R9 Nano 4GB | $ 649 | $ 12.6 | 51.4 FPS
|
49.6 FPS
|
33 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK 6GB | $ 999 | $ 20 | 49.9 FPS
|
45.9 FPS
|
31.4 FPS
|
AMD Radeon R9 FURY 4GB | $ 549 | $ 11.3 | 48.6 FPS
|
46.7 FPS
|
30.7 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6GB 6GB | $ 254 | $ 5.2 | 48.5 FPS
|
44.7 FPS
|
29.2 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT 4GB 4GB | $ 169 | $ 3.5 | 48 FPS
|
44.1 FPS
|
27.9 FPS
|
AMD Radeon R9 390X 8GB | $ 429 | $ 9.2 | 46.8 FPS
|
44.8 FPS
|
29.6 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3GB 3GB | $ 170 | $ 3.7 | 46 FPS
|
42.5 FPS
|
27.7 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 4GB | $ 329 | $ 7.3 | 45.2 FPS
|
41.3 FPS
|
28 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 480 8GB | $ 400 | $ 9.1 | 44 FPS
|
41.7 FPS
|
27.8 FPS
|
AMD Radeon R9 390 8GB | $ 329 | $ 7.5 | 43.7 FPS
|
40.9 FPS
|
25.4 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 570 4GB | $ 169 | $ 3.9 | 43.1 FPS
|
40.3 FPS
|
25.7 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 4GB | $ 149 | $ 3.6 | 41.2 FPS
|
38.5 FPS
|
25 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 470 4GB | $ 179 | $ 4.6 | 38.5 FPS
|
36.2 FPS
|
23.5 FPS
|
AMD Radeon R9 380X 4GB | $ 229 | $ 7.1 | 32.4 FPS
|
30.1 FPS
|
20 FPS
|
AMD Radeon R9 285 2GB | $ 249 | $ 8.6 | 29 FPS
|
27.1 FPS
|
16.9 FPS
|
AMD Radeon R9 380 2GB | $ 199 | $ 6.9 | 28.8 FPS
|
26.8 FPS
|
16.9 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti 4GB | $ 169 | $ 6 | 28.4 FPS
|
26.6 FPS
|
17.3 FPS
|
AMD Radeon R9 280 3GB | $ 279 | $ 9.9 | 28.1 FPS
|
26.5 FPS
|
16.2 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 2GB | $ 199 | $ 7.2 | 27.8 FPS
|
25.7 FPS
|
16.5 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | $ 169 | $ 7 | 24.2 FPS
|
22.4 FPS
|
14.3 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 560 4GB | $ 99 | $ 4.4 | 22.4 FPS
|
20.5 FPS
|
13.1 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 2GB | $ 159 | $ 7.3 | 21.9 FPS
|
20 FPS
|
13.3 FPS
|
AMD Radeon R7 370 2GB | $ 149 | $ 6.9 | 21.5 FPS
|
18.9 FPS
|
12.6 FPS
|
AMD Radeon R7 265 2GB | $ 149 | $ 7 | 21.4 FPS
|
18.2 FPS
|
12.2 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 460 4GB | $ 140 | $ 7.1 | 19.8 FPS
|
18.1 FPS
|
11.7 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti 2GB | $ 149 | $ 7.8 | 19.1 FPS
|
15.6 FPS
|
10.5 FPS
|
AMD Radeon RX 550 2GB | $ 79 | $ 5.1 | 15.6 FPS
|
14.4 FPS
|
9.2 FPS
|
NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 2GB | $ 79 | $ 5.3 | 14.9 FPS
|
13.7 FPS
|
8.5 FPS
|
Okay I finally managed to get it off but the thermal paste is like literally baked on, I can't get it off using rubbing alcohol. Any ideas?
What thermal paste did you use on it? Are you sure it wasn't thermal glue or some kind of liquid metal that bonded the surfaces?
Oh man, this is sad and funny. I'm sorry that happened to you but shit, thermal adhesive? :P
I don't even.. I have no words. I've been building computers for 8ish years and never done something so stupid
Update: it finally came off after hours of pulling and twisting. After being unable to remove the adhesive I took it to microcenter and they were kind enough to exchange it.
Crisis averted.
I probably would've lapped it, but at least this way you have a warranty.
- all are the same price for me when considering cpu + mobo = all are £250 for cpu + a board
- will be used mainly for gaming (I play R6 siege competitively so fps is must)
Thanks, feel free to add experiences, recommendations etc!
obligatory wait for benchmarks comment number two
At least on the Intel side, the 8600k gives you the fastest single core speeds but it lags behind just a hair on multi-core benchmarks.
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-i5-8600K-vs-Intel-i7-5930K-vs-Intel-i7-6800K/3100vs2336vs2785
Some benchmark leaks have shown that 3600 can match or come close to single thread performance of the 9th gen series so yeah please wait 3 days for ryzen
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 i7-5930K is priced at $583, potentially "saving" you more than $400. If that’s still a little rich, the Core i7-5820K lands at a palatable $389. It too is a six-core chip with 15 MB of ...
Intel Core i7-5930K Review – The CPU. Shown above is the 140w Intel Core i7-5930K which looks identical to the other models in the family. Flipping the CPU over we see the socket 2011-3 layout (which isn’t compatible with 2011/X79 boards) and in terms of the base design we have a 22nm Haswell family chip, just like the latest i7 CPUs on Z97 ...
Such are the questions we intend to answer today by conducting an incredibly thorough review of the Haswell-E Intel Core i7-5820K, Intel Core i7-5930K, and Intel Core i7-5960X in a gladiator-like showdown of massive proportions.
For example, the i7-990X and the i7-5930K are both six-core, 3.5 GHz base frequency models, but the i7-5930K has 3MB more L3 cache. Similarly with the i7-980X and the i7-3960X. Nehalem
The i7-5930K is what most people will go for just to future-proof their purchase more than the Intel Core-i7 5820K with its higher base speeds and x16/x16 SLI capability would. I also highly recommend the Intel Core i7-5930K to those who are into CPU-intensive tasks and need that extra minute advantage with 3D rendering programs/media applications.
The obvious elephant in the Core i7-5930K's living room is the Core i7-5820K. Substantially cheaper but only marginally slower - both share the six-core, 12-thread, 15MB LLC design - Intel also ...
[Build Help] My CPU heatsink is stuck to my 5930k
As the title states.
Currently freaking out. I do not know what to do. I have a Cooler Master hyper 212 on it currently it is is freaking stuck.
Tried letting the computer run to heat up the paste but it is not budging.