i5 2500 VS i5 2500K

[noteworthynerd]

I also prefer Anandtech. I get kind of frustrated when I can't find a specific component on their site, but I know I shouldn't expect them to bench every single PC part.

[Dizey]

i5 2500 only has a locked multiplier, but still has small overclocking ability(via base clock), and is equipped with the lesser HD 2000 integrated GPU.
i5 2500k has massive overclocking ability with its unlocked multiplier, and is equipped with the HD 3000 integrated GPU.

i5 2550k has the same massive overclocking ability, has a 100mhz stock base and turbo speed, but has no enabled integrated GPU. In theory it's suppose to offer better OCing than the 2500k with the removed iGPU, but I haven't seen any solid reviews proving that to be valid. There's probably a reason why, and I suspect that the OCing benefit of the disabled iGPU is marginal if any.

[Saithes]

i5 2500 only has a locked multiplier, but still has small overclocking ability(via base clock), and is equipped with the lesser HD 2000 integrated GPU.
i5 2500k has massive overclocking ability with its unlocked multiplier, and is equipped with the HD 3000 integrated GPU.

i5 2550k has the same massive overclocking ability, has a 100mhz stock base and turbo speed, but has no enabled integrated GPU. In theory it's suppose to offer better OCing than the 2500k with the removed iGPU, but I haven't seen any solid reviews proving that to be valid. There's probably a reason why, and I suspect that the OCing benefit of the disabled iGPU is marginal if any.

Actually... Any Sandybridge CPU with a "Locked Multiplier" but has Turbo Boost can be raised 4 Multiplier's above the stock Turbo Multiplier. So the 2500 can cap at 4.1GHz and the 2600 at 4.2GHz.

Despite the idea of the 2550K overclocking better, it doesn't because the iGPU and the CPU have completely separate power designs.

[Eon Drache]

Seriously...buy a z68 MB with any kind of auto overclocking and you will automatically get at least 30-40% faster clock speeds with the stock cooler and nothing more.

You buy a $50 CPU cooler and you can easily do 4.8Ghz out of the box with nothing more than a little better CPU cooler. Don't even have to know anything about which settings to tweak the MB's now days have presets that are good enough for anyone that doesn't care about the absolutely max speed you can get.

I just built a machine with a i5 2500k on the Asrock Extreme4 Gen3 with a Coolmaster V8 cooler and I'm rock solid at 4.8Ghz.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813157264

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16835103055

I also got the i5 2500k and the AsRock Extreme4 Gen3 MB. However, I can't go to 4.8Ghz. I've got a V6, though. I can go to 4.6Ghz, anything higher and the auto heat protection kicks in. Course, I found out after buying the V6 it does not fit right on the Gen 3 board because of the Digi-Power around the CPU socket.

[Dizey]

Actually... Any Sandybridge CPU with a "Locked Multiplier" but has Turbo Boost can be raised 4 Multiplier's above the stock Turbo Multiplier. So the 2500 can cap at 4.1GHz and the 2600 at 4.2GHz.

Despite the idea of the 2550K overclocking better, it doesn't because the iGPU and the CPU have completely separate power designs.

Correct, but having the 4 bin option available to you is going to depend on which MB manufacturer you go with. I know ASUS has taken advantage of the max TB workaround, but I'm not sure about the others. Thought I read something about it not being by all cores either, where as the BCLK is.

[BruteBlue]

Wanted to post the specs link from Intel but could not do so being a new user.

Now as per Intel specs these are following things which i5 2500 supports and i5 2500K doesn't. There are no such things which i5 2500K supports and i5 2500 doesn't

1. Intel® vPro Technology
2. Intel® Virtualization Technology for Directed I/O (VT-d)
3. Intel® Trusted Execution Technology

For me the features 1,2 add a lot of advantage and the problem is I see no reason from their specs why i5 2500 is not a superior processor. If overclocking is the only thing then certainly it doesn't matter to me much and for me it would have been a very big mistake to go for 2500K instead of 2500.

But then I think their specs is wrong, probably swapped

[Deleted]

They differences are already posted, just compare the links I provided earlier, since you can't link them yet

[Sephiracle]

Wanted to post the specs link from Intel but could not do so being a new user.

Now as per Intel specs these are following things which i5 2500 supports and i5 2500K doesn't. There are no such things which i5 2500K supports and i5 2500 doesn't

1. Intel® vPro Technology
2. Intel® Virtualization Technology for Directed I/O (VT-d)
3. Intel® Trusted Execution Technology

For me the features 1,2 add a lot of advantage and the problem is I see no reason from their specs why i5 2500 is not a superior processor. If overclocking is the only thing then certainly it doesn't matter to me much and for me it would have been a very big mistake to go for 2500K instead of 2500.

But then I think their specs is wrong, probably swapped

I haven't really done a whole lot of research outside of those options you listed, but assuming that is the case, both of those options you think provide a lot of advantage to the 2500 are also options the normal computer user that would be building a gaming computer on this site would not take advantage of.

Vpro is specifically listed as mainly an IT tool, it's best, imo, purpose for the average user would be able to remotely remove data on the machine, whether you had possession of the device or not.

IVT is something you're probably going to take advantage a bit more if you were to run VMware, there's some added support for 64bit guests, but others might be a bit more experienced on IVT and have stuff to say that would be more accurate.

[DeltrusDisc]

2. Intel® Virtualization Technology for Directed I/O (VT-d)

Funny, I have Virtualization Technology support and I run virtual machines.

[Sephiracle]

Funny, I have Virtualization Technology support and I run virtual machines.

They're not mutually exclusive, provides some features that aren't available, at least that's my interpretation of it. I don't really have much use of running virtual machines currently.

[DeltrusDisc]

Run a Windows XP VM to play 3D Pinball.

Hell yeah I just went there.

[Jaerin]

I also got the i5 2500k and the AsRock Extreme4 Gen3 MB. However, I can't go to 4.8Ghz. I've got a V6, though. I can go to 4.6Ghz, anything higher and the auto heat protection kicks in. Course, I found out after buying the V6 it does not fit right on the Gen 3 board because of the Digi-Power around the CPU socket.

Yeah the V8 Sits really high...when I first took it out of the box I didn't think there was anyway it would fit in my case, but it does quite nicely in fact...

Note that running with a V8 at 4.8Ghz my CPU is running 75C which for some people they don't like running it that hot, but I don't mind it.

[Saithes]

Funny, I have Virtualization Technology support and I run virtual machines.

VT-d lets you remote in and control the VM on a hardware level. What you're referring to is VM on a Software Level. Essentially, Lets say the VM BSOD's and you want to reboot it but you're at a remote location away from the VM. Well, you can remote into the VM and reboot it manually using VT-d. You can access bios using VT-d, which normal software level VM cannot do also.

What the 2500K has is VT-x which is simply x86 Virtualization(Direct Software Control of the OS)and not Direct-I/O Virtualization(Direct Hardware Control of the entire VM's physical hardware).


I really wish the 2600K/2500K had VT-d, because it would make overclocking remotely a lot easier lol. I could overclock remotely using VT-d and access the bios to change stuff while being able to reset the PC remotely if it BSOD's which normal Virtualization CANNOT do.

vPro allows Intel to lock down the Processor remotely(as long as the computer its in is on the internet) if the PC gets stolen or lost. Essentially its Intel's form of Anti-Theft for processors.