1. #1

    i5-2500k vs i7-2600k

    So, everything I've been reading people are only talking about the i5 version of the Sandy Bridge. The price is only 20 bucks difference I think between the two? either way pretty small, is there a reason people are going for the i5 over the i7?

  2. #2
    I think the performance gain is minimal, as the i5 is more suited towards gaming than the i7. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, as i know more about AMD platforms than intel. Basically, more bang for your buck for the i5.

  3. #3

  4. #4
    Epic! Idrinkwhiterussians's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    In a bar. Somewhere that carries Khalua, cream and Vodka
    Posts
    1,562
    Zick - I hate to say but that is a completely useless graph post. You should also note the set-up (meaning graphics, memory etc) used while posting that.

    Aside from that - it does look like the i5-2500k is the way to go for performance vs. price. $220~ for a fast chip that outperforms some of the older $1000~ chips? Yes please.

    I am not suggesting the i7-2600k is bad, just the fact that it is actually ~$100 more in price point than the i5-2500k.

    I am looking forward to the improvements as I need to build myself a new computer!

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Idrinkwhiterussians View Post
    Zick - I hate to say but that is a completely useless graph post. You should also note the set-up (meaning graphics, memory etc) used while posting that.
    Turbo Mode Enabled
    Intel DP67BG
    2x2gb Corsair 1333 mhz
    Radeon HD 5870 at 1680 x 1050

    Our World of Warcraft benchmark is a manual FRAPS runthrough of a lightly populated server with no other player controlled characters around. The frame rates here are higher than you'd see in a real world scenario, but the relative comparison between CPUs is accurate.

    We're using WoW's high quality defaults but with weather intensity turned down all the way.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Artunias View Post
    So, everything I've been reading people are only talking about the i5 version of the Sandy Bridge. The price is only 20 bucks difference I think between the two? either way pretty small, is there a reason people are going for the i5 over the i7?
    Price difference is more like 200€ vs 300€. Not exactly "20 bucks".

    If you're gonna use it mainly for WoW, i5 is the way to go. No arguments. i7 has its benefits though if you actually do a lot of video editing and stuff that actually benefits from the Hyper Threading. It's also safer bet for future, if you have the money. Most likely 2600K will be slightly more overclockable too.

    The way I see it, go for i5 if you're short on cash and don't do heavy video editing / compressing etc. Go i7 if you got the cash for it and want a safer investment for future too.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Artunias View Post
    So, everything I've been reading people are only talking about the i5 version of the Sandy Bridge. The price is only 20 bucks difference I think between the two? either way pretty small, is there a reason people are going for the i5 over the i7?
    Price difference is $100, and it's the same old "i5-760 vs i7-930" all over again. 2600K has hyper threading which does nothing for games and is closer to old i7's while 2500K does not have HT and is equal to old i5.
    Never going to log into this garbage forum again as long as calling obvious troll obvious troll is the easiest way to get banned.
    Trolling should be.

  8. #8
    TOTALLY NOT
    Banned
    tetrisGOAT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    12,842
    Quote Originally Posted by vesseblah View Post
    Price difference is $100, and it's the same old "i5-760 vs i7-930" all over again. 2600K has hyper threading which does nothing for games and is closer to old i7's while 2500K does not have HT and is equal to old i5.
    Correct, apart from that I'd like to change i7-930 to i7-870, as it's more of a replacement to that. In the benchmarks it seems to be the same relation 2500 <-> 2600 as 870 <-> 760 as well.

  9. #9
    Hm, not sure why I thought they were much closer in price. That certainly helps clear things up. heh.

    ---------- Post added 2011-01-05 at 08:27 AM ----------

    I guess another question I have then is what does hyperthreading do then? If it has no effect on gaming what does it effect? The only articles I could find in a quick search were 4+ years old and basically just said ht> no ht period. If someone has a good link I'd be more than happy to read it on my own I just didn't have much luck

  10. #10
    Moderator Cilraaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    PA, USA
    Posts
    9,052
    Quote Originally Posted by Artunias View Post
    I guess another question I have then is what does hyperthreading do then? If it has no effect on gaming what does it effect?
    Hyperthreading creates two threads per core. It essentially gives a quad core CPU 8 virtual cores. This doesn't do much for gaming, as there are a very minimal amount of games that are that multithreaded. It would help on things like video processing or sound editing, where jobs can be split into tiny pieces and spread among many cores.

  11. #11
    Hm, I see. I guess I knew that I just wasn't aware most games were unable to take advantage of it. Thanks for the clarification.

  12. #12
    The virtual hyper threaded cores don't really compare to real cores though.

    Basically HT > No HT, Cores > HT. I have seen several benchmarks where AMD hex cores beat I7 processors (only in heavily threaded apps) in spite of intel having a superior architecture.

    This is assuming that you use applications that are actually threaded for multi processor systems.... Most programs are not.

    Video is a Palit GTS450. Main display is a 24" full HD TV. Secondary display is an ACER 19" lcd at 1440x900.

  13. #13
    The Lightbringer Asera's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    This side of an imaginary line in the sand
    Posts
    3,738
    Basically HT > No HT, Cores > HT. I have seen several benchmarks where AMD hex cores beat I7 processors (only in heavily threaded apps) in spite of intel having a superior architecture.
    HT (IMO) is really a gimmick in most cases. It can help, but it's a feature that either should have died with the Pentium 4, or something intel shouldn't really be charging a $100+ premium for (Sort of like Intel-VT). You would be surprised how many people buy i7's and think they are getting a full blown 8 core cpu.
    Node 304 | i7 3770 | H77N WIFI | 2x4GiB HyperX 1600 | 2x512GB MX100 | MSI GTX970 4GiB | U2711 | 6GV2 | Naga Hex Wrath | Yamaha RX-V550 | Win8.1 Pro
    15" Retina MBP | i7 4960HQ | 16GiB 1600 | 512GB PCIe SSD | IRIS Pro + GT750M | G700S | OSX 10.10

  14. #14
    not good with computers
    chaud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    7,344
    2500k will likely be the way to go.

  15. #15
    Fluffy Kitten Badpaladin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    ccaarrrrllllll
    Posts
    11,090
    Yeah, I'd only go for the i7 if you plan on doing more than gaming. Otherwise, you'd be wasting money.
    My Short Required Reading List: One. Two. || Last.fm

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •