New cpu few questions

[Elektrik]

i5-2500K will run 50% faster in 25-man raids than 965BE, and any money past $100 put on GPU is wasted for WoW if you're playing on 1920x1080 or smaller monitor. Also x4 955 is best value for money AMD CPU for gaming use currently, not 965.

I said the 2500k is faster. 50% faster, 50% more money. Makes sense to me. I was giving him a cheaper option, which will still handle WoW fairly easily, especially if you OC up to 4.0 or so (which is very easy to do).

Also, I was just throwing the 965 in the ring because I found a much better deal on a 965 than a 955. I got a 965/AM3 mobo combo for $140 when the processor alone was going for $160+. Not saying everybody is going to find this deal, but it was enough savings to sway me from the 2500k. "Best value for money" is based on sales/promos going on at the time of purchase.

I have no problems in WoW with this combo, and it holds it's own in Rift, too.

As I said, it's a way to save some money and still get good performance.

im on quite a tight budget :/

This is the part in almost every thread that most people seem to ignore.

[vesseblah]

This is the part in almost every thread that most people seem to ignore.

Ever heard of "poor people can't afford to buy cheap"? It applies perfectly to computer shopping as well.

Talking in imaginary numbers in the rest of the post to illustrate the point. Numbers are in right ballpark but not spot on.

It might seem like buying $300 mobo+cpu+ram might be better idea than $400 if you need to pinch pennies, but if you're looking at what you can get with the money it's whole another thing. In case of i5-2500K vs x4 955 you will pay $100 extra which might sound like a lot, but here's what you get with the money:

- Intel Sandy Bridges are about two generations ahead technologically than any current AMD processors. It shows up in power drain as well as performance. x4 955 uses 30% more electricity (which turns into heat and fan noise inside the computer) but i5-2500K still manages to push 20-50% higher speed in any application.

- Intel processors will overclock higher. On AMD you can expect about 15-20% speed-up, while with Intel Sandy Bridges you can do 25-35% easily. Overclockability might not be the first thing everybody is looking for in their hardware, but it's the first thing you're looking for in 2-3 years when you want more speed out of your current computer. 30% free overclock can make the difference between buying or not buying another $400 motherboard+cpu+ram set.

- Slightly better future proofing. Yes, Intel has previously been pretty bad at this, and changed their CPU sockets every two years. But right now we are at a time when Intel has announced their next CPU will run with current socket, while AMD has new product coming up in few weeks which will obsolete current motherboards. Therefore buying AMD now is considerably more risky than Intel if you think about what upgrade options you will have 2-4 years from now.

Because of these three reasons I personally think it's very bad idea and bad use of money to save in wrong places and go for old AMD today. If it can be avoided at all.

[Elektrik]

Obviously a very good argument, and I'm not saying you're wrong in any way. I'm just saying that for some people (including myself), spending that extra $100 right now might throw their whole idea of an upgrade out the window. I personally could have afforded pretty much whatever I wanted (within reason), but I also know my gaming needs, and thought a 2500k would have been overkill, and I was right. If the 2500k price point was the only upgrade for me, I would not have upgraded. Luckily for me, I did my research and was able to get a sweet upgrade within what I wanted to spend, and I couldn't be happier.

As far as future-proofing goes, I personally discount this almost completely. By the time I (and many other "budget gamers") want to upgrade again, there's no guaranteeing that Intel will still be using that socket. Sure, they say they're going to for the next gen, but what's after that? Probably something different.

The main point I was trying to make is that just about everybody these days throws the 2500k around like it's the only thing to buy if you want an upgrade. If you're looking in that price point, it IS the only thing to buy. It's that good. On the other hand, it's expensive, and may turn a lot of people who know little to nothing about computers off to an upgrade completely. If you really want to upgrade on a tight budget, there are cheaper options that will give you the upgrade you're looking for now, while possibly allowing you to upgrade something you didn't plan on, or keeping some money in your pocket.

As I said before, the 2500k is amazing. You're certainly getting what you pay for. It's just that not everybody wants to pay quite that much.


TLDR - If you're looking to spend $300+ on a processor/mobo, the 2500k is perfect. If you're shying away from that price point, an upgrade isn't out of the question.