From a i5 2500k to a i7 6700k: my impressions

[Superlevure]

I changed my rig mostly because it was old and I didn't think I'd get much of a change by upgrading the CPU - I kept upgrading the GPU instead (560ti, 670, 770 and now a 970)

I never overclocked my i5, apart from when I was trying to run GTA4 a bit better (it didn't help)

I never max out the games as I aim to display 1080p@60fps, and often it means using FXAA only. The only games I couldn't run @60fps were the Assassin Creeds and Watch Dogs (but I obviously haven't played ALL games).

The performance boost from the i7 is MASSIVE. It feels like there's nothing my 970 can't handle anymore. I've even reinstalled Assassin Creed Unity (notorious for poor optimisation) and now the angry revolutionary mobs of Paris are displayed in butter-smooth 60 fps. It doesn't even feel like it's the same game anymore. I never imagined games were so CPU reliant.

I have no idea how my i5 would have performed if overclocked à 4.8ghz. My current i7 6700k is at 4.2ghz and the cpu is sitting comfortably at 50 degrees.

I'm really glad I made the upgrade anyway. Thank you guys for the advice you gave.

 

[Superlevure]

thanks for the insight..suppose it helps those who are thinking about upgrading there cpu but are not quite sure

inc me

I was so uncertain about that change that I thought the market would decide for me: I advertised my old rig on gumtree to see if it would go at a decent price. I immediately got calls and someone picked it up the day after.

I realise now that I should have made the move a long time ago. I can't believe I almost bought a 980ti to improve performance, while the cpu was to blame!

 

[Superlevure]

I'm sure overclocking the i5 2500k would have helped (although it didn't with GTA4).
I never did any serious OC because I would have had to change the case, the heatsink, etc. and I thought that if I had to do all this, I could as well change this all ageing rig. I also didn't believe games depended on the CPU so much, so I didn't see the point of it.

Also, an overclocked i5 would be better than a stock one, but how good would it be? A bench to verify that would be welcome.

Am pleased so far with the upgrade... as long as those cpu idle random freezes don't persist (hopefully not that notorious skylake bug..)

 

[Superlevure]

This thread is not helping me keep my money in my pocket I have to say.

Although I think I would see less of a difference with my overclock.

Sorry!

 

[Superlevure]

So on the back of this, I also have an i5 2500k running at 4.2GHz. I've had it since June 2011 so it's rather long in the tooth but it's still doing very well in games. Much like the OP I've upgraded graphics (GTX460-GTX670-GTX780 6GB-GTX 980), doubled my RAM to 8GB and added an SSD. Would I see any decent benefit and aid the longevity by going to 16GB of faster RAM, currently I'm using 1600Mhz) and finding an i7 and over clocking that?

Price to change would be around £50-60 for the RAM from MM, unsure what any i7 would go for.

Or should I just bite the bullet and go for a full board, CPU and RAM and be done with it?

You can do like me: let the market decide! put your motherboard and cpu on sale, and if it goes, then you do the upgrade. Once I had sold mine, then the upgrade really wasn't too expensive. Especially considering how long the last one had lasted.

 

[Superlevure]

I tested a 2550K at stock (with intel turbo boost) and 4.6Ghz in Witcher 3 and GTA V. GPU was a GTX Titan and 16GB 1600Mhz memory. Witcher 3 saw about an 8% gain in Novigrad (the most CPU demanding area) and in the GTA V benchmark the difference was negligible. I don't really know what to think of these results.

Looks like the CPU doesn't really matter on these.

The only games that were going below 60 fps (and sometimes well below, around 30-40fps) were the Assassin Creeds: Black Flag, Unity and Syndicate. I get it's the number of polygons on screen. The boost with skylake was jaw dropping.
(again, my i5 2500K was NOT overclocked for the reasons explained above)

 

[Superlevure]

I posted this thread mostly to thank those who helped me choose my rig and share the outcome with them and everybody.

Also, I was very surprised to see that my CPU was limiting fps performance that much, so I thought maybe someone else might find these findings useful (I never saw many reviews comparing the 2500k - or even an overclocked 2500k - with the latest CPUs)

For technical reasons (already explained) I didn't want to OC my i5 2500k. My advice would be to try to OC the i5 before upgrading, because the CPU is more important in games than people might think. Honestly, games like Assassin Creed have just become a perfect experience.

Initially, I didn't even upgrade to see a rise in performance in games.

I'll try Rise of the Tomb Raider soon, and probably the Division. Looking forward to that.

 

[Superlevure]

go play bf4 on a 2500k then go play on a modern 6700k or x99 cpu. tell me there is no difference. if people tell you there isnt they either blind or stupid.

But what about the overclocking? Are we talking about an OC 2500k?

Clearly, if we compare two stock CPUs, my old i5 is completely buried by my i7 6700k.

 

[Superlevure]

Surely it's easy enough to figure out which part of your pc is the bottleneck? Simply monitor your cpu and gpu usage while gaming, which ever one is topping out first is surely the bottleneck? If you are getting good FPS, ignore and put your wallet away. Personally for me, the CPU has never became a bottleneck in the past until I started running multi gpu's, then very quickly you could see an older CPU struggle, and the GPU's weren't using all their potential. I'm a big fan of buying yesterdays best tech, you can't beat the value/performance ratio. Often the best thing about buying previous generations especially with GPU's is you can have 2 (or more!) gpu's for less than the price of the current new top end and also be faster than it.

Is it that simple? I'm pretty sure my i5 was never pushed to 100%. More like 40%. Isn't there a question of architecture?