• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

i7 2500k for £145 or i7 2600k for £200 for i7 950 for £125?

DeputyDawg said:
Plus the i7 2600k is only 5% faster than the i5 2500k.
Click to expand...

Sometimes, sometimes its not. Sometimes HT is working, Sometimes it isnt. Sometimes HT actually causes problems and then the i7 lags behind i5.

Stating i7 is 5% faster than i5 isnt always true, so shouldnt really be said.

I could say i7 is slower than i5, And I'd be right due to it sometimes being the case
 
555BUK said:
Socket 1366 is not dead yet, and there are no doubt be budget 6 core processors in the pipeline to keep the upgrade path open.
Click to expand...

It is dead. The 2500k outperforms the I7 970 / 980 (non x), which cost the same as a brand new Z68 motherboard and 2500k.

It isnt obsolete, but there is absolutely no point to buying a new X58 system right now. Z68 + 2500k is cheaper, far faster and much more power efficient.

The only value that Gulftown still has is for silly people like me who splashed out on a Rampage III Extreme or similar uber high end mobo that obviously dont want to change that board now, but 6 core X58 CPUs are still far too expensive when they provide less performance than an overclocked 2500k for the majority of people.
 
wannabedamned said:
Sometimes, sometimes its not. Sometimes HT is working, Sometimes it isnt. Sometimes HT actually causes problems and then the i7 lags behind i5.

Stating i7 is 5% faster than i5 isnt always true, so shouldnt really be said.

I could say i7 is slower than i5, And I'd be right due to it sometimes being the case
Click to expand...
I should have said at best it's only 5% faster - and given the difference in price between the 2500k and 2600k, the 2500k is a no-brainer.
 
bhavv said:
It is dead. The 2500k outperforms the I7 970 / 980 (non x), which cost the same as a brand new Z68 motherboard and 2500k.

It isnt obsolete, but there is absolutely no point to buying a new X58 system right now. Z68 + 2500k is cheaper, far faster and much more power efficient.

The only value that Gulftown still has is for silly people like me who splashed out on a Rampage III Extreme or similar uber high end mobo that obviously dont want to change that board now, but 6 core X58 CPUs are still far too expensive when they provide less performance than an overclocked 2500k for the majority of people.
Click to expand...

lol, don't be so ridiculous. A 2500K is only faster than Gulftown when <4 cores are used (which is obvious, because SB IPC is better). When all 6 cores are used, Gulftown obliterates a 2500k.

wannabedamned said:
Sometimes, sometimes its not. Sometimes HT is working, Sometimes it isnt. Sometimes HT actually causes problems and then the i7 lags behind i5.
Click to expand...

Whenever HT decreases performance, the drop is so small it isn't even worth mentioning (1-2% usually).

DeputyDawg said:
Plus the i7 2600k is only 5% faster than the i5 2500k.
Click to expand...

No.

DeputyDawg said:
I should have said at best it's only 5% faster - and given the difference in price between the 2500k and 2600k, the 2500k is a no-brainer.
Click to expand...

And no.

At "best" (where the extra threads are fully utilized) the 2600K can reach ~30% faster than the 2500K.
 
Last edited:
Reaper 392 said:
for goodness sake, why is anyone suggesting the i7 950 when the i7 2600k is clearly far superior for the same price.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/287?vs=100

the i7 2600k beats the i7 990X
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/287?vs=142

also, there will be no new processors on socked 1366 as it is being replaced by socket 2011, whereas some ivybridge processors will be coming to socket 1155.
Click to expand...

The 2600K is not better than a 990x.

You should actually bother to read the title aswell, he said he can get the i7 950 for £125, and the 2600K for £200, so no, in this case they aren't the same price.



FYI, it's incredibly stupid to throw up some gaming benchmarks and then claim that a 2500K/2600K is a better CPU than a 980x. The IPC/per core performance of Sandybridge is abit better than Gulftown, therefore it's common sense that it's going to do better in applications (or games) that cannot utilize >4 threads effectively. If you can make use of the extra cores/threads of Gulftown, then a 2500K/2600K doesn't come close.

Basically, compare a 980x at 100% load with the 2500K/2600K at 100% load. The 990x stomps them every time.
 
Last edited:
ATIorNvidia said:
The 2600K is not better than a 990x.

You should actually bother to read the title aswell, he said he can get the i7 950 for £125, and the 2600K for £200, so no, in this case they aren't the same price.



FYI, it's incredibly stupid to throw up some gaming benchmarks and then claim that a 2500K/2600K is a better CPU than a 980x. The IPC/per core performance of Sandybridge is abit better than Gulftown, therefore it's common sense that it's going to do better in applications (or games) that cannot utilize >4 threads effectively. If you can make use of the extra cores/threads of Gulftown, then a 2500K/2600K doesn't come close.

Basically, compare a 980x at 100% load with the 2500K/2600K at 100% load. The 990x stomps them every time.
Click to expand...

didnt notice the price in the title, was going by OcUK prices. however, if the OP is going by price alone, over two years the 2600k or 2500k will more than make up the extra money because of the electric bill

also, those benchmarks are not all gaming benchmarks, and even the i5 2500k beats the i7 950 in most places.
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/100?vs=288

couple that, the greater overclocking ability of the sandybridge and the option of a cheap ivybridge upgrade and i can see very few reasons to take the i7 950. even if the OP is doing lots of video creation then the sandybridge probably has the edge as that benchmark was pre-Z68 chipsets
 
Last edited:
I hope this is useful in helping you decide. http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/287?vs=288. The difference in terms of performance is only slight and doesn't quite justify the massive difference in price. Also should note that most of the time you would not really use hyper-threading. I was also considering getting i7 2600K for a new PC until I spoke to a guy at DinoPC and he said that i7 really wasn't worth it as the difference is also slight compare to i5 2500K.
 
555BUK said:
Having owned all 3, and currently settling for a 2500K I make the following observations.

Performance
Unless you are addicted to benchmarks, you will not be able to tell the difference between them. On paper the 2500K and i7 950 are equal, with the 2600K being slighlty ahead but in real life (gaming, general Windows apps and the occasional encode) I noticed no difference.

Efficiency
The i7 pulls approximately 15W more electricity at idle and 40W more when fully loaded than the 2500K. Run both for 4 hours per day and the i7 will cost about £5 more per year than the 2500K (~25W average x 4 x 365 / 1000 x 15p per kWh). Not much in it really, especially when graphics cards, monitors and the rest of the system components will pull a lot more.

Cooling
2500K and 2600K do run a lot cooler (10-15 degrees).

Motherboards
1366 mobos tend to be expensive compared to the budget 1155 mobos.

Conclusion
If you can pickup a cheap used 1366 mobo and i7 920-960 they are well worth the money. Sandy Bridge is NOT a massive step forward unless you are building a Small Form Factor PC, where the improved thermal performance and onboard graphics will make a big difference. For anyome who already runs a 1366 system it is not worth upgrading unless you have nothing better to do with your time.

For anuyone buying brand new, Sandy Bridge offers much better value and equal to slightly better performance. If you currently run 1366, wait for Ivy Bridge.

Other thought's
I only moved sideways from 1366 to 1155 because I wanted to downsize from a full tower HAF-X case to a Sugo. I have measured the power consumption with a plugin monitor and the savings are not that great. I have however squeezed equally powerful components into a much smaller case, but it did cost a lot to do so.
Click to expand...

this
 
Socket 1366 is still massive overkill man. Especially overclocked.
While I would choose sandybridge, I currently use an overclocked 920 and nothing pushes it.

Consider putting the £75 towards an ssd or better GPU.

I used to think along the lines of "dead sockets", but in the systems I have built for myself over the last few years I have always changed the mobo and the cpu together.
 
Flashheart said:
I used to think along the lines of "dead sockets", but in the systems I have built for myself over the last few years I have always changed the mobo and the cpu together.
Click to expand...

But with socket 155 and Sandybridge you can just change to Ivy bridge without needing to change the board.
 
stulid said:
But with socket 155 and Sandybridge you can just change to Ivy bridge without needing to change the board.
Click to expand...

Still means buying the SB cpu first though and coming from a 920 is a pointless upgrade.

Just upgrade when you will see this difference. With new Chips and new mobo's
 
easyrider said:
Still means buying the SB cpu first though and coming from a 920 is a pointless upgrade.
Click to expand...

Thats right, and the OP has neither sandybridge or i7 920.

Flashheart says he changes CPU and board together because of "dead end sockets", but with Ivy bridge working on current boards you can keep the current board and drop the next gen stuff in.
 
Last edited:
I picked my 920,P6T and 6GB of Patriot DDR3 for £300

Great Bang for buck

If buying now then I would get i3 clock the nuts off it and then plonk in IB on release
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom