Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Feb 2004
- Posts
- 9,555
I'm out of touch with these chips, anyone explain the differences?
Thanks
Thanks
-
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 ...860....2500...etc...what's the difference?
- Thread starter bloodline76
- Start date
860 is the old gen i7, 1156 socket.
2600/k is the latest gen i7, using an 1155 socket. They are not interchangable. 2500k is the i5 version.
The i7's both have 4 cores and 8 threads, the i5 has 4 cores.
Latest Gen overclock using Multiplier and hit speeds in excess of 4.6Ghs easily. The old ones are lucky to get over 4.2Ghz.
2600/k is the latest gen i7, using an 1155 socket. They are not interchangable. 2500k is the i5 version.
The i7's both have 4 cores and 8 threads, the i5 has 4 cores.
Latest Gen overclock using Multiplier and hit speeds in excess of 4.6Ghs easily. The old ones are lucky to get over 4.2Ghz.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 7 Feb 2004
- Posts
- 9,555
But still pretty good if you are only interested in running at stock?
Much of an improvement over a q6600?
Much of an improvement over a q6600?
Only if you buy the specific models with an unlocked multiplier:
- i5-2500K
- i7-2600K
- i7-2700K
Please note my edit to the first post, i made a small mistake.
If you're using the machine for gaming or other leisure activities then you won't notice the difference.
However if you do a lot of file compressions then you might want to splash out a little extra to get the extra speed of the i7.
If you're using the machine for gaming or other leisure activities then you won't notice the difference.
However if you do a lot of file compressions then you might want to splash out a little extra to get the extra speed of the i7.
Old gen were based off the Nahelam architecture. This architecture was the successor of the Core architecture (Your current Q6600). It performs about 20% better per clock.
New gen (i3/5/7-2***, the 2 meaning 2nd gen) is based off the Sandy Bridge architecture, successor to Nahelam. It also gave about 20% more performance per clock over Nahelam. Also these things are amazing overclockers, and since they're on the 32nm process they're highly power efficient.
If you want to upgrade, best chip to go for is the i5-2500K. It's an amazing chip, and will perform better than your Q6600 even at stock. Even then, it's got a Turbo feature which will automatically self overclock itself for you depending on how many cores are being used (+100mhz on 4 cores, +200mhz on 3, etc). So a brilliant chip to buy if you don't plan on overclocking.
New gen (i3/5/7-2***, the 2 meaning 2nd gen) is based off the Sandy Bridge architecture, successor to Nahelam. It also gave about 20% more performance per clock over Nahelam. Also these things are amazing overclockers, and since they're on the 32nm process they're highly power efficient.
If you want to upgrade, best chip to go for is the i5-2500K. It's an amazing chip, and will perform better than your Q6600 even at stock. Even then, it's got a Turbo feature which will automatically self overclock itself for you depending on how many cores are being used (+100mhz on 4 cores, +200mhz on 3, etc). So a brilliant chip to buy if you don't plan on overclocking.
Associate
- Joined
- 11 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 1,287
In what universe is Sandy 20% better than nehalem?
10% is generous.
Its better because its more power efficient and overclocks better. Other than that the improvements are minimal.
10% is generous.
Its better because its more power efficient and overclocks better. Other than that the improvements are minimal.
Comparison Q6660 v i2500k
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/53?vs=288 and
i2500k v i7 860
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/288?vs=108 and ( for completeness)
i7 860 v i7 2600k
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/108?vs=287
They are all at stock in the above tests but it gives you a good idea as to their relative performance abilities.
An upgrade from your q6660 to any of the others would give you a nice boost. Personally moved from a q9650 @4ghz to an i2500k (not overclocked) and noticed a marked improvement (have said before but would say again - one of my better upgrades )
Overall the best buy , imo, is the i2500k . I've not heard of any that will not (with the addition, maybe, of an after-market cooler) overclock to 4.2 (+) at low volts.
Forgot to add 'Happy New Year' - to one and all
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/53?vs=288 and
i2500k v i7 860
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/288?vs=108 and ( for completeness)
i7 860 v i7 2600k
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/108?vs=287
They are all at stock in the above tests but it gives you a good idea as to their relative performance abilities.
An upgrade from your q6660 to any of the others would give you a nice boost. Personally moved from a q9650 @4ghz to an i2500k (not overclocked) and noticed a marked improvement (have said before but would say again - one of my better upgrades )
Overall the best buy , imo, is the i2500k . I've not heard of any that will not (with the addition, maybe, of an after-market cooler) overclock to 4.2 (+) at low volts.
Forgot to add 'Happy New Year' - to one and all
Last edited:
people really need to learn how to read properly...Sandy Bridge isn't 'that' much faster than the previous generation, quit it with the constant, typical 'benchmark' links that get thrown around like currency these days here. compare Sandy Bridge and Nehalem at even clock speeds and the difference is less than 'impressive' to say the least, one of the main reasons I think people are outright stupid to go from one of the original models to one of the newer Sandy Bridge models and justify it with some pointless 'power consumption' argument, even though they are running heavyweight crossfire set-ups and such.
when comparing two architectures such as Nehalem and Sandy Bridge, which are essentially the same architecture please remember to not use a bias benchmark where one runs at a higher frequency than the other, or else its not a valid comparison. however, comparing something like Prescott and Dothan for example, or Sandy Bridge and Bulldozer on a clock for clock basis is equally pointless and just as incorrect, since they are 'different' architectural directions, one based more in maximising instructions per cycle and the other based on maximising frequency. based on the evidence one has seen would say the difference between Sandy and Nehalem is more like ~10% rather than 20%, pretty much agreeing entirely with what Trunks was pointing out.
when comparing two architectures such as Nehalem and Sandy Bridge, which are essentially the same architecture please remember to not use a bias benchmark where one runs at a higher frequency than the other, or else its not a valid comparison. however, comparing something like Prescott and Dothan for example, or Sandy Bridge and Bulldozer on a clock for clock basis is equally pointless and just as incorrect, since they are 'different' architectural directions, one based more in maximising instructions per cycle and the other based on maximising frequency. based on the evidence one has seen would say the difference between Sandy and Nehalem is more like ~10% rather than 20%, pretty much agreeing entirely with what Trunks was pointing out.
from the benchmarks ive seen the 920 is almost identical to the 2600k utpto 4.2ghz,then the oc headroom of the 2600k pushes it further,your pretty much limited to 4.2 on a 920 chip,unless you have good watercooling