• 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.

I5-2500K time to upgrade??

MonkeyMan said:
Yeah was thinking about that but then I'm still not sure if modern games are actually making use of HT or extra cores (most threads on this subject are a few years old). Been offered a pretty good price on a 3930k setup which is a 6 core, would that have any real gaming performance increase over an overclocked 2500k?

Tbh at stock the only game I've struggled a bit with is Forza Horizon 3 but that just seems to be poorly optimised for everyone.
Click to expand...

No end of modern games make use of 4+ cores now. BF1 loads all 8 threads on mine 80-100% constantly in game. I've not had any problems playing FH3 either, although not monitored the CPU usage so much on that.

3930k is a nice CPU, 6 core plus HT so 12 threads, which is good! The 6 core 6900k benches better on BF1 than the 6600k and 6700k, so it does utilise the cores.
 
andy_mk3 said:
No end of modern games make use of 4+ cores now. BF1 loads all 8 threads on mine 80-100% constantly in game. I've not had any problems playing FH3 either, although not monitored the CPU usage so much on that.

3930k is a nice CPU, 6 core plus HT so 12 threads, which is good! The 6 core 6900k benches better on BF1 than the 6600k and 6700k, so it does utilise the cores.
Click to expand...

Well that's good to know, he wants rid so I said I'll take it of his hands. Complete system so no faffing about and I can get my current 2500k in to a work rig, either that or sell it while its still got some worth.

Good to see AMD back in the game, will keep an eye on how Ryzen progresses.
 
I'm upgrading from a [email protected] to a R7 1700.

Expecting similar or slightly worse gaming performance at stock, better overclocked and hopefully improving more with optimization as time goes on. Don't think I would have bothered upgrading to anything less than 8c/16t as Ryzen will make this mainstream over the next few years.
 
It's the ryzen 5 that has my interest. If they get the pricing / performance right then that could dominate gaming rigs in the same way the 2500k did.
 
I don't think Ryzen 5 will dominate gaming rigs for the simple reason that it won't clock much past 4GHz and games still benefit hugely from raw clock speed. Zen 2 might do though.

Ryzen 5 is basically Ryzen 7 with disabled cores and I think people who are expecting superior gaming performance will be disappointed. I would expect the same performance in most games and slightly worse in some.

The voltage for the highest single core boosted PState (XFR, e.g. 4.1GHz) can be as high as 1.475V. Compare that to Kaby Lake which can hit 5.1GHz at around 1.4V.

As 'The Stilt' points out here:

https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/ryzen-strictly-technical.2500572/

"The ideal frequency range for the process or the design (as a whole) appears to be 2.1 - 3.3GHz (25mV per 100MHz). Above this region (>= 3.3GHz) the voltage scaling gradually deteriorates to 40 - 100mV+ per 100MHz"

This is a server chip pushed to its limits, not a gaming CPU.
 
With Mass effect Andromeda coming out soon i also was thinking of upgrading my 2500k. Its actually still at stock ( i know thats criminal :) )
I game at 1080p with 16GB RAM and a Nvidia 970.

Was thinking about an i7 3770k cpu as it fits my motherboard.
But after searching for prices and reading this thread......i think i'll wait a bit to see how these Ryzen 5's are or get a Ryzen 7, or just stick with intel and get a 7700k or something.
 
Last edited:
got the upgrade itch my self ..... pushing the 2500k pass its limit. Decided the old girl is gonna run untill shes dies . 4.8 Stable but running very hot under prime past 1 hour (95C) at 1.4V
 
I do personally think the 2500k has given itself the same legendary status as the likes of the q6600, both fantastic chips holding up well many years after its replacement :)
 
AthlonXP1800 said:
Ryzen 1700 at stock 3.7GHz max temp 69C played Battlefield 1.

I am really shocked to see Ryzen 1700 temp in Battlefield with GTX 1070.

My 3770K never reached that crazy high temp in Battlefield 1, it stayed around 55C whole time. My 3770K blew Ryzen 1700 out of water to shame in Battlefield 1 peformance and temp. :cool:
Click to expand...

Did you possibly take into consideration any, or a combination of the following?

1. First of all - 64c average is not a high temp.
2. Different CPUs
3. Different motherboards can affect CPU temp.
4. Different memory can even affect it (some RAM gets really hot)
5. Different cooling, different thermal paste can make as much as 10c difference.
6. Different case / cooling / airflow.
7. Recorded during different time of the day, in a different place where room temperature /airflow is different.
8. Voltage settings, even the chip itself can vary few degrees.

Did you compare GPU temps as well? His card gets to almost 80c and it's not a blower - this surely would bring the case temp up as well, especially if he's been benching and recording. Oh and also, did you record video when playing???
 
andy_mk3 said:
No end of modern games make use of 4+ cores now. BF1 loads all 8 threads on mine 80-100% constantly in game. I've not had any problems playing FH3 either, although not monitored the CPU usage so much on that.

3930k is a nice CPU, 6 core plus HT so 12 threads, which is good! The 6 core 6900k benches better on BF1 than the 6600k and 6700k, so it does utilise the cores.
Click to expand...

At the end of the day, 6700k's and 7700k's are still the best gaming CPU's on the planet. X99 and Ryzen can't touch them.

By the time 8 core CPU's are ubiquitous and 'needed' for maximum performance in games, there will be much faster CPU's out.
 
Ha, I swear everything I visit this forum to browse there is always a thread on, "is it time to upgrade my 2500k?" :p

I bought mine new, boxed, from the Bay in 2011 for a £105 delivered. The seller had about 10 of them, probably nicked I'm guessing? It's been in my main rig ever since, oc'd to 4.4GHz where it has been as solid as a rock...

I see no immediate need to switch but I am keeping my eye on the Ryzen situation. I think I've been really luck with my chips; in recent times I've had a good 2500xp (3200xp), an off the charts Opteron 146, a e8400 Wolfdale and then the 2500k.

The 2500k has already earned it's cult status in my opinion, certainly nothing's come close from what I've seen in recent years?
 
Second hand prices is exactly the reason why i did a full rebuild with new parts.

No way am i paying nearly 200 quid for a 5 year old cpu just out of principle.
 
I have a 2500k @ 4.2 ghz.

Recently maxed out the CPU in assetto corsa when running a championship with a lot of AI cars. Not planning of upgrading until I finish university (2-3 years) so will be interesting to see how the old girl olds up by then.
 
Luckystrike123 said:
I have a 2500k @ 4.2 ghz.

Recently maxed out the CPU in assetto corsa when running a championship with a lot of AI cars. Not planning of upgrading until I finish university (2-3 years) so will be interesting to see how the old girl olds up by then.
Click to expand...

I would have thought that you should be able to push the speed up by at least a couple of hundred Mhz. 4.2Ghz is a very conservative OC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom