• 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.

2500K @ 4.5GHz vs 8600K OC?

bf1 64man mp games. on same gpu. at 1080 res the 2500k can drop to halve of the performance of a 8600k. now...that might not sound a lot but ingame 120-140 on the 8600k solid no drops. on the 2500k at 4.5 50-60 fps. thats huge ! they have moved on its just many havent moved on. still think they are amazing. when basically its they WAS amazing chips. they give reasonable performance but there day has been and gone years ago now. the 8600k and 2500k are miles apart performance wise. if you call 50 -60 fps in some games nothing then i dont know what to say. thats like going from a 1050ti to a 2080ti and saying there is no difference.:p . thats not even a joke thats the difference. fps wise.
 
~>Dg<~ said:
bf1 64man mp games. on same gpu. at 1080 res the 2500k can drop to halve of the performance of a 8600k. now...that might not sound a lot but ingame 120-140 on the 8600k solid no drops. on the 2500k at 4.5 50-60 fps. thats huge ! they have moved on its just many havent moved on. still think they are amazing. when basically its they WAS amazing chips. they give reasonable performance but there day has been and gone years ago now. the 8600k and 2500k are miles apart performance wise. if you call 50 -60 fps in some games nothing then i dont know what to say. thats like going from a 1050ti to a 2080ti and saying there is no difference.:p . thats not even a joke thats the difference. fps wise.
Click to expand...

will depend hugely on the game and the res you play at.

GPU will make the biggest difference when gaming.

i could pull out a game like cs:go where it makes zero difference going from a 2500K to 8600K.
 
Psycho Sonny said:
will depend hugely on the game and the res you play at.

GPU will make the biggest difference when gaming.

i could pull out a game like cs:go where it makes zero difference going from a 2500K to 8600K.
Click to expand...

jan 2017 article so nearly two years old now.

https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/2773-intel-i5-2500k-revisit-benchmark-for-2017/page-3

do depend what you play but saying there is no difference is totally wrong. theres games even in those two year old benchmarks where the fps is terrible nearly half behind and thats on previous gen i5s / i7s not even the newer chip we on about.

modern games will show more of a advantage and the slide show from the 2500k in certain situations. thats why they 30 quid 2nd hand chips. great in there day or if you still just play old games.
 
Playing BF1 on 2700k with a 1070 @1080p I must say there isn't that much of an issue, still get decent FPS albeit having to tweak the settings a bit.
I agree with DG, saying there won't be a difference is totally wrong as I can guarantee and know for sure I am being bottle-necked by the near enough decade old CPU and would benefit hugely from an upgrade.
 
You guys. :D

Let's put this to bed.

Gaming, get a 8600K depending on the game(s), resolution and amount of eye candy you want.

Encoding and compression, 8600K twice as fast.

Windows, desktop and browsing. Negligible difference.

I only play Starcraft 2 at 1080p, so more than happy with my GTX1050, 16GB of RAM and SSDs at the moment. Some new games at E3 peaked my interest recently though, namely Cyperpunk 2077, the new Doom and whenever the hell Star Citizen is released. Futureproofing and all that jazz.

I've also got a f' ton of family videos to sort. At some point during this thread's existence, I then realised the cost of a new CPU, mobo and RAM would be silly when I could just make a cuppa or play with my kids... or wife.
 
I went from a 2500k @ 4.6GHz to an 8700k. Peak performance hasn't really changed because I'm GPU bound in most titles at the resolution I game at. However, the troughs feel less severe. This is demonstrated well in World of Warcraft in raids.
For me, the key benefit of moving from a 2500k to an 8700k was overall system performance caused by other factors. Things like now being able to support lots of USB3 ports without an additional card, and the performance from a NVME SSD.
Running my Oculus Rift was a pain on the 2500k because I had to add a flaky PCI-E USB card. No such problems with my new rig.

At the end of the day though, a 2500k is perfectly acceptable for 99% of home users. I had the money to spend and fancied a new rig so I bought one.
 
I do wonder if the worse "troughs" from the i5 2500 are down to the CPU, or the motherboard/architecture. I wouldn't be surprised if it's down to an inability to push information to/from the CPU from say the RAM or similar, in which area, there's been a big improvement in performance.
 
KarolW92 said:
Playing BF1 on 2700k with a 1070 @1080p I must say there isn't that much of an issue, still get decent FPS albeit having to tweak the settings a bit.
I agree with DG, saying there won't be a difference is totally wrong as I can guarantee and know for sure I am being bottle-necked by the near enough decade old CPU and would benefit hugely from an upgrade.
Click to expand...
I play BF1 at 1080p on a 290x at 75 fps. Rarely does it drop below 75fps and I am using a i5 4670k, what res are you at?
I have just reinstalled windows, which has made a bit of a difference.
 
KarolW92 said:
Still rocking a 2700k @4.5 and the only issues i'm experiencing really are when streaming.
Click to expand...

Similar for me with my [email protected]. I've had it 7 years on a P67P8 Pro board with 1666Mhz DDR3 RAM and made by OcUK and all I've done is swap the GFX from a 580 to 780 and then to a 1080ti and I still have no issues in the AAA games I play but it would be nice to swap to a much newer board with NVME, USB C support etc and swap the CPU to something with more cores like 8/16.

sandys said:
https://www.techspot.com/review/1546-intel-2nd-gen-core-i7-vs-8th-gen/
Click to expand...

Shows about a 22% increase between the 4C/8T 2600K and the newer 4C/8T 7700K (8700k is 6 core so will always be better) which, for me, is pretty poor considering the 7700K is 5 generations newer and it still isn't quite worth the price jump yet.
 
Last edited:
The biggest difference is the smoothness in games if not the pure fps, the 2500k was great but now's a good time to upgrade if you have the cash
 
Since all the fps improvements in pubg I now can deffo feel that folk are beating me just because they have a better computer... its not so much the average frame rates...which are great on the 2500k with correct settings etc... its the fps drops and minimum fps.
 
2500k is the minimum i would say now, a lot of games max out older 4c/4t cpus. 4c/8t seem to be fine for a couple more years. some games I would say are unplayable on a 2500k such as kingdom come: deliverance.

i went from a 2500k to a 2600 and have had much higher minimum fps on recent 2017/2018 games and no more stutters or hitches since the cpu isnt pegged at 100% constantly. this was with a 980 at 1080p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom