It bothers people who are worried more about benchmarks and scores rather than gaming or people running very high frequency monitors.
-
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 getting a bit long in the tooth?
- Thread starter vantastic
- Start date
It bothers people who are worried more about benchmarks and scores rather than gaming or people running very high frequency monitors.
can almost smell the tears
its interesting that if you take a lower graphics setting say high from ultra in some games the i5s take over i7s why is that ?
it happens in both bf3 and bf4 seen numerous benchmarks proving this aswell.
Im still using a Ati 6950 with my 2500k and all games still runs perfectly fine and cant see myself upgrading for a few yrs as games are not pushing my system at all atm.
"Once again the reason is simple. A PC Game does not benefit greatly from a new instruction set (AVX AVX 2) and it is only concerned with the primitive aspects of the processor. Basically the physical cores and frequency.
Read more: http://wccftech.com/intel-sandy-bri...compared-10-difference-average/#ixzz2qf6rtsHZ
"A higher clocked 2500k would make mince meat out of a lower clocked i7-4770k because that is what Games care about."
"Now if you were talking about rendering or compute intensive tasks it would be an entirely different story. Of course this test doesnt cover the TDP and Efficency aspects too, but i think it proves without a doubt that if you are going for gaming, dont bother with an i7."
Read more: http://wccftech.com/intel-sandy-bri...compared-10-difference-average/#ixzz2qf7F4eAw
Read more: http://wccftech.com/intel-sandy-bri...compared-10-difference-average/#ixzz2qf6rtsHZ
"A higher clocked 2500k would make mince meat out of a lower clocked i7-4770k because that is what Games care about."
"Now if you were talking about rendering or compute intensive tasks it would be an entirely different story. Of course this test doesnt cover the TDP and Efficency aspects too, but i think it proves without a doubt that if you are going for gaming, dont bother with an i7."
Read more: http://wccftech.com/intel-sandy-bri...compared-10-difference-average/#ixzz2qf7F4eAw
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 13,594
- Location
- La France
I have no plans to upgrade my 2500K/Asus P8P67 combo until there's something that offers more than a 5%-10% performance improvement for gaming.
Yeah I upgrade my system when I have trouble running games smooth and playable at mid-high settings, then you get much more of a performance boost from your upgrade. But just upgrading because of bottlenecking and when your games are running smooth anyhow, what's the point? Totally pointless and a waste of money in my eyes.
Associate
- Joined
- 28 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 2,174
- Location
- Behind you
If you have the money then why not upgrade? Some people like to max out their games and run at least 60fps. Hyperthreading might not work in many games yet but helps a lot in video editing/converting ect.
Associate
- Joined
- 30 Mar 2010
- Posts
- 581
Also sometimes bottlenecking can stop some games running smoothly whereas most games run fine on a particular system. If the time comes along when the favourite games that a certain owner likes to play no longer are as smooth as they would like then they most likely will upgrade even if the lesser games they play still run fine.
It was like when I upgraded my E8400 to a 2500k system 2yrs ago,, you guys told me I would notice a huge diff in performance. What a let down that was.
Edit: So this 2500k system is going to last at least 5-6yrs before I upgrade, as I upgraded my E8400 system well too soon.. But I will be upgrading the gpu Id say in the next 1-2yrs, to get every drop of speed out of the system before I do a cpu, memory, board upgrade.. But that all depends how far games improve, as I might not need to upgrade the gpu as soon as that.
People say pc gaming is expensive, its not at all if your not anal about it, by just upgrading cos something is bottlnecking or slightly out of date....... You can make it as expensive or as cheap as you like.
Edit: So this 2500k system is going to last at least 5-6yrs before I upgrade, as I upgraded my E8400 system well too soon.. But I will be upgrading the gpu Id say in the next 1-2yrs, to get every drop of speed out of the system before I do a cpu, memory, board upgrade.. But that all depends how far games improve, as I might not need to upgrade the gpu as soon as that.
People say pc gaming is expensive, its not at all if your not anal about it, by just upgrading cos something is bottlnecking or slightly out of date....... You can make it as expensive or as cheap as you like.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 1,400
for me, it wont be worth an upgrade until haswell-e octo core and thats coming from an i7 920, that at least will grow in performance over time with games using more threads. no point in going to another quad core atm as the advances in core architecture speed are pretty small!
Its like when the first quad core cpu came out, as they were totally pointless for games because no games took advantage of the quad for a good 3-4yrs later and people were even going back to the dual core cpu, as a higher clocked dual cpu made mince meat out of a lower clocked quad core cpu for games.
i5 with sli/xfire in a few games. If you see your cpu running at near 100% constant. Thats bottleneck. Your cards will not run at full potential. Bung in an i7, lower cpu use, (aka no bottleneck) more consistent gpu use, smoother gaming. This is for sli/xfire. Single card, even an old bloomfield cpu will cope grand.