2500k or 3570k

Ollie1132 · 14 Jul 2012 at 23:34

3570k if you can afford it it is worth it. The latest batches of SB chips are **** clockers apparrently. Plus newer tech lasts an extra year over SB so why take a year off how long your stuff lasts just to save £20-30 if you can afford it anyway ^.^

aly051 · 16 Jul 2012 at 22:36

Dirtyganker said:
Can you please qualify what you mean by "overheat" because they don't.

Sure they run hot and don't like having their voltage tweaked upwards but they don't 'overheat' as that implies that they get too hot and fail, which is not true. They do, however, 'throttle back' to prevent overheating which is generally when someone has got a bit gung-ho with voltages and a multiplier over about 46.

I've seen a few posts from yourself the last few days which are just wrong and misleading where you clearly have no first hand experience of the things you're talking about and are just spouting something you've read somewhere else and either mis-interpreted the real meaning or have made a generalisation.

Please do your homework.

jojothemonkey69 · 21 Jul 2012 at 13:47

An interesting discussion, I'm looking to buy the 3570k so it definitely helped me.

Spook187 · 21 Jul 2012 at 14:25

s4mmy007 said:
ivy bridge overheats, and the sandys are fantastic overclockers, especially the 2500k, check the top benchmarks on overclockers uk forum, i think 9 out of the top 10 processors are 2500k's[/QUOTE

Dirtyganker said:

Can you please qualify what you mean by "overheat" because they don't.

Sure they run hot and don't like having their voltage tweaked upwards but they don't 'overheat' as that implies that they get too hot and fail, which is not true. They do, however, 'throttle back' to prevent overheating which is generally when someone has got a bit gung-ho with voltages and a multiplier over about 46.

I've seen a few posts from yourself the last few days which are just wrong and misleading where you clearly have no first hand experience of the things you're talking about and are just spouting something you've read somewhere else and either mis-interpreted the real meaning or have made a generalisation.

Please do your homework.

Click to expand...

Agree,the AI SUITE is dangerous was a good one

I have ivybridge now and it's a fantastic chip,32c idle 60-70 fully load oc at 4.6 well within safe limits.

Martini1991 · 21 Jul 2012 at 15:05

Bacon? said:
Clock for clock the Ivy is better. So a 4.4 Ghz Ivy is still better than a 4.8 Ghz Sandy.

No it isn't.

Nuclear Fusion · 21 Jul 2012 at 19:06

Martini1991 said:
No it isn't.

Probably more like a 3570k @ 4.4 is roughly equal to a 2500k @ 4.7.

Ollie1132 · 21 Jul 2012 at 19:26

3570k. 2500k is old tech now will last 1 year less than IB is also better clock for clock 4.4Ghz IB = 4.65Ghz~ SB plus IB uses less power etc.

Johnz0r · 21 Jul 2012 at 19:48

Ollie1132 said:
3570k. 2500k is old tech now will last 1 year less than IB is also better clock for clock 4.4Ghz IB = 4.65Ghz~ SB plus IB uses less power etc.

How can you possibly say that it would last a year longer? :confused:

Martini1991 · 21 Jul 2012 at 20:03

Ollie1132 said:
3570k. 2500k is old tech now will last 1 year less than IB is also better clock for clock 4.4Ghz IB = 4.65Ghz~ SB plus IB uses less power etc.

They'll last as long as each other, if something comes along that one can't do, it'll be the same for the other.

Ollie1132 · 21 Jul 2012 at 20:09

Johnz0r said:
How can you possibly say that it would last a year longer?

easy... SB is now 1 year old... which means IB should logically last 1 year more than SB should >.>

Martini1991 · 21 Jul 2012 at 20:31

Ollie1132 said:
easy... SB is now 1 year old... which means IB should logically last 1 year more than SB should >.>

That's a stupidly flawed logic.
With the rather small performance difference between the two, one won't outlast the other.

Ollie1132 · 21 Jul 2012 at 20:40

Martini1991 said:
That's a stupidly flawed logic.
With the rather small performance difference between the two, one won't outlast the other.

Not really stupidly flawed -.- but w/e. I'll tell you in 4 years when people start upgrading from SB to a newer processor and Im still on IB.

Nuclear Fusion · 21 Jul 2012 at 20:41

Martini1991 said:
That's a stupidly flawed logic.
With the rather small performance difference between the two, one won't outlast the other.

The longer lifespan of IB comes from the extra features it provides, not the performance difference.

Martini1991 · 21 Jul 2012 at 20:42

Ollie1132 said:
Not really stupidly flawed -.- but w/e. I'll tell you in 4 years when people start upgrading from SB to a newer processor and Im still on IB.

Of course it's flawed.
You can't say because it's came out at X time it'll last Y time.

Your 3770k at 4.5GHZ won't be much better than 4.6GHZ 2600k, that minor difference isn't going to make one last longer performance wise, when one gives unacceptable performance the other will too.
Also, people upgrading isn't the same as it not lasting, a Phenom II 1055T could be fine for ones work load, but they've upgraded to say an SB rig, the Phenom II can still go on however.

Nuclear Fusion said:
The longer lifespan of IB comes from the extra features it provides, not the performance difference.

The main thing I'd say is PCI-E 3.0, and that's unquantifiable at the moment.
I was talking purely performance wise.
Regardless, sweeping statements like Ollie's are flawed.

Orcvader · 21 Jul 2012 at 21:00

I have to agree, on a basis SandyBridge and IvyBridge are the same architecture; just IB being tweaked a bit and with PCI 3.0.

So really in terms of pure performance, both pretty much have the same lifespan...

Ollie1132 · 21 Jul 2012 at 21:01

Martini1991 said:
Of course it's flawed.
You can't say because it's came out at X time it'll last Y time.

Your 3770k at 4.5GHZ won't be much better than 4.6GHZ 2600k, that minor difference isn't going to make one last longer performance wise, when one gives unacceptable performance the other will too.
Also, people upgrading isn't the same as it not lasting, a Phenom II 1055T could be fine for ones work load, but they've upgraded to say an SB rig, the Phenom II can still go on however.

The main thing I'd say is PCI-E 3.0, and that's unquantifiable at the moment.
I was talking purely performance wise.
Regardless, sweeping statements like Ollie's are flawed.

its 4.75Ghz on SB my OC. -.-

Martini1991 · 21 Jul 2012 at 21:05

Ollie1132 said:
its 4.75Ghz on SB my OC. -.-

NVM.

Ollie1132 · 21 Jul 2012 at 21:09

Martini1991 said:
I'm not psychic.
Your sig says 4.5GHZ.

Either way, it's not going to be leaps and bounds ahead of any 2600K when both are OC'ed, on a performance standpoint they'll last the same, which since SB came out a year previous, gives SB the life span positive.

True. If anything I should have explained my statement better! The features it gives (namely pci 3.0) are probably the bigger factors in what will keep IB going longer so to speak. Since CPU's bottleneck GPU's faster than anything else.

Martini1991 · 21 Jul 2012 at 21:11

I read your post wrong, I thought you said your OC was 4.75GHZ.

Which, your point at it being equal to a 4.75GHZ SB, given I said "Not much better than a 2600k @ 4.6GHZ" point still stands.

Although, you meant in a performance standpoint, as it's the only way your "It'll last a year longer because it's a year younger" can be, so don't try and turn it around like you meant features.

EDIT : Onto PCI-E 3.0, that's still an unknown quantity at the moment how it will be affected, I mean a 4X PCI-E slot can handle gaming on a GTX680, you'll lose a few percent at best.
I think SB/IB might bottleneck GPU's before PCI-E bandwidth does, since CPU's don't increase their performance as much, since SB launched we've almost doubled GPU performance, for CPU we're a few percent better than SB.

Ollie1132 · 21 Jul 2012 at 21:35

Hm true. The only way we will see is once we get that far.