2500k vs 2600k v 4760k for gaming in 2016.

[Dave2150]

Skylake, Haswell get much better minimum FPS in many games.

 

[MissChief]

Still running my i5 2500k mildly OC'd to 4.2GHz and managing just fine with anything and everything I throw at it. HOWEVER, if I were to buy now I think I would go for the newest and latest available.

 

[Andy7]

If you have a 2600k clocked at 4.4Ghz or over you would be a fool to upgrade for a lot of money for minimum gains.

The only route I would go from a 2600k is the x99 platform.

 

[Superlevure]

I have an old i5 2500k, which I've never overclocked (never felt the need)

I only updated the GPU (560ti, then 670; 770 and now a 970)

I use a 1080p monitor and I ensure I always have 60 fps by adjusting the settings. The only games that couldn't make it were from Ubisoft (Watchdog and Assassin Creed series). The rest was always 1080p@60fps. Obviously, I never max up the settings into 'Ultra'. It's always high or very high, and I pick the most basic AA. This, however, has little to do with the CPU.

If you buy a new CPU however, you should buy the most recent: i5 6600k. Why bother take something older to save a few £10s?

 

[rossiboy001]

My 2700k is at 4.5ghz Hottest core 57 degree"s in prime 95 Gaming BF4 58-59 again hottest core. typically guess dependent on room temperature but more heat due to gpu I would imagine on full load. tempted by the 6700k bundle but im guessing I could overclock further. Wondering what i might expect if I push it keeping gaming to 70 degrees hottest core. im on 1.3V I guess that would negate any limited gains I might get from a 6700k. I run triples by the way 5760x1080 144hz with 980ti.

 

[Sky01454]

As mentioned by many people here i would go for the z97. I upgraded from a i5 2500k to a i7 4770k and saw some difference. However the i7 2600k vs 4770k would be a different story.

 

[Nasher]

Yea you will notice a jump going from any i5 to an i7 in a number of recent games.