• 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.

Finally time to replace the 2600k - need advice

EdGey

EdGey

EdGey

Soldato
Joined
21 Jan 2008
Posts
8,322
Location
England
Hello,

I've been looking at reviews of the latest CPU's and I'm considering the 10700k or possibly the 10600k.

I've seen a lot of people going on about PCIE 4.0 - I understand that the intel chips don't support it. Do you think PCIE 3.0 will start to bottleneck GPU's in the near future? Bearing in mind I expect to keep this system for a long time just like the 2600k which has been flawless for 9 years now.

My main priority is gaming, so I don't want to get four years down the line and have a bottleneck issue with the latest GPU's at the time.

Thanks!
 
I can't see that there might be a bottleneck in the near future, no, but a long way down the line, I don't know. I doubt it, but obviously I can't say for sure.
 
Last edited:
EdGey said:
Hello,

I've been looking at reviews of the latest CPU's and I'm considering the 10700k or possibly the 10600k.

I've seen a lot of people going on about PCIE 4.0 - I understand that the intel chips don't support it. Do you think PCIE 3.0 will start to bottleneck GPU's in the near future? Bearing in mind I expect to keep this system for a long time just like the 2600k which has been flawless for 9 years now.

My main priority is gaming, so I don't want to get four years down the line and have a bottleneck issue with the latest GPU's at the time.

Thanks!
Click to expand...

Your current system will have been built in 2011 or 2012. If you want a similar type of longevity I'd buy the best you can afford right now with the most current and future proof feature set.

PCIE 4, although not massively important now, would be a feature I'd be looking for if I wanted my system to be as future proof as possible. With the new consoles sporting 8 core CPUs I'd also not buy anything less than and 8 Core/16 thread part now.

You could go AMD B550/X570 now with a potential CPU upgrade next year or wait to see what Intel releases next with PCIE 4?

I was in a very similar situation to yourself and have decided to replace a 2500k system with an 8c/16t CPU on an X570 board. It's weird but the motherboard on my 2500k build, from 2011, was one of the first to sport PCIE 3 compatibility.
 
For year or two performance difference between PCIe v3 and v4 is sure to be pretty marginal.
Assuming no changes in for what GPU is used.
(next-gen consoles unknown factor with their powerful APU)

But with major increase in speed of GPU advance would expect difference to start rising significant in couple years.


EdGey said:
Bearing in mind I expect to keep this system for a long time just like the 2600k which has been flawless for 9 years now.
Click to expand...
Why are you then even considering max 10 cores Intel, when before Christmas next-gen consoles bring 8 core/16 thread CPU as base line for next-gen games?

Also as another example of future's heavily multithreaded games Star Citizen gives 12c/24t good workout:
https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/dkac5j/i_knew_star_citizen_utilizes_multicore_well/
Without SMT's extra threads majority of cores would be fully occupied.

AMD's Zen3 should be Zen+ to Zen2 level improvement in IPC and if there's also some clock speed advantage, Intel won't be leading in anything.
Except power hogging...
Intel uses "artistic freedom" in TDPs and real maximum power draw/heat output is twice the marketing TDP.
 
The unfortunate and depressing longevity of 2600k is due to stagnation in the CPU market. No idea why people hail that as a good thing. Hopefully that's all over and you're next CPU only lasts half that amount of time.

PCIE 3.0 shouldn't bottleneck graphics cards for a good while yet. Although it does depend whether you normally buy high end or low end. The 3090 or 4090 may start to botleneck but the xx50 cards certainly wont.
 
jimferno said:
Your current system will have been built in 2011 or 2012. If you want a similar type of longevity I'd buy the best you can afford right now with the most current and future proof feature set.

PCIE 4, although not massively important now, would be a feature I'd be looking for if I wanted my system to be as future proof as possible. With the new consoles sporting 8 core CPUs I'd also not buy anything less than and 8 Core/16 thread part now.

You could go AMD B550/X570 now with a potential CPU upgrade next year or wait to see what Intel releases next with PCIE 4?

I was in a very similar situation to yourself and have decided to replace a 2500k system with an 8c/16t CPU on an X570 board. It's weird but the motherboard on my 2500k build, from 2011, was one of the first to sport PCIE 3 compatibility.
Click to expand...

This. Basically the same route as me. I expect PCIE 3.0 to hit a bottleneck at the high end with whatever comes after Ampere/Big Navi. X570 gives me upgrades to at least Zen3 and faster 16C32T CPU's, PCIE v4.0 GPUs and NVME up to 7GB/s. I can't see that limiting me for a long time.
 
I'd agree AMD's B550 platform seems like the best option for futureproofing. It supports pci-e 4.0 so should work well with faster SSD's which will likely be required for next gen consoles ports.

Likewise support for Ryzen 4000 CPU's with faster performance and increased core counts will also certainly help with upgrades down the line to improve longevity.

That's definitely what I'd buy right now and intend to once B550 ITX boards are available.
 
CuriousTomCat said:
The unfortunate and depressing longevity of 2600k is due to stagnation in the CPU market.
Click to expand...

It wouldn't have matter either way if we would have CPUs 2x faster, as the games would have been designed still with the consoles in mind. Perhaps the PC version would have not been as optimized since there's plenty of power to run (if we would have CPUs 2x faster).
 
Disco_P said:
Cause it meant gamers didn't need to upgrade their CPUs for 5+ years.
Click to expand...

Yeah but gamers are also moaning that there's no graphics card worth upgrading to from a 1080ti etc. Like a CPU doesn't matter anymore, even though they want faster and faster graphics cards to spend their money on.

The counter argument is that a graphics card is very important for gaming while a CPU no longer is. But that's only because game developers stopped allowing for faster processors in their code due to the fact there weren't any.
 
You should be fine with pcie gen 3 as the top end card has only just about hit the limit of pcie gen 2 that said I would still consider AMD unless you game at 1080p also bear in mind AMD could possibly overtake Intel even in gaming with the zen3 CPUs which will be compatible with the current Boards.
 
CuriousTomCat said:
Yeah and consoles have a weak CPU for the same reason. Stagnation. Progress had stopped.
Click to expand...

They have a weak CPU, because AMD had nothing great at the time (Intel did). Same with the GPU. At least nothing that would fit the requirements of a consoles (at the time). They don't get upgraded every year anyway. :)

With that said, I would look at a minimum of a Ryzen 8c/16t from the latest generation (probably wait a bit to see what will be launched soon), ideally 12c/24t.
 
I wouldn't buy anything with less than 8 cores/16 threads if you want decent longevity. Personally I'd definitely go 10 core or 12 core if buying right now (because I already have an 8 core 16 thread now). I definitely would NOT consider a 6 core/12 thread OR an 8 core/8 thread CPU if you want it to last 7-10 years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom