But in single core running a G3258 will not be faster than a 5820k. It would be impossible for it to do so. As you say they are virtually the same core.
-
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.
Gaming 2500k cpu upgrade? 6700k or 5820k
- Thread starter OrionTC
- Start date
But in single core running a G3258 will not be faster than a 5820k. It would be impossible for it to do so. As you say they are virtually the same core.
Soldato
- Joined
- 9 Jun 2011
- Posts
- 3,635
lol off topic much 
Associate
- Joined
- 22 Dec 2015
- Posts
- 28
- Location
- UK, South East, Hampshire
holy crap!!!! lol u got 1 or more backround app running problems (not the progs open in the pic if any1 asks
) there, also whats the temps at that load and is there signs of throttling ???( i would use cpu-z while u do this as it has little to no impact on ur cpu running.also could you tell me what memory ur using and whats the cl times and command rate set to?
Last edited:
Memory Type DDR3
Memory Size 8 GBytes
Channels Dual
Memory Frequency 802.1 MHz (1:6)
CAS# latency (CL) 11.0
RAS# to CAS# delay (tRCD) 11
RAS# Precharge (tRP) 11
Cycle Time (tRAS) 28
Command Rate (CR) 2T
according to CPU-Z
the OCD has the temp 61 degrees or so at full load
Memory Size 8 GBytes
Channels Dual
Memory Frequency 802.1 MHz (1:6)
CAS# latency (CL) 11.0
RAS# to CAS# delay (tRCD) 11
RAS# Precharge (tRP) 11
Cycle Time (tRAS) 28
Command Rate (CR) 2T
according to CPU-Z
the OCD has the temp 61 degrees or so at full load
Associate
- Joined
- 22 Dec 2015
- Posts
- 28
- Location
- UK, South East, Hampshire
ok so i take it is 1600mhz std clock and u have 2 sticks of 4gb in dual channel ??
if so
i would say that ur command rate needs changing to 1 and see if we can help bring down ur memory latency and cycle timings this will help to ur cpu load latency and cpu load %'s
also i would run cpu-z run the benchmark and watch ur cpu for throttling which will show any problems u might be getting
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 22 Dec 2015
- Posts
- 28
- Location
- UK, South East, Hampshire
also have u run any memory load tests or cpu/with memory stressing ???
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 22 Dec 2015
- Posts
- 28
- Location
- UK, South East, Hampshire
then try that hopefully it will point to ur problem (which i believe one of ur memory stick is possably faulty by the looks of it and filling ur cpu cache up with crap as well as ur programs)
but try this and see what the results are
Last edited:
It will run it no problem but in some areas, especially the grass filled bits, more cores and threads will give much better performance. I saw it as clear as anything going from a 2500k to a 3700k. min fps went from about 40fps to about 60fps in those same areas. I believe it is mainly the grass animation that is a big stress on the cpu and the game uses multi threading properly for those highly physics orientated parts.
http://forums.joinsquad.com/topic/5973-my-2500k-vs-6700k-upgrade-fps-results-hefty-fps-increase/
^ 32fp minimums to 82fps minimums in Crysis 3. Also massive improvements in Arma 3 as well.
People talk about their 2500k's as thought they are just as good as anything else out since for games, but in some cases they will be way, way behind some of the latest i7 cpu's, even in games.
This video shows the shortcomings of an i5 compared to an i7 in some titles as well - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhaB1dqYv_I (from 3 mins 15secs for crysis 3 and from 1 min 30 secs for GTA V as examples)
Fact is, if you want to make sure you get the best experience in all possible titles, an i7 IS worth it.
This isn't aimed at you 8 Pack as I am sure you are aware but more for all the nay sayers thinking old gen i3's and i5's are just as good as the latest i7's.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 24 Mar 2013
- Posts
- 2,268
- Location
- C-137
My thoughts exactly. OP, you're doing some gaming and occasional editing/rendering. There's absolutely no need for you to spend £600+ for something you're you're only going to get the most out of every now and then. The i5 will be more than enough.
Save a few quid and treat the missus & kids to something nice as a cover story for your new toys
memtest came back with 0 errors, i left it over night.
that squad forum thread is very interesting, some of them seem pretty sure about the results.
i realise a i3 may run games but so does my 2500k to a certain extent. if i cant get a decent leap in performance then i probably wont do it.
that squad forum thread is very interesting, some of them seem pretty sure about the results.
i realise a i3 may run games but so does my 2500k to a certain extent. if i cant get a decent leap in performance then i probably wont do it.
Associate
- Joined
- 22 Dec 2015
- Posts
- 28
- Location
- UK, South East, Hampshire
well thats good, i take it u also tryed in single with this test 20mins per mem test is fine to find problems but i might not find anything wrong as it was lefted overnight under test,
have you tried the other easy one is format ur OS drive and load a fresh copy on ? that 9 times out of 10 fixed random effects from the OS
Look at my post/link above. In some games you will see huge gains.
As someone says in that thread, the 2500k circle jerk needs to stop. Is it competent and can it still play modern games? Yes of course. Will it give you the best experience in all games you play compared to more modern i7's? Absolutely not. There will be some, as shown, where an i7 and especially the latest ones will stomp all over a 2500k
Last edited:
yeah ive been reading that its very interesting. makes a lot of sense.
the next thing is a reformat. i got a new 500g SSD since my 2x120g's could only hold 2 games or so lol.
Associate
- Joined
- 22 Dec 2015
- Posts
- 28
- Location
- UK, South East, Hampshire
kool well let us know how u get on with it and if need any further help drop me a line and i will do what i can to help
The Op has stated that his 2500k is maxed out on cpu load.
The gpu at 19%, seems the op hs some resource issues either from a corrupt windows or something hogging up resources, we need to see if his 2500k system is actually performing on par with a 2500k system or it's actually lagging behind the baseline it should be and holding his gpu back/system back.
Game benches and some system benches could be tested for this, although maybe a format and windows reinstall would help too.
Debating about justification for single threaded Ipc gains of an x99 system vs 1151 is a moot point as it depends on how you compare it.
The point Nightfox is making is that in single/dual poorly threaded games which the Op plays the advantage of a 5820k/6700k is an expense that can't be justified when his current 2500k will perform within 0-20% of them. His example of the g3258 is just a way of stating that a clocked g3258 in low threaded games is a contender and an x99/1151 would be wasted here.
Claiming huge gains in selected synthetic benches is fine but how about real world usage? Your muiti-core (gta5, crysis 3) theory holds ground and games that utilises the 5820k will show benefit over the 2500k/ G3258, also in handbrake encoding or applications that require threads too.
But there's two fundamentals with this depending on the gpu used, at what price does it cost to gain 15-20% in fps, and at what pace will future game engines adopt multi-threading.
The Op has stated that his 2500k is maxed out on cpu load.
The gpu at 19%, seems the op hs some resource issues either from a corrupt windows or something hogging up resources, we need to see if his 2500k system is actually performing on par with a 2500k system or it's actually lagging behind the baseline it should be and holding his gpu back/system back.
Game benches and some system benches could be tested for this, although maybe a format and windows reinstall would help too.
Debating about justification for single threaded Ipc gains of an x99 system vs 1151 is a moot point as it depends on how you compare it.
The point Nightfox is making is that in single/dual poorly threaded games which the Op plays the advantage of a 5820k/6700k is an expense that can't be justified when his current 2500k will perform within 0-20% of them. His example of the g3258 is just a way of stating that a clocked g3258 in low threaded games is a contender and an x99/1151 would be wasted here.
Claiming huge gains in selected synthetic benches is fine but how about real world usage? Your muiti-core (gta5, crysis 3) theory holds ground and games that utilises the 5820k will show benefit over the 2500k/ G3258, also in handbrake encoding or applications that require threads too.
But there's two fundamentals with this depending on the gpu used, at what price does it cost to gain 15-20% in fps, and at what pace will future game engines adopt multi-threading.
Why do people always belittle the actual change, just look at the ARMA 3 and Crysis 3 results as an example. You are talking anywhere between a 50-100% increase in minimum framerates.
What you say is true, but then that is true of anything. A 960 will play most games at 1080p decently with high settings but there are a fair few where it will really struggle and where you really need a 980Ti to get 60fps+ all the time.
Saying a 6700k or 5820k is not worth it just depends on whether you want the best performance possible or not. If not, and you can cope with lower framerates and lower minimums in some titles then ofcourse, don't bother spending the money.
My objection is not with this premise, it is with the view held by some that a newer cpu is totaly not worth it at all, when that is simply not the case.
If the OP wants the best frames and experience possible on all titles he plays then he should get a 6700k or 5820k. Whether he can justify the money he would need to spend to get this is up to him.
Last edited: