i5 760 @3.8GHz vs i5 2400 @ 3.1GHz

[almoststew1990]

I have an i5 760 in my "messing around PC". It's overclocked to 3.8GHz and could probably go a little higher maybe touch 4GHz.

I may be getting an i5 2400 (and the rest of the PC too), which is 3.1GHz. Which would you use to game on / mess around / benchmark / warm up the lounge with?

Obviously a lot lower clocks on the sandy but I thought sandy saw a big IPC jump from Nehalem so it might be quite close? Can I overclock an i5 2400 on what is undoubtedly a cheapo motherboard?

 

[Tommy_Here]

an i5-760 at those speeds are give or take around the same performance as the 2400, I had a i5-750 a few years back clocked at 4.2ghz and it was smack bang in the middle between a 2500k and a 3570k stock.... great cpu!.... well it was ^_^ haha

 

[pastymuncher]

I went from a i5 760 clocked at 4.2Ghz to the 4670k clocked at 4.4Ghz that I have now and was very disappointed with the "upgrade". The performance gain was more or less only noticeable in benchmarks. A few games had minor performance games but they were barely noticeable and day to day tasks showed little to no increase. Your 760 at that speed should be faster than the 2400.

 

[bfar]

That's odd. I went from an overclocked i7 860 to a 2500k, and the upgrade was noticeable, even with the sandy bridge running stock.

 

[ALXAndy]

If you get the right board you can overclock the 2400 by x4 on the turbo multi, making it faster.

 

[David Bisset]

Nehalem to Sandy was a big jump, but only in clock speed. Almost no IPC gains so the 760 will be faster at those speeds.

 

[ALXAndy]

Nehalem to Sandy was a big jump, but only in clock speed. Almost no IPC gains so the 760 will be faster at those speeds.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2011/01/03/intel-sandy-bridge-review/7

I5 2400 at stock speed vs 760 @ 4.1ghz. There is no contest, especially given that Intel left in the Turbo overclock X4 bins. The Sandy will smash it.

In a couple of tests they include the 2400 overclock too.

 

[almoststew1990]

I didn't realise the jump would be that much! Now I am sad I didn't get the PC. I'm surprised even an 1GHz overclock is not enough to keep up with a stock clocked sandy.

 

[David Bisset]

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2011/01/03/intel-sandy-bridge-review/7

I5 2400 at stock speed vs 760 @ 4.1ghz. There is no contest, especially given that Intel left in the Turbo overclock X4 bins. The Sandy will smash it.

In a couple of tests they include the 2400 overclock too.

Careful picking of tests there to flatter the newer instruction sets, pick any software not using them and that'll not be the result you get.

Lets say... another page in the same review, some games.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2011/01/03/intel-sandy-bridge-review/10

Oh, look, first game the 760 smashes the 2400, beating it by 38% in minimums.
Second game it narrowly sneaks ahead, beating it by only 5.5% but is still the faster chip.

On every comparison on every other page of the review the 760 wins (well, you can have 'power consumption' too if you like)

The review sample didn't have it's turboing disabled so there is no 'especially' left to get there.

 

[pastymuncher]

I didn't realise the jump would be that much! Now I am sad I didn't get the PC. I'm surprised even an 1GHz overclock is not enough to keep up with a stock clocked sandy.

It's not, he cherry picked the results that were most in favour of the Sandybridge. Check out the gaming results and there's nothing in it. Like I said in post #3, the gains were there in benchmarks but for gaming and day to day tasks it made little to no difference at all.

 

[Poneros]

Be glad you saved your money.