-
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.
Intel Core i7-2700K Vs 2600K
- Thread starter Macphisto
- Start date
Associate
- Joined
- 13 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 32
- Location
- The Moon
Specs between the two look identical apart from the slight difference in clockspeeds.
I've heard something about the 2700K's being cherrypicked cpus's, like the best in each batch or wafer.
Still just intel out to make a quick buck.
I've heard something about the 2700K's being cherrypicked cpus's, like the best in each batch or wafer.
Still just intel out to make a quick buck.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
People do come up with the cherry picking/speed binning theories, 99% of the time its BS marketing crap(mostly gpu's to be honest).
Think of all those Gigabyte 480gtx overclock models, people insisted they were cherry picked but a crapload failed.
Its cheaper to just sell them and replace ones that don't work than spend a long time binning chips, largely because binning chips effectively and quickly needs very expensive equipment, a lot of power, and when you're only picking out a few chips in a hundred, not cost effective.
Considering there isn't a single 2600k out there that won't do 2700k speeds, its as simple as why spend the extra money, time and effort binning them when you don't need to?
The 2700k really is as simple as not wanting to go from Sandybridge in Jan, to ivybridge maybe next April-June sometime, without a single new cpu on the platform. Analysts, stock holders want to see forward movement, they want to see moving forward, no matter what AMD have, competitive or not, they want to have a counter release around an AMD release, for free publicity in reviews, to get their name out and to not look stagnant.
Think of all those Gigabyte 480gtx overclock models, people insisted they were cherry picked but a crapload failed.
Its cheaper to just sell them and replace ones that don't work than spend a long time binning chips, largely because binning chips effectively and quickly needs very expensive equipment, a lot of power, and when you're only picking out a few chips in a hundred, not cost effective.
Considering there isn't a single 2600k out there that won't do 2700k speeds, its as simple as why spend the extra money, time and effort binning them when you don't need to?
The 2700k really is as simple as not wanting to go from Sandybridge in Jan, to ivybridge maybe next April-June sometime, without a single new cpu on the platform. Analysts, stock holders want to see forward movement, they want to see moving forward, no matter what AMD have, competitive or not, they want to have a counter release around an AMD release, for free publicity in reviews, to get their name out and to not look stagnant.
Get the 2700K instead of a 2600K if you don't already own one. They are looking like much better clockers, at least this first batch. If you already have a 2500k or 2600k even a jump to Ivybridge isn't really very sensible, although I may be tempted by a 3700k 
I really do not buy this there the same chip "theory" I absolutely do not believe that you get 2 identical batch chips and one gets a 2600k label the next a 2700k.
Maybe I am simply falling for a marketing trick but I believe Intel in some way have quality checked the batches and decided one is fractionally better than another.
Just looking at peoples clocking results 2600ks tend to overclock higher than 2500s I am certain this will also be the case with 26xxx and 27xxx and up.
Maybe I am simply falling for a marketing trick but I believe Intel in some way have quality checked the batches and decided one is fractionally better than another.
Just looking at peoples clocking results 2600ks tend to overclock higher than 2500s I am certain this will also be the case with 26xxx and 27xxx and up.
Hi there
I can tell you for sure the 2700k's are much better clockers than the 2600k.
We build systems with both 2600k and 2700k, the 2600k's really struggle to get 4800MHz stable, only some manage it. With the 2700k they all hit 4800MHz with ease and all seem to have no issue with 5GHz either and were finding some push even higher, this the 2600k can't do.
So if your choosing between the two and overclocking, the 2700k is the winner just be sure to go for the OEM 2700k as they are all the same batch and the ones we've done all testing and system builds with.
I can tell you for sure the 2700k's are much better clockers than the 2600k.
We build systems with both 2600k and 2700k, the 2600k's really struggle to get 4800MHz stable, only some manage it. With the 2700k they all hit 4800MHz with ease and all seem to have no issue with 5GHz either and were finding some push even higher, this the 2600k can't do.
So if your choosing between the two and overclocking, the 2700k is the winner just be sure to go for the OEM 2700k as they are all the same batch and the ones we've done all testing and system builds with.
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 5,768
Intel are more fool us all with 2600K than the best clocking 2700K. Damn you Intel 