2500 vs 2600 : HT and multitasking

[Lee Saxon]

Looking at single-application benchmarks, the 2600 seems obviously not worth the price premium over the 2500. Almost a dollar per MHz!!!

But what about for hopeless multitaskers like me, usually photo editing, browsing 84 tabs, listening to FLACs, and rendering two videos all while running a defrag?

Does hyperthreading make the 2600 worth a second look?

 

[Stuka87]

While hyper threading does not perform like an actual physical core, from your description I think it would help quite a bit.

But I have to ask, why on earth do you have 84 tabs open at any given time? I consider myself to be a heavy(ish) browser and often have 10 or so open, but 84?!

 

[dorion]

But I have to ask, why on earth do you have 84 tabs open at any given time? I consider myself to be a heavy(ish) browser and often have 10 or so open, but 84?!

I'm wondering why he is running a defrag while encoding two videos... also manually defragging, I haven't done that since XP.

 

[Stuka87]

I'm wondering why he is running a defrag while encoding two videos... also manually defragging, I haven't done that since XP.

Hah, I totally skipped over that. I stopped at rendering two videos at once (rather inefficient). But defragging while writing data is a bit dangerous. And yeah, Windows Vista and 7 auto-defrag.

 

[Rifter]

defragging and encoding on the same drive at the same time is a bad idea, on seperate drives though would be fine.

That said HT might be worth it to you based on your description. I went with HT because i multi task alot, when running more than 4 threads that dont fully utilize each core HT can make a difference.

 

[Nintendesert]

I believe he's just being a little sarcastic on the number of things he runs.

 

[soccerballtux]

I can do all the above on a single core, I just prioritize the web browsing over the photo editing. The flac takes like 1% CPU and the vid encoding sucks up the rest.

Now that I have 4 cores, I never have to prioritize anything.

 

[Lee Saxon]

I believe he's just being a little sarcastic on the number of things he runs.

Yeah I like hyperbole

 

[dehemke]

I think I/O limitations are going to come to bear before CPU HT with that sort of multitasking.

 

[Lee Saxon]

Even with OS and program files on an SSD?

 

[Zap]

Even with OS and program files on an SSD?

Why are you defragging your SSD?

 

[ilkhan]

Granted, its hard on RAM but not so bad on the CPU....and still no intention of a 2600K vs a 2500K.

 

[soccerballtux]

I think I/O limitations are going to come to bear before CPU HT with that sort of multitasking.

nah, plenty of bandwidth

 

[Maximilian]

While hyper threading does not perform like an actual physical core, from your description I think it would help quite a bit.

But I have to ask, why on earth do you have 84 tabs open at any given time? I consider myself to be a heavy(ish) browser and often have 10 or so open, but 84?!

Lots of porn maybe

 

[IgoByte]

But I have to ask, why on earth do you have 84 tabs open at any given time? I consider myself to be a heavy(ish) browser and often have 10 or so open, but 84?!

Oh please. 10 tabs? I think the OP might have been exaggerating but I have to remind myself to close some tabs every now and then. Bottom line: the more the better.

 

[Lee Saxon]

Why are you defragging your SSD?

this:

I believe he's just being a little sarcastic on the number of things he runs.

 

[RaistlinZ]

Hyperthreading is like owning a gun...rarely ever use it, but nice to know it's there just in case.

 

[Mannaman]

While hyper threading does not perform like an actual physical core, from your description I think it would help quite a bit.

But I have to ask, why on earth do you have 84 tabs open at any given time? I consider myself to be a heavy(ish) browser and often have 10 or so open, but 84?!

I COMPLETELY relate!

It's like this. We open a search page looking for something and we go down the list clicking links and depending on how clear the clues are, we might open 8 or 9 links (and each new one is drawing while we're going down the list). We then leave the search page open (for easy reference in case we don't find that for which we're looking) and start reading. If we find nothing interesting, we'll close each page as we go through it (unless we find something to which we want to come back -- and we don't want to make a bookmark that we'll have to organize(!), but being the inquisitive type, we might find several links on each page that we go over that we want to "check out." Well, it begins to mushroom rather quickly. After all, one wheel click to open a new page and let it draw while we're reading is awfully easy!

 

[Mannaman]

Hah, I totally skipped over that. I stopped at rendering two videos at once (rather inefficient). But defragging while writing data is a bit dangerous. And yeah, Windows Vista and 7 auto-defrag.

You're forgetting multiple drives. If I'm processing on one hard drive and another is idle, it's a good time to defrag.

 

[betasub]

Hyperthreading is like owning a gun...rarely ever use it, but nice to know it's there just in case.

In case of what? Mars invades?

 

[skipsneeky2]

As a prior owner of a 2600k and now a 2500k,i notice zero difference in gaming and every day usage between the two.

Save the $100,go 2500k

 

[kowalabearhugs]

As a prior owner of a 2600k and now a 2500k,i notice zero difference in gaming and every day usage between the two.

Save the $100,go 2500k

OP says he will be rendering videos and editing photos (almost positive CS5 supports 4+ cores) and that is exactly the type of application that benefits from hyper-threading.

 

[dbcooper1]

I vote for 2500k over 2600; you're almost always going to be better off with 4 faster real cores which you can choose the speed you need over 4 fixed speed with HT that are worth maybe 30% and sometimes even work against you.

 

[frozentundra123456]

I vote for 2500k over 2600; you're almost always going to be better off with 4 faster real cores which you can choose the speed you need over 4 fixed speed with HT that are worth maybe 30% and sometimes even work against you.

Doesnt the 2600 have turbo boost too?? Maybe you are talking about the overclocking potential of the 2500K. Not sure I really understand what you are saying.

 

[kowalabearhugs]

I vote for 2500k over 2600; you're almost always going to be better off with 4 faster real cores which you can choose the speed you need over 4 fixed speed with HT that are worth maybe 30% and sometimes even work against you.

OP never mentioned K series processors. The questions was about the benefits of hyper-threading and mhz (2500:3.3-3.7 2600:3.4-3.8 with his current workflow.

The 2600 also has a higher tubro graphic speed and 2mb more cache.