i5-2500 (no overclocking)

[Cygnus X1]

Would that be good choice for us non overclockers? Looking at pairing it with a ASUS P8P67 PRO.

 

[Castiel]

For gaming? Yes it would BUT the K is just 15 dollars more if you're ordering on newegg

 

[thedosbox]

I certainly think so (had mine for a week).

 

[Nintendesert]

Get a 2500K, especially if you're getting a P8P67 Pro. The money is hardly anything and the overclocking is about as easy and n00b friendly as it has ever been. It's a button press and you're going to get hundreds of mhz more than stock.

 

[Jumpem]

Get a 2500K, especially if you're getting a P8P67 Pro. The money is hardly anything and the overclocking is about as easy and n00b friendly as it has ever been. It's a button press and you're going to get hundreds of mhz more than stock.

Some people, such as myself, simply do not want to overclock. I would rather not risk data degradation for a few more fps.

 

[mnewsham]

Some people, such as myself, simply do not want to overclock. I would rather not risk data degradation for a few more fps.

So if intel sold this same chip at 4.2Ghz you would buy it because intel says it will perform at that speed? They release a "k" series cpu because they know the chip can handle it. This one handles it very very good.

 

[thedosbox]

So if intel sold this same chip at 4.2Ghz you would buy it because intel says it will perform at that speed? They release a "k" series cpu because they know the chip can handle it. This one handles it very very good.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/01/03/intel_sandy_bridge_2600k_2500k_processors_review/2

The results below are based on the range of the CPU turbo multiplier when overclocking.

Results are representative of 100 D2 CPUs that were binned and tested for stability under load; these results will most likely represent retail CPUs.

1. Approximately 50% of CPUs can go up to 4.4~4.5 GHz

In other words, half of the CPU's are unable to get that high. Those are good odds, but no matter the hype, overclocking success is never guaranteed.

 

[Jumpem]

So if intel sold this same chip at 4.2Ghz you would buy it because intel says it will perform at that speed? They release a "k" series cpu because they know the chip can handle it. This one handles it very very good.

Intel supports their product at the rated speed. If Intel sold a 4.2GHz version I would buy it.

 

[mnewsham]

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/01/03/intel_sandy_bridge_2600k_2500k_processors_review/2



In other words, half of the CPU's are unable to get that high. Those are good odds, but no matter the hype, overclocking success is never guaranteed.

It says
50% reach 4.4ghz
40% reach 4.6ghz
And 10% reach 4.8ghz

Depending how you view this it claims ALL cpu's can reach 4.4ghz
My 4.2ghz was conservative

 

[flexcore]

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/01/03/intel_sandy_bridge_2600k_2500k_processors_review/2



In other words, half of the CPU's are unable to get that high. Those are good odds, but no matter the hype, overclocking success is never guaranteed.

Don't try to deceive every one here. You beat me to it mnewsham.

 

[mnewsham]

Intel supports their product at the rated speed. If Intel sold a 4.2GHz version I would buy it.

Did they release the "k" series for funsies?

 

[thedosbox]

It says
50% reach 4.4ghz
40% reach 4.6ghz
And 10% reach 4.8ghz

Depending how you view this it claims ALL cpu's can reach 4.4ghz
My 4.2ghz was conservative

Don't deceive every one here. Read the rest of that very same numbered list. The other 50% can OC even higher.

LOL - that's an optimistic reading. If that were the case, Intel would be selling them at that speed.

The reality is more like:

Of 100 CPU's

50 cannot reach 4.4
50 can reach 4.4
- of which ~40 can reach 4.6
- of which ~10 can reach 4.8

Which interpretation you want to follow will depend on how badly you want to compare e-peen

 

[mnewsham]

LOL - that's an optimistic reading. If that were the case, Intel would be selling them at that speed.

The reality is more like:

Of 100 CPU's

50 cannot reach 4.4
50 can reach 4.4
- of which 40 can reach 4.6
- of which 10 can reach 4.8

Which interpretation you want to follow will depend on how badly you want to compare e-peen

Show me a review where they couldn't hit 4.2ghz stop guessing.

 

[combust3r]

If OP needs VT-d and like TXT then 2500 is a good choice. Otherwise, 2500K is the way to go, maybe he won't o/c but in the long run juicing it up a bit could prove valuable in two + years.

 

[thedosbox]

Show me a review where they couldn't hit 4.2ghz stop guessing.

You may want to revisit your statistics class.

 

[flexcore]

what ever dos. I'm just trying to help the OP out with the truth. You have a point that no one can guaranty every chip will clock the same but the truth is these chips have A LOT of headroom. For the $15 extra and the ease of OCing I and many others believe that is the best option. If he doesn't want to that is fine. He has every right to do as he likes.

Sorry OP. If you want the k version and try out an OC I'm sure a few people around here would be willing to help. If not, thats cool too.

 

[Nintendesert]

LOL - that's an optimistic reading. If that were the case, Intel would be selling them at that speed.

The reality is more like:

Of 100 CPU's

50 cannot reach 4.4
50 can reach 4.4
- of which ~40 can reach 4.6
- of which ~10 can reach 4.8

Which interpretation you want to follow will depend on how badly you want to compare e-peen

That's not what it says at all. You've added words to try and support your position. The review has none of the "of which" shit that you're stating.


"
Results are representative of 100 D2 CPUs that were binned and tested for stability under load; these results will most likely represent retail CPUs.
1. Approximately 50% of CPUs can go up to 4.4~4.5 GHz
2. Approximately 40% of CPUs can go up to 4.6~4.7 GHz
3. Approximately 10% of CPUs can go up to 4.8~5 GHz (50+ multipliers are about 2% of this group)"






So when the review specifically states when they are looking at a % of chips within a segment. As in this case the 2% of the 10% clock range. You need to work on your reading comprehension because HardOCP pretty clearly states 100% of the chips they had can overclock to at least 4.4~4.5 GHz.

 

[mnewsham]

You may want to revisit your statistics class.

Is that code for "i can't find an oc less then 4.2ghz"?

Really tho, you should'nt say it can't when reading that article it says all of them oc to 4.4, it may mean otherwise but it clearly says they do.

 

[LR6]

Some people, such as myself, simply do not want to overclock. I would rather not risk data degradation for a few more fps.

I have thought the same thing for a very long time, Data integrity and system stability has always been at the top of my priority list when building a system and I have always been successful at that.

However, I am wondering if all of this is a marketing thing and the chips are designed to be overclocked from the beginning. Intel themselves even sell boards and software that lets you do it. The slides that intel distributed about Sandy Bridge even included some on overclocking.

 

[thedosbox]

Is that code for "i can find an oc less then 4.2ghz"?

Really tho, you should'nt say it can't when reading that article it says all of them oc to 4.4, it may mean otherwise but it clearly says they do.

It means drawing conclusions from a tiny sample size is a bad idea (not that 102 is exactly large either).

However, I realize I'm fighting a losing battle in this forum where most people want to boast about how large a clock they have. I hope you all have fun with that.

 

[RobDickinson]

Prehaps I'm not pushing my chips hard enough but I've overclocked many over the last 10-15 years and never had one fail. Current p2160/1.8 has been running at 3ghz for 3+ years on the stock cooler...

Without trying I've only ever seen 1 dead CPU.

 

[nyker96]

I think with K series, Intel has made OC just child's play, all you need to do is run a software and set the max multiplier you want. That's it. Done. for $15 extra, get the K. If only just to set it to something low like 4ghz. You'll get quite a bit more out of the chip.

 

[Jumpem]

Did they release the "k" series for funsies?

Overclocked speeds are not supported. They just make the option available. See the notes at the bottom of the slide below from Intel. They even note data integrity in it.

 

[toyota]

Jumpem, you are being ridiculous. you can oc the cpu to 4.0 by doing nothing more than moving the multiplier to 40. you dont even have to touch the voltage or anything else for anything under 4.2 according to reviews.

of course they put that overclocking is a risk because they do not want to warranty all the crazy people that will see just how far they can oc their cpu with tons of voltage. light overclocking, especially with stock voltage, will have no negative impact on the cpu for its relative lifetime.

 

[bryanW1995]

I have thought the same thing for a very long time, Data integrity and system stability has always been at the top of my priority list when building a system and I have always been successful at that.

However, I am wondering if all of this is a marketing thing and the chips are designed to be overclocked from the beginning. Intel themselves even sell boards and software that lets you do it. The slides that intel distributed about Sandy Bridge even included some on overclocking.

intel is currently VERY conservative with their clocks b/c all they have to do is beat their last gen i7 cpus. if Bulldozer launches at a competitive performance level then we'll magically see an SB sku that comes from the factory at 4.4 or whatever is necessary to maintain the performance lead until skt 2011 comes out.

@toyota: maybe he likes to keep his cpus for 20 years...