so where will hyperthreading really make a difference?

[Chaoticlusts]

Like a lot of other people I'm strongly considering the 2500k over the 2600k even though the 2600k fits in my budget the price/performence difference is quite substantial

While I have looked at various reviews and forums around one thing still eludes me...I understand some apps will benefit reasonably substantially from HT especially those involving compression and such by the looks of it....

but 95% of those don't affect me...one thing I am curious about that I haven't seen much referenced too is whether HT will have a decent impact when heavily multitasking I have had instances where I have an app running that consumes a reasonable bit of cpu power (bout 30% of my e6600) while watching a compressed 720p video while also gaming (most likely wow or some other game that is easily playable without sound) while none of those individually could take advantage of more than 4 threads so theoretically there would be no HT benefit...how bout when they're all going at once? would there be a noticeable difference?

 

[Rifter]

If you mostly game then get the 2500, if you do alot of video encoding/transcoding/compression or multitask alot with 4+ CPU intense programs open at a time then it might be worth it to go 2600.

This is the same as the i5 750 vs i7 920 is HT really worth it debates that have went on for the last few years, search some of those threads.

 

[flopper]

 

[AtenRa]

If you can afforded then get it, you'll get 8MB L3 Cache vs 6MB for the 2500K + the HT.

 

[Chaoticlusts]

rightio cheers I missed all those cause it wasn't during an upgrade cycle for me so didn't realize it had been heavily discussed before I'll poke around the archives

although there's still the question of how much more relevant it is now (since I imagine these discussions took place a year or two ago so more app's are multi-threaded and we have heavily CPU taxing games like SC2)

thank you for the info though...given my level of multi-tasking (or my inability to focus on one thing at a time however you want to put it ) it might be very tempting to go for a 2600k....but the alternative of going for a 2500k keeping it for say 18 months and then buying a similar priced ivy bridge with the saved cash plus a bit extra...could be rather nice too

I guess going from an E6600 to any sandy bridge I'm going to have a *massive* difference in the power available too me regardless I just like to make sure I have all the facts before a purchase

*edit* ohh thanx flopper great chart, though i'm surprised that with games they didn't pick either civ5 or sc2 which seem to be very CPU dependant, though looking at the benchmarks for them on normal reviews you can clearly see the difference between 2500 and 2600 is too large too just be the cache and 100MHz so HT on them is already answered

 

[Rifter]

thank you for the info though...given my level of multi-tasking (or my inability to focus on one thing at a time however you want to put it ) it might be very tempting to go for a 2600k....but the alternative of going for a 2500k keeping it for say 18 months and then buying a similar priced ivy bridge with the saved cash plus a bit extra...could be rather nice too

I wouldnt count on anything more than a dual core ivy bridge making it to 1155, i fully expect the 4-8 core ivy bridge to require 2011. Intel isnt so hot on supporting old sockets with new CPU's.

 

[Chaoticlusts]

I wouldnt count on anything more than a dual core ivy bridge making it to 1155, i fully expect the 4-8 core ivy bridge to require 2011. Intel isnt so hot on supporting old sockets with new CPU's.

if Ivy Bridge works on old 1155's at all I'd bet it would be dual and quad (with sept and oct being on 2011) though I agree about intels support for old sockets while they've said ivy will go on 1155's they also said sandy would be on 1156 originally...so 1154 for ivy?