Which CPU LGA 1366 i7-960 3.2Ghz or LGA 1155 i7-2600 3.4 Ghz

[CZJZ]

Hi, I am looking to build a new computer and it will be soley a gaming rig. My question is will the 1155 i7-2600 be much quicker than the i7-960? The costs difference for the matching mobo and cpu is minimal.

The other thing I question about the two choices is the fact I just built a new rig about 6 months ago but it is a q9550 cpu and if I go with the i7-960 build I believe I can integrate\swap parts between the 2 systems if ever needed.

So with that said, which way should I go? If the speed increase worth it on the lga 1155 i want to jump on it.

Thanks

 

[Tuna-Fish]

The SNB (LGA1155) is considerably better: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU/48

The chip you should buy isn't i7 2600 -- it's the i5 2500(K). It differs only by 2MB less cache and by the HT being disabled, neither of which hurts performance in games much at all. (the lack of HT can actually help, just look at the SC2 benchmark in the link I posted.) And it's quite a lot cheaper. If you get the K version, it's also a very good overclocker.

Also, you cannot swap parts between LGA775 (Q9550) and LGA1366 any better than you can between LGA1155 and LGA775.

 

[dma0991]

Unless you have the need for 4 way SLI or insane overclocks more than 5.7Ghz, you should get the SB instead. The Core i7 960 is not worth the money right now especially when LGA2011 is coming out pretty soon to replace it.

http://ark.intel.com/Compare.aspx?ids=37150,37151,

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/287?vs=100

Core i7 950 is used for comparison as there is no Core i7 960 but should only be slightly faster than the 950 with 200Mhz more on the 960. From the CPU bench you could clearly see that the Core i7 2600 is way faster than the Core i7 950. Not to mention the great overclocking potential of the K suffix SB processors with air coolers.

I don't understand what parts that can't be swapped between your old rig and the new one. GPU, HDD, DDR3 RAM and all that can be used on the LGA1155.

 

[aphelion02]

Even the i5 2500 is better in most situations than the i7-960.

 

[hans007]

if you can get the xeon e3-1230 thast probably the best choice.

 

[IntelEnthusiast]

OK right now I would have to say it is hard to beat the performance for gaming that you can get from the Intel® Core™ I5 2500K in gaming. On the Intel Core I7 2600K it is a better processor if you are doing heavy multi-threaded work like audio/video or doing heavy multi-tasking (btw it is possible to turn off hyper-threading in the bios). Now to the fact is it worth it to upgrade from an older Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 to the Intel Core I7 960 or Intel Core I7 2600K or Intel Core I5 2500K, lets clear up a couple things while it is possible that you may have one of the rare boards that supported DDR3 on for your Intel Core 2 Quad most likely it is using DDR2. All of the Intel Core processors (like the Core I7 960 and Core I7 2600K and Core I5 2500K) use DDR3. So the memory wouldn’t be able to be used on the new system. SATA is SATA so that is able to be used for both processors, so you can carry over your hard drives and the case is going to be ATX or Micro-ATX and that hasn’t changed along with the power supply. Overall there would be more value in upgrading to the 2nd generation Intel Core processor.

Christian Wood
Intel Enthusiast Team

 

[AdamK47]

Only go with the 1366 if you plan on getting a hex core, otherwise go with the 1155.

 

[Soundmanred]

i5 2500K

 

[nanaki333]

you should also take in to consideration you have to buy more memory for the new board based on the socket you get. so getting the outdated s1366, you're going to need at LEAST 3 DIMMs, vs 2 for SB.

on the plus side though, DDR3 is so cheap, it's like we're robbing the manufacturers!

 

[tweakboy]

The SNB (LGA1155) is considerably better: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU/48

The chip you should buy isn't i7 2600 -- it's the i5 2500(K). It differs only by 2MB less cache and by the HT being disabled, neither of which hurts performance in games much at all. (the lack of HT can actually help, just look at the SC2 benchmark in the link I posted.) And it's quite a lot cheaper. If you get the K version, it's also a very good overclocker.

Also, you cannot swap parts between LGA775 (Q9550) and LGA1366 any better than you can between LGA1155 and LGA775.

the K in Sandy means its unlocked and ready for intense OCing.

2500k and 2600k , I promise you wont tell a difference doing your normal stuff. thx gg and gl

 

[CZJZ]

Ohhh, lots of excellent info w\out me having to pour through pages and pages of reading and trying to make a decision on my own. Thanks all, that is why I came here! This thread answered one of my questions but led into another now that I was not aware of before.

I will go with the 1155 but now which cpu to choose.... the i5 2500k or the i7 2600? Before you answer this however I forgot to mention in my original post, I do not plan on Oc'ing the cpu.

I will be buying new ddr3 ram, video card, mobo and cpu on the build, I have everything else from other units, a case, PS, op drive, SSD.

Thanks for the help.

 

[AdamK47]

Also take into account that the feedback you get here generally falls into the cheapskate category. Anandtech use to be filled with high end enthusiasts at one time.

 

[Accord99]

I will go with the 1155 but now which cpu to choose.... the i5 2500k or the i7 2600? Before you answer this however I forgot to mention in my original post, I do not plan on Oc'ing the cpu.

Think of the 2600 as a 4.8 core Sandy Bridge, if the extra performance offered by the extra 0.8 core will be beneficial to your non-gaming applications, then it may be worthwhile to pay the extra premium.

 

[mb103051]

if you can afford the 2600k then go for it...with no o/clocking rule of thumb is buy the fastest cpu you can afford...but even on stock voltage these o/clock like mad....

 

[BTRY B 529th FA BN]

If I wanted a 2600K, that is what I would go with. The 2600K is essentially the same thing as a 2500K when you disable Hyper Threading in the bios except 100Mhz faster in both stock & turbo speeds. Me, I like to have that option to satisfy curiosity so it would be the 2600K for me.

Good Luck

 

[Makaveli]

For a new build it makes more sense to go with SB. If you can wait tho I would hold out for Socket 2011.

 

[StrangerGuy]

Actually, a Q9550 @ 4GHz is still plenty fast for gaming purposes where the bottleneck is purely on the GPU side. It only makes sense to go 2500K when you are still on a dual-core.

Anyway, gaming stay away from the overpriced, dead-end 1366 at all costs.

 

[Acanthus]

Also take into account that the feedback you get here generally falls into the cheapskate category. Anandtech use to be filled with high end enthusiasts at one time.

Eh I wouldn't call us cheapskates, just "bang for your buck oriented"

I'm willing to spend lots of money if it actually garners large performance gains.

 

[BoomerD]

Wow...It's like deja vu all over again...

From a nearly identical question in General Hardware...

While in some categories, the i7-960 beats the i5-2500K fairly handily, the i7-2600K beats the snot out of the the i7-960.
Unfortunately, the Anandtech bench doesn't have the 960, but it does have the i7-965 Extreme...and the Sandy Bridge processor puts that one to shame.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/45?vs=287

 

[betasub]

^ Yes, and those "some categories" are a few specialised cases where HT has a big effect - in which case the comparison with i7-2600k is more apt.

 

[ed29a]

If I wanted a 2600K, that is what I would go with. The 2600K is essentially the same thing as a 2500K when you disable Hyper Threading in the bios except 100Mhz faster in both stock & turbo speeds. Me, I like to have that option to satisfy curiosity so it would be the 2600K for me.

Good Luck

And extra 2 MB of cache.

 

[BoomerD]

Oh noes...not ANOTHER Hal...

 

[Campy]

for gaming i'd get the i7-2500

 

[AdamK47]

for gaming i'd get the i7-990x

 

[BTRY B 529th FA BN]

I'm happy gaming with my i7 920 doing 3.81Ghz @ 1.23v HT off.