Will you be going 2600K or 2500K?

[Hulk]

I'm going with the 2500k. I just can't see $100 for Hyperthreading when most applications don't do much better with it over the 4 physical cores. For me that money is better spent on a SSD performance-wise.

 

[Mannaman]

I work with video and even I'm having a hard time convincing myself of the 2600K over the 2500K and am starting to think the only users who can legitimately benefit from the 2600K are those who do a wide variety of multi threaded intensive tasks, unless they deal with a specific program that individually benefits a great deal on its own. I have a feeling a majority of 2600K adopters will be from ignorance, e-peen, or they simply couldn't get their hands on a 2500K

2500K should easily be the gamer's choice as the two should perform virtually identically, especially when both are overclocked.

It's a no-brainer for me. I'm not a gamer but I'm ALWAYS waiting on my computer with a 2.8 Ghz Core 2 Duo (E4700 O.C.). I'll probably use the chip for five years and in the last five years I've averaged over five hours a day and the math is easy. Less than .02 an hour for a recognizably faster experience of getting things done is extremely cheap. Divide that by the minute and it's no more than 1/40 of a penny per minute of actual USE time. Yeah, $100 seems like a lot, and it would be if you were only going to use your computer five times a year for a few minutes each time. But I don't think that's how you guys use your computers. I know I don't.

In fact, I keep my computer on probably avg. of more than 18 hrs. a day.

That why if I wait for Ivy Bridge, the savings on electricity (not to mention the heat) by going to 22 nm will far more than pay for the difference in the CPU cost... of course, it won't then be a 2600K. I'm just hoping the improvement Intel makes on the new CPUs will be even half again the improvement over this last generation.

Excuse me for drooling.

 

[Anubis]

neither my 920 will keep me happy for at least another cycle

im running it @ 4GHZ with HT on. there really isnt anything out there id need more power for other then benchmark numbers

 

[GrumpyMan]

I got mine for $279.00 at MicroCenter so I think deserve a little cherry and whip cream on top, like another member said, once in awhile. And I'm set for a few years with this setup for what I actually do at home with it too, which saves me money in the end since I don't have to upgrade every 2 years. That's why I always get the best currently available for my needs.

 

[tweakboy]

Wait for Ivy Bridge . neither!

 

[Fun Guy]

Hmm, I wondering for the guys who got the 2600K, if you were blindfolded and shown two identical computers (except for the 2500K & 2600K), would you even be able to tell the difference between the two???

 

[Kristijonas]

2500k for games 2600k for photo-video processing, rendering programs.

 

[Axon]

Hmm, I wondering for the guys who got the 2600K, if you were blindfolded and shown two identical computers (except for the 2500K & 2600K), would you even be able to tell the difference between the two???

Depends what I was doing, so, yes

 

[Sunburn74]

Hmm, I wondering for the guys who got the 2600K, if you were blindfolded and shown two identical computers (except for the 2500K & 2600K), would you even be able to tell the difference between the two???

Not with day to day stuff, but with anything productivity related I'd say so.

Personally, if you're coming from an ancient platform, I'd spend the extra 100 bucks and go 2600k as a little extra future proofing is all. But hey thats just me.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

If I were to make a system, I'd probably keep it for three years at the very least, minus perhaps a CPU upgrade. I think the 2500K is a good CPU for now and a year from now, but its multi-threaded performance isn't THAT great. The 2600K nets you a ~20% improvement there, but I don't really know about paying $310 for a Quad-Core. I'd really prefer to get a Six-Core CPU, but the 3930K will be a whopping $585 while platform costs are higher than P67, too. At the same time, the upgrade path of P67/Sandy Bridge isn't that great.

Ivy Bridge will net us a ~5% improvement in IPC and probably 300MHz or so higher clock speeds at the same voltage (1.35V), but nothing earth-shattering. Going from a 2500K to a theoretical Quad-Core with HT Ivy Bridge isn't that big of a deal, except perhaps for the PCIe 3.0 support (as long as the motherboard supports it, of course). At the same time, there's some rumors flying around that Ivy Bridge-E will eventually support Eight-Core consumer CPUs, and if that happens, they'll be the new $1,000 ones and a new, slightly lower clocked model will come out and cost less (see Core i7-980X to 970). Then again, I think paying $1K for a CPU is ridiculous and I wouldn't do it.

 

[classy]

I just put together a 2500K for my sister. Nice box.

 

[RandomSanity]

2600k for me, even though I am mostly using it for gaming I couldn't resist the recent bundle deal

 

[rbk123]

The slight performance gain of the 2600k isn't going to make it any more future proof than the 2500k. Both will last many years and there won't be an app that will run fine on the 2600k but will run like crap on the 2500k. Buy it because you can afford it and it's a hobby but making an economic case for it with them as close as they are is laughable.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

The slight performance gain of the 2600k isn't going to make it any more future proof than the 2500k. Both will last many years and there won't be an app that will run fine on the 2600k but will run like crap on the 2500k. Buy it because you can afford it and it's a hobby but making an economic case for it with them as close as they are is laughable.

That depends on your definition. You do have to admit the 2500K isn't THAT great in multi-threaded, especially when it comes large workloads. In those it's comparable to something like a Core i7-880 or a Phenom II X6 1100T.

Now that I think about it, the 3930K doesn't sound too bad. About 35-40% faster than the 2600K in multi-threaded and similar in single-threaded. Only thing is that $600 price tag.

 

[rbk123]

Even in multi-threaded the 2500k will perform sufficiently close to the 2600k. The difference isn't even remotely close to being night and day. There is a difference and if you're timing things you'll see it but to describe it as something only the 2600k is capable of is silly.

 

[Capt Caveman]

2500K were on sale at Microcenter for $149 last week.

 

[carnage10]

I just put together a 2500K for my sister. Nice box.

Yeah but what about the rig? ;-)

 

[arredondo]

2500K were on sale at Microcenter for $149 last week.

I snagged one up from them to build my new rig around. You can't beat $150 for the power of a 2500K.

 

[Davegod]

If you already have 1156/1366 you really should wait for Socket 2011 (socket R) before thinking about upgrading. There are comparable CPU's to the 980x but there isnt going to be any game changing proccessors to surpass yours. For that kind of setup adding a second 5870 is your best upgrade until the next socket.

Any idea of a date on that? I've not been keeping up recently and can't work out the current position with the delays and whatnot.