Status
Not open for further replies.

humanage

Distinguished
Aug 11, 2010
241
0
18,680
I have an OCd Pentium D E5400 @ 4Ghz. I don't see the point of switching to an i7 2600k(new sandy bridge). I play games on a GTX 460 OC. Will I see any performance difference, or is this $600+ switch just for some bragging rights?
 
Solution
Its not just bragging rights. The 2500K offers great performance with reasonable power and thermal requirements... at a very good price. You can probably get a capable AMD system for less, but this is as good a price/performance ratio you'll get out of Intel for the near future... You're probably looking at $400 for CPU/mobo ... and add $50 for 4GB of DDR3. Not quite $600... :)

Most gaming reviews I've read use 30fps as the line for 'playability'. Its also a factor of image quality, graphic content, and resolution. If you can get a richer gaming experience with shinier graphics and sharper images...

I usually find the graphics card makes the most drastic difference... but the card you have should be pretty capable. Perhaps the...

moody89

Distinguished
Oct 6, 2009
799
0
19,160
If you ask me it all depends on the games you play and the settings you're happy with. If you're happy with your current setup and you can play all your games on settings you're happy with then why upgrade? If you're struggling then maybe it would be worth considering, but why fix what isn't broken. If you do upgrade though from what I've heard the 2500k is cheaper than the 2600k and offers great gaming performance - it's mean to be the best price/performance chip of the new SandyBridge line so that may be worth considering.
 

jpmucha

Distinguished
Aug 5, 2008
168
0
18,710
Its not just bragging rights. The 2500K offers great performance with reasonable power and thermal requirements... at a very good price. You can probably get a capable AMD system for less, but this is as good a price/performance ratio you'll get out of Intel for the near future... You're probably looking at $400 for CPU/mobo ... and add $50 for 4GB of DDR3. Not quite $600... :)

Most gaming reviews I've read use 30fps as the line for 'playability'. Its also a factor of image quality, graphic content, and resolution. If you can get a richer gaming experience with shinier graphics and sharper images...

I usually find the graphics card makes the most drastic difference... but the card you have should be pretty capable. Perhaps the CPU/RAM is a bottleneck. Are you playing at High Quality to get 23fps avg?
 
Solution

jpmucha

Distinguished
Aug 5, 2008
168
0
18,710
I'm sure you would see an improvement.
Here's a review at a different website that has Fallout 3 at medium quality. the closest CPU to yours, a Q6600, is in the high 60s. The 2500K is getting 90fps. Test is using a GTX 280. They're getting over 20fps at medium... it should translate to an extra 10-15fps for you perhaps... just extrapolating from the data. If that is worth the $450... that's your call.
 

1965ohio

Distinguished
Jan 12, 2011
697
0
19,060
The E5400 is not a Pentium D. Pentium D is just a dual core Pentium 4 (netburst)... the E5400 is based on the Core 2 architecture and just has less cache and/or a little less features. And of course the 2600 will be better because it can do a lot more clock for clock, just like your E5400 can do a lot more than the Pentium 4/D clock for clock.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS