Just putting on the final touches..

July 19, 2011 4:29:09 AM

I tried this in another area with no response. Hopefully I don't sound too much like a broken record, so I apologize in advance, but I get great responses from here.

. I've been battling back and forth with this for probably a good couple months if I really think about it. My eye will catch something that convinces me the 2600k is what I want, and the way to go, and then read an article that shows that the 2500k although a fraction slower in most testing, has more bang for the buck. Whether I've been reading a thread, or scoping out a new article, I think I may have finally come to a conclusion as to what will actually fit the bill. I just need some good strong opinions from either side (even if you're biased to one over the other, and it's blatantly obvious) as to why I would, or would not go with a certain processor. From what I can tell, real world use shows the 2500k and 2600k neck and neck for most of what I'm trying to build for.

All things equal, the main use of the CPU will be Adobe, some light programming, and some good ol' pwnin' some noob gaming. Monitor is 24" 1920x1200. Assume the graphics card will be at least a 6850/560 (n. MB, RAM, etc.. will all be mid range (z68 with the usual goodies, ~1600+ ~CL8 for RAM). I don't want to get into too many tiny details of the build since I want the focus to be on benefits I'll see using one over the other, and vice versa. When in doubt, just imagine your own mid-high range build (hence the all things equal).

If there happens to be an outside influence that would affect a CPU's performance, (i.e. RAM variables, MB BIOS, GPU performance) buy all means, eat your heart out!

Thanks in advance. I've learned a lot so far from the community.

More about : putting final touches

| E-mail me updates
| Report abuse

gkay09

July 19, 2011 5:32:38 AM

^ If you would require the extra bit of additional performance, then the i7 is a good option as it performs as good as the 6-Core CPUs from Intel in most the apps, also for CAD, IMO the i7 is worth it as many apps do benefit from the HT present on the i7,...

But if CAD is a just a hobby or just a small part of you daily routine, then the i5 would offer better value,...

| Report abuse

divinedragon

July 19, 2011 5:59:09 AM

gkay09 said:

^ If you would require the extra bit of additional performance, then the i7 is a good option as it performs as good as the 6-Core CPUs from Intel in most the apps, also for CAD, IMO the i7 is worth it as many apps do benefit from the HT present on the i7,...

But if CAD is a just a hobby or just a small part of you daily routine, then the i5 would offer better value,...

Perfect start! Just what I was looking for. I think the whole reason I even wanted to upgrade initially in the first place was because I hated waiting for photoshop to render something, or the load time on a program. I just knew I could do better, and now looked like a great time to upgrade.

| Report abuse

gkay09

July 19, 2011 6:36:07 AM

^ Then I dont see any reason why not to get an i7,...

Agreed that it is $100 costler, but you will atleast be content that the performance you get is the best currently available...

| Report abuse

divinedragon

July 19, 2011 6:54:54 AM

Here's a nice advantage I see of buying the 2500k over spending the extra for the 2600k. I'll assume Ivory bridge will probably hit around the same time, maybe a little earlier than the Sandy bridge version did, and with the increase in performance, I wouldn't be taking such a hit if I wanted to upgrade.

I'm still looking for others out there to chime in with their 2 cents as well.

| Report abuse

gkay09

July 19, 2011 7:14:43 AM

^ Well that is atleast 6 months away, so it also depends on when you want to build the PC.....

| Report abuse

shadow1942

July 19, 2011 9:46:46 AM

simple if you do video encoding or use multiple applications at once, get the i2600k
(k model only if you plan to overclock)

if you don't get the i2500k (again K model only if you plan to overclock otherwise you can save a few bucks).

Ivy bridge won't be out for at least 6mths as Gkay said maybe longer since AMD has been delayed again intel won't really have any competiton. Ivy bridge will smash both the i2500 and i2600 so it won't matter which one you get.

| Report abuse

DXRick

July 19, 2011 6:50:52 PM

Get the 2600K! Otherwise, you will end up with buyer's remorse.

| Report abuse

divinedragon

July 20, 2011 9:51:24 AM

well, I really don't think I'd end up with buyers remorse. I'd love someone to chime in that owned said processor(s) to add some more flare. I think if I went and bought the 2600k and found that it was only very slightly better (waiting 1 second instead of 2) I would have the remorse knowing that the next CPU isn't too far off the horizon, and would rather spend money on that.

Seems I'm still stuck in the same spot as before.. haha! Was initially dead set on a 2600k.. read some articles referencing performance and calculations, and saw that the 2500k was just barely behind in most tests. I can handle a fraction behind, and don't need to be bleeding edge. I'd rather allocate that extra money towards overall quality within my build.

| Report abuse

DXRick

July 20, 2011 6:30:47 PM

Get the 2500K, and spend the $100 on something else!

Or, the final option is to continue to read benchmarks and charts, obsessing over every detail, waiting for someone to come along with what ever it is that will break that indecision, or waiting so long that the next platform comes out.

| Report abuse

divinedragon

July 20, 2011 7:07:07 PM

There is truth to this, and why I posted this in the first place. It was a last hurrah before I decided to start buying up stuff. I just knew the 2600 handles encoding and medius heavy apps better. I just wasn't really sure how MUCH better when I'm sitting in front if the computer doing it. Looks like the 2500k it is.

| Report abuse