Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

I7 3930k vs i7 2600k, OC AIR! Help.

Last response: in Systems
Share
August 28, 2012 10:25:32 PM

Edit: Made a mistake in the title. It should be i7 3770k vs 2600k. Sorry! =)

Hello. I am helping a friend put together a PC. Since the difference between the Sandy and Ivy seems very minimal when overclocked on air I adviced my friend to go for a cheap PC now and spend a lot on a haswell later. But the friend insists on i7 processor.

Now, we have already decided on the GFX card. $300.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

and Intel 520 SSD (size not decided, probably 180GB).

I was leaning toward buying an i7 2600k BUT the GFX card is PCI Express 3.0 x16. Do any Z68 mobos have PCIe 3.0? I checked out the award winning ASUS Maximus IV Extreme Z, and it does not.

Q1) Will using that card in a PCIe 2.0 slot, slow down its performance (I was reading before that you lose about 5% performnce).
Q2) Do cheap and reliable i7 2600k mobos with PCIe 3.0 exist?
Q3) What overclocks and runs better on air. Ivy Bridge or Sandy Bridge? And how big is the difference.

I have been out of the game for a while so I don´t know anything about Ivy except that it has problems with temperatures.
Budget is $1000-1250. US part prices.

Thanks for all the help.

More about : 3930k 2600k air

August 28, 2012 10:30:47 PM

ivy bridge doesnt have problems with temps unless you crank the voltages above 1.3v. heres what i would get. if he is gaming, this would be better

get a i5 3570k. getting a i7 is pretty much useless unless you do CAD, video rendering, and work

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/fHCz

it offers room for future SLI
August 28, 2012 10:39:18 PM

Q1) There is a small difference. I wouldn't argue with your figure.
Q2) No. PCIe 3.0 needs Ivybridge, to actually get that boost.
Q3) Depends what you mean by better. In terms of the frequency you can acheive, without destroying processor, Sandybridge would probably win. However, Ivybridge starts with a better performance, which equates to about a 0.2 GHz "headstart", the REAL difference in terms of performance, at max overclock, for each, is actually quite small.
Related resources
August 28, 2012 10:40:23 PM

+1 TheBigTroll

Aside from that, I believe you mean to compare the i7 3770k vs 2600k. The 3930k is a Sandy Bridge-E CPU that costs over $500 and fits into the LGA 2011 socket, which would require a X79 motherboard.

August 28, 2012 10:44:22 PM

there is a minimal performance difference between the i7 3770k and the 2600k in terms of regular gaming performance. the biggest performance increase would be quick sync which from what i know is around 30% faster and the intergrated GPU is about 30% faster as well (not that it matters much in games)
August 28, 2012 10:55:46 PM

My suggestion is always buy the latest tech, if you have your heart set on an i7 then go for an 3770k with a z77 board. Sandy E is a waste unless your doing 3-4 way sli
August 28, 2012 10:59:21 PM

redeemer said:
My suggestion is always buy the latest tech, if you have your heart set on an i7 then go for an 3770k with a z77 board. Sandy E is a waste unless your doing 3-4 way sli

Or you do lots of video rendering/photo editing.
August 28, 2012 11:10:05 PM

irlwizard said:
Hello. I am helping a friend put together a PC. Since the difference between the Sandy and Ivy seems very minimal when overclocked on air I adviced my friend to go for a cheap PC now and spend a lot on a haswell later. But the friend insists on i7 processor.

Now, we have already decided on the GFX card. $300.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

and Intel 520 SSD (size not decided, probably 180GB).

I was leaning toward buying an i7 2600k BUT the GFX card is PCI Express 3.0 x16. Do any Z68 mobos have PCIe 3.0? I checked out the award winning ASUS Maximus IV Extreme Z, and it does not.

Q1) Will using that card in a PCIe 2.0 slot, slow down its performance (I was reading before that you lose about 5% performnce).
Q2) Do cheap and reliable i7 2600k mobos with PCIe 3.0 exist?
Q3) What overclocks and runs better on air. Ivy Bridge or Sandy Bridge? And how big is the difference.

I have been out of the game for a while so I don´t know anything about Ivy except that it has problems with temperatures.
Budget is $1000-1250. US part prices.

Thanks for all the help.

I've read about a 5% performance hit from going PCI-e 16x to PCI-e 4x when investigating SLI/Crossfire on 1155 platforms. It demonstrates that PCI-e 2 bandwidth isn't even being utilized, so PCI-e 3 is only for bragging rights. I'd just get the 2600k because Sandy Bridge overclocks better (4.2GHz vs 4.8GHz). Actually, if the rig is for gaming, I'd opt for a 2500k, or other Sandy Bridge i5.
August 28, 2012 11:12:43 PM

4.2ghz, thats kinda bull right there. it will hit 4.5ghz but after that, it gets too hot due to the extra voltage. at 4.5-4.6ghz it should perform like the sandy bridge at 4.8ghz.

you do get a large increase in performance with quick sync on the i5 3570k compared to the i5 2500k
August 28, 2012 11:29:38 PM

TheBigTroll said:
4.2ghz, thats kinda bull right there. it will hit 4.5ghz but after that, it gets too hot due to the extra voltage. at 4.5-4.6ghz it should perform like the sandy bridge at 4.8ghz.

you do get a large increase in performance with quick sync on the i5 3570k compared to the i5 2500k

Really? you must have missed this article:
Quote:
As we proceeded in our overclocking efforts, regardless of whether we used a higher core voltage or not, we observed something frustrating: even below 4.5 GHz, our Ivy Bridge-based Core i7-3770K began thermal throttling. That is to say it reduced its clock rate in order to bring its temperature down. In other words, our overclocked -3770K was already running too hot, even at its default voltage setting.

Quote:
Core Temp 1.0 RC3 reports that our Core i7-3770K reaches 90-100°C (194-212°F) internally when it's overclocked to 4.5 GHz. No wonder the chip's thermal monitor tripped, throttling the CPU. This phenomenon dropped the effective clock rate of our chip to approximately 3.5 GHz, corresponding to the CPU’s nominal frequency.


http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ivy-bridge-overcloc...

Ivy Bridge at 4.5GHz put up higher temps than the six-core Sandy Bridge-E at 4.7GHz. Ivy bridge sucks at overclocking.
August 28, 2012 11:49:17 PM

TheBigTroll said:
every chip is different. pretty sure he reached 4.7ghz
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCIWTX-jy9A

He reached 4.6GHz, on a closed loop water cooling unit, and still hit 85. I'm not sure if you missed the part of the all caps AIR! cooling in the title. The article I posted used an Arctic Cooler Freezer 13 which is a bit more realistic and closer to the needs of the OP.
August 28, 2012 11:59:36 PM


Linus used an H70 which has a larger surface area, in addition to using a push/pull config. Seriously dude, the H70 Push/Pull is significantly better than a stock H60.

Also, 85 is way too high for every day temp. 3770k temp is spec'd at 67.4c.
http://ark.intel.com/products/65523/Intel-Core-i7-3770K...

The 2600k is spec'd at 72.6. So in addition to running cooler overclocked, Sandy Bridge also has higher thermal tolerance.
http://ark.intel.com/products/52214/Intel-Core-i7-2600K...
August 29, 2012 12:04:33 AM

bro, fudoka711 got 57c after 9 hrs of prime95 on his 3570k at 4.4ghz with a hyper 212
August 29, 2012 12:04:46 AM

"i7 3770k vs 2600k" oh ya that is correct.

The CPU cooler you found in the list is very interesting for that price.
http://www.frostytech.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=265...

Almost as good as my Noctua C14. But the thing I like about the C14 is that it blows DOWN, cooling the mobo as well.

As for SSD. I think 520 cherryville is the best option here because that is the only thing my friend will be saving if he ends up taking the SSD out and selling the PC a month before haswell release. But very good list.

As for PSU I only trust 3 brands on a OC system. Seaonic, Corsair and Antec.

I made some changes to the list I´ll post it here. Let me know what you think.
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/fWgT
750W PSU would leave room for future SLI. But I might edit that one later if I find something cheaper. Have to look up reviews of ripple and vdroop. But I have a 750W Seasonic and it has served me very well. xD

The GFX I found and linked is actually faster and cheaper then the 670 version, pretty sad. xD
http://www.guru3d.com/article/gigabyte-geforce-gtx-660-...

PS: I don´t count the OS in the final sum. My friend can buy a cheap key from collage. But lets include it just for laughs.
August 29, 2012 12:11:18 AM

TheBigTroll said:
bro, fudoka711 got 57c after 9 hrs of prime95 on his 3570k at 4.4ghz with a hyper 212

What were the ambient temps? Case? voltage? Thermal compound. I've gotten 62 on my 2500k with a Dark Knight (I'd argue the 212 is a better cooler due to heatpipe count) at 4.6GHz in the middle of winter with a fresh application of thermal grease, but I'm flirting with 70 now at 4.2Ghz on the same system right now because my room is hotter than the devils a**hole.
August 29, 2012 12:20:17 AM

well obviously he wasnt running it in the middle of winter because he posted it in may.with a fresh application of thermal grease, he would only get a 3-4c max reduction





August 29, 2012 12:21:01 AM

irlwizard said:
"i7 3770k vs 2600k" oh ya that is correct.

The CPU cooler you found in the list is very interesting for that price.
http://www.frostytech.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=265...

Almost as good as my Noctua C14. But the thing I like about the C14 is that it blows DOWN, cooling the mobo as well.

As for SSD. I think 520 cherryville is the best option here because that is the only thing my friend will be saving if he ends up taking the SSD out and selling the PC a month before haswell release. But very good list.

As for PSU I only trust 3 brands on a OC system. Seaonic, Corsair and Antec.

I made some changes to the list I´ll post it here. Let me know what you think.
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/fWgT
750W PSU would leave room for future SLI. But I might edit that one later if I find something cheaper. Have to look up reviews of ripple and vdroop. But I have a 750W Seasonic and it has served me very well. xD

The GFX I found and linked is actually faster and cheaper then the 670 version, pretty sad. xD
http://www.guru3d.com/article/gigabyte-geforce-gtx-660-...

PS: I don´t count the OS in the final sum. My friend can buy a cheap key from collage. But lets include it just for laughs.


the 520 isnt worth it for the price. a samsung 830 is a better option

on a psu, you left out xfx. xfx provides a better value given its made by seasonic and most of their units are identical to corsair models (other than the fan). the tx series are the same as the xfx core series and the ax series are the same as the pro series from xfx. the hx are made by CWT but there was a refresh
August 29, 2012 12:27:01 AM

TheBigTroll said:
well obviously he wasnt running it in the middle of winter because he posted it in may.with a fresh application of thermal grease, he would only get a 3-4c max reduction

The point is, ambient temps are critical factors. Comparing two different results without knowing the ambient temps of each is just like comparing apples and oranges. Winters in the bay area aren't particularly cold.
August 29, 2012 12:31:39 AM

it wouldnt really change the fact that he could hit 4.4ghz with 60c if it was 20c. i highly doubt he would put himself under colder temps just to prove his point.

i live in a colder area so temps are no problem for me
August 29, 2012 12:48:13 AM

TheBigTroll said:
it wouldnt really change the fact that he could hit 4.4ghz with 60c if it was 20c. i highly doubt he would put himself under colder temps just to prove his point.

i live in a colder area so temps are no problem for me


well considering room temp is 22-24, that would effect the temp of the OC, which, along with voltage, will affect the stability.

The underlying point is Sandy Bridge OC's much better than Ivy Bridge, all things equal. In a controlled environment, Toms proved it. Same temp, same cooler, same RAM, etc. There are also other articles from Anadtech, ExtremeTech, and any other tech review site indicating the same thing. If that guy could reach 60c with Ivy Bridge at 4.4GHz, I'd bet Sandy Bridge would reach 4.8GHz under the same conditions with similar temps.
August 29, 2012 12:51:20 AM

yes i know it wont overclock as well but what is the point of reaching 4.8ghz when you can do fine with a 4.2 to 4.4 and not see a whole lot of a difference?
August 29, 2012 12:54:50 AM

TheBigTroll said:
yes i know it wont overclock as well but what is the point of reaching 4.8ghz when you can do fine with a 4.2 to 4.4 and not see a whole lot of a difference?


The performance difference heavily depends on the application. All we know is the OP wants to OC, and SB provides the better Oc. If the application was web-browsing, you wouldn't see a lot of difference from a 4.8GHz i7 and a Celeron G530
August 29, 2012 1:06:28 AM

TheBigTroll said:
the 520 isnt worth it for the price. a samsung 830 is a better option

on a psu, you left out xfx. xfx provides a better value given its made by seasonic and most of their units are identical to corsair models (other than the fan). the tx series are the same as the xfx core series and the ax series are the same as the pro series from xfx. the hx are made by CWT but there was a refresh


Thanks for the tip about xfx being built by Seasonic. I haven´t really looked into PC parts since the X58 mobo so it is always nice to be refreshed.

Samsung has bad write speeds, is a dirty pirate and price-fixing company. Plus, you can always trust intel software to be very good when they release better firmware for the SSD etc. I think it is worth it in the long run. =)


How many Ghz do you guys think I can hit on stable OC with i5 or i7 Ivy using the CM or Noctua C14 cooler.
http://www.frostytech.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=265...

e.g. for Ivy
i5 CM 4.2Ghz
i7 CM 4.4Ghz
i5 Noc 4.4Ghz
i7 Noc 4.6Ghz


Jerm1027 said PCIe3.0 is just for braging rights. Is this true? Almost every review I have seen show that, even tho GFX cards do not use up all the bandwith of PCIe2.0. They still get better results when slotted into PCIe3.0 slots. Maybe because of efficiency or something?
August 29, 2012 1:12:49 AM

if you go noctua, id get the d14 in the first place

are you trollin me on the samsung 830 being bad? (cant find a 120gb intel 520 to bench so its only fair to do 256gb vs 240gb)
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/532?vs=529

you can hit 4.5ghz with the noctua but not always with a hyper 212 on a ivy bridge chip. you can easily hit 4.5ghz on a hyper 212 and 4.8ghz on a noctua d14

pci-e 3 is not useful now since no card can saturate the bus but it does help in sli situations
August 29, 2012 1:23:50 AM

irlwizard said:

How many Ghz do you guys think I can hit on stable OC with i5 or i7 Ivy using the CM or Noctua C14 cooler.
http://www.frostytech.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=265...

e.g. for Ivy
i5 CM 4.2Ghz
i7 CM 4.4Ghz
i5 Noc 4.4Ghz
i7 Noc 4.6Ghz


Jerm1027 said PCIe3.0 is just for braging rights. Is this true? Almost every review I have seen show that, even tho GFX cards do not use up all the bandwith of PCIe2.0. They still get better results when slotted into PCIe3.0 slots. Maybe because of efficiency or something?

4.4 - 4.5GHz tops. Again, it depends on ambient temps, in addition to other things.

I'd say link me to the review. But according to what I've read, there is no difference. Even with the 7970.
Quote:
Ultimately what is clear is that 8GB/sec of bandwidth, either in the form of PCIe 2 x16 or PCIe 3 x8, will be necessary to completely feed the 7970. 16GB/sec (PCIe 3 x16) appears to be overkill for a single card at this time, and 4GB/sec or 2GB/sec will bottleneck the 7970 depending on the game
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5458/the-radeon-hd-7970-r...

Quote:
GPU maker AMD wanted to be the first to be out there with a GPU that's compliant with this interface, and so one thing led to another, and VR-Zone got to set up a test-bed using Core i7 "Sandy Bridge-E", ASUS Rampage IV Extreme (which allows users to change PCI-Express standard mode in the BIOS setup program, by forcing Gen 2 or Gen 1 mode), and an HD 7970, to see if running the GPU on PCIe 2.0 and PCIe 3.0 modes made any worthwhile difference. The results are in: zero, nada, zilch, sunna (zero in my language).

Quote:
The performance figures between the two were agonizingly insignificant. 3DMark 11 and ComputeMark are tell-tale tests of whether the GPU (and with it, its system interface) is at least getting loaded enough. You would much rather spend the money you saved to upgrade your current, perfectly-functional LGA1155 motherboard to an "ooh-Gen3" one, on a memory upgrade, before DRAM prices rebound.

http://www.techpowerup.com/157253/PCI-Express-3.0-Has-Z...
August 29, 2012 1:33:45 AM

How can intels read speed be so much worse then what they advertise. It has to go up with a firmware update. That is unacceptable.

Any other good SSDs out there. Mushkin, OCZ, Kingston or Corsair?

Plus if I end up going i5 Sandy with the 212. How many Ghz am I looking at? Oh and can Sandy be used in the Z77 mobo?
August 29, 2012 1:38:07 AM

the read speeds are made up. they are usually the manufacturers best shot and then rounded up. samsung didnt do that. dont believe the advertised speeds when you go shopping for a SSD

i have a mushkin chronos deluxe 240gb and its considered better than the 520 given it uses toggle nand which is the best stuff.

you are looking at 4.5ghz

sandy works in z77 boards no problem
August 29, 2012 2:42:34 AM

irlwizard said:
How can intels read speed be so much worse then what they advertise. It has to go up with a firmware update. That is unacceptable.

Any other good SSDs out there. Mushkin, OCZ, Kingston or Corsair?

Plus if I end up going i5 Sandy with the 212. How many Ghz am I looking at? Oh and can Sandy be used in the Z77 mobo?

I've gotten a stable 4.6GHz with a so-so cooler. My system isn't even much of an OC machine either; MSI P67A-G45 and Dark Knight cooler in a Thermaltake V4 Black Edition case. I also kinda shot my OC potential by opting for 4x2GB of RAM instead of 2x4GB. I suspect between 4.6GHz and 4.8GHz. Sandy Bridge works fine with Z77.
August 29, 2012 3:29:03 AM

Think I will settle for these parts.

Expensive - http://pcpartpicker.com/p/fXm3
Cheap - http://pcpartpicker.com/p/fXf8

In the Cheap version I use a Hybrid SSD. Any work around, like a cheap 60GB SSD as a boot drive with synced cache on a regular barracuda 1TB. But still keeping it under $150-200 for both the SSD and HDD?

Thanks in advance to everyone. For some reason I can not select best answer. But I will +rep instead. Goodnight.
August 29, 2012 3:51:36 AM

irlwizard said:
Think I will settle for these parts.

Expensive - http://pcpartpicker.com/p/fXm3
Cheap - http://pcpartpicker.com/p/fXf8

In the Cheap version I use a Hybrid SSD. Any work around, like a cheap 60GB SSD as a boot drive with synced cache on a regular barracuda 1TB. But still keeping it under $150-200 for both the SSD and HDD?

Thanks in advance to everyone. For some reason I can not select best answer. But I will +rep instead. Goodnight.


I'd go for the 64GB OCz Vertex 4 + 1TB Barracuda ST1000M003

SSD: ~$65 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
HDD: ~$90 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
August 29, 2012 10:33:57 AM

irlwizard said:
Think I will settle for these parts.

Expensive - http://pcpartpicker.com/p/fXm3
Cheap - http://pcpartpicker.com/p/fXf8

In the Cheap version I use a Hybrid SSD. Any work around, like a cheap 60GB SSD as a boot drive with synced cache on a regular barracuda 1TB. But still keeping it under $150-200 for both the SSD and HDD?

Thanks in advance to everyone. For some reason I can not select best answer. But I will +rep instead. Goodnight.


as for your expensive build
1: no point of spending 70 dollars on redline ram (although great) when i can spend 41 dollars on a set of crucial ballistix sport that performs the same
2:if its work, get the i7, if its games, get the i5.
3:the samsung 830 performs better than the mx. deluxe mx is a downgraded version of the deluxe dx(or just plain deluxe)you have been fooled
4:for a hundred dollars more, the gigabyte 670 sells for 389.99. a better value. if the 670 is too much, id rather get a 7870 instead. its 239.99 and it performs just as well as the 660ti.
5:if you are to go SLI, get a xfx xxx 750w for 99.99. if you are to use a single card, get a xfx 550w. 500w is more than enough to power the system
6:D isc media will die off pretty soon. dont see the point of blu ray unless you watch and use a lot of them. get a plain dvd drive if you really need one. if you are still getting blu-ray, asus has a much cheaper one for 59.99
August 29, 2012 1:04:19 PM

@1 - HOW ON EARTH. Is the 9lat crucial going to perform as well as a 7-7-7 ram?
This is the mushkin I selected - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
I am guessing you selected this crucial - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

@3 - Not buying a samsung. Jerms suggestion will have to do.
@4 - Actually usually go for AMD but the Nvid drivers and tools are way superior this time around. The new Vsync and AA they made is amazing.
@5 - Thanks for tip, sucks that they are not fully modular.
@6 - My pioneer has never failed a burn.
August 29, 2012 3:04:32 PM

1: you are seriously confused. at tops, you see a ~1% increase in performance. do you think that is worth 30 dollars?
2:o k then. your loss (a large one as well)
3:nah. its not my money really
August 29, 2012 5:36:20 PM

irlwizard said:
@1 - HOW ON EARTH. Is the 9lat crucial going to perform as well as a 7-7-7 ram?
This is the mushkin I selected - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
I am guessing you selected this crucial - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

@3 - Not buying a samsung. Jerms suggestion will have to do.
@4 - Actually usually go for AMD but the Nvid drivers and tools are way superior this time around. The new Vsync and AA they made is amazing.
@5 - Thanks for tip, sucks that they are not fully modular.
@6 - My pioneer has never failed a burn.


1) You're right, the lower latency will definitely help in games, but it given the voltage, you don't want the Redline RAM. Voltage greater than 1.55-1.6 volts are dangerous for Intel CPU's and runs the risk of frying the controller. Go with the Crucial. Plus savings $30 is sweet.

4) Unless you are specifically planning to use the tools NVidia's technologies capitalizes on, the Radeon 7870 is much better, especially if the programs you use can utilize open standards (ie OpenCL vs CUDA). Between the superiority of GCN for compute/workstation workloads, lower price, and OC potential, the choice for me would be obvious. Also, in regards to Vsync; there is not a game pushing 1080p on a single monitor that will bring the 7870 (especially OC'd) down low enough to utilize dynamic v-sync and AA takes less of a performance hit this round thanks to the superior memory bandwidth.

TheBigTroll said:
1: you are seriously confused. at tops, you see a ~1% increase in performance. do you think that is worth 30 dollars?
2:o k then. your loss (a large one as well)
3:nah. its not my money really
.

1) probably closer to 3%-5%, but the real reason he doesn't want Redline, as I've stated, is voltage. It's too high for Intel chips and could fry the memory controller.
2) With the Firmware updates from OCz (I believe they had multiple updates which boasted performance increases since it's release), I'd argue that the Vertex 4 is the better option, especially in the desktop space. The random r/w is much better. However, if power consumption is a factor, such as in mobile computing, I'd also go for the Samsung 830. Much better performance per watt, and still one of the better performing SSD's on the market.
August 29, 2012 6:16:37 PM

My opinion is from a price to performance range you can't beat either the i5 2500k or i5 3570k. Even more so for gaming.
August 29, 2012 6:29:34 PM

spat55 said:
My opinion is from a price to performance range you can't beat either the i5 2500k or i5 3570k. Even more so for gaming.

Strictly price to performance, you can't beat the Celeron G520, especially in gaming. The i5 may be significantly faster, probably about 2.5 times faster if the application is threaded, but the G520 comes in a quarter of the i5's price at $50.
August 29, 2012 8:14:29 PM

TheBigTroll said:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/406?vs=288

the i5 is MUCH better in games. the celeron wont squat for anything other than emails, web browsing, and other basic stuff

I never said it wasn't. Like I said, up to 2.5 times faster. But considering the price, the Celeron offers better bang for the buck. For the i5 to offer the same price per performance, it would have to sell at ~$125.
August 29, 2012 8:22:44 PM

tech performance doesnt scale with price proportionality. so you are telling him to get a celeron when his chip probably performs better?
August 29, 2012 8:30:39 PM

jerm1027 said:
I never said it wasn't. Like I said, up to 2.5 times faster. But considering the price, the Celeron offers better bang for the buck. For the i5 to offer the same price per performance, it would have to sell at ~$125.


OP: Budget is $1000-1250

Jerm1027: I'd recommend to get a $55 processor.

No.....just....no.

I'd second the 2500k
August 29, 2012 10:23:32 PM

TheBigTroll said:
tech performance doesnt scale with price proportionality. so you are telling him to get a celeron when his chip probably performs better?


If it did, the Core i7's and GTX 690's would be a fraction of what they cost. I only said if tech was to scale, the Core i5 would have to be a lot cheaper.

rndmavis said:
OP: Budget is $1000-1250

Jerm1027: I'd recommend to get a $55 processor.

No.....just....no.

I'd second the 2500k


When did I recommend a celeron?

I just said it had a better price/performance ratio (<- also said strictly speaking, meaning not accounting for performance needed). If anything, I was recommending a 2500k, as Core i5's have a better value than i7 in gaming, and Sandy Bridge overclocks a lot better than Ivy Bridge. I was simply stating the 2500k isn't the best bang for the buck. Again, with the Celeron you get anywhere (depending on application) between 40-60% of the performance of the 2500k for 25% the cost. If you are going to tell me that 2500k has a better price/performance ratio, you need to go back to pre-algebra.
August 29, 2012 10:27:32 PM

jerm1027 said:
If it did, the Core i7's and GTX 690's would be a fraction of what they cost. I only said if tech was to scale, the Core i5 would have to be a lot cheaper.


so you were on a rant about irrelvant information. nice trolling there. never would of thought of that
August 29, 2012 10:53:04 PM

It does occur to me, amongst a discussion on aggressive overclocking, if OP's friend is INSISTING on i7, maybe that's because he wants to run something that NEEDS i7. If that is the case, stability and reliability is likely to be too important to be trying overclocks over 4.5. Modest overclocking, perhaps. At stock, or modest overclock, Ivybridge is surely better (end of story). Is that not the case?
August 30, 2012 12:01:44 AM

malbluff said:
It does occur to me, amongst a discussion on aggressive overclocking, if OP's friend is INSISTING on i7, maybe that's because he wants to run something that NEEDS i7. If that is the case, stability and reliability is likely to be too important to be trying overclocks over 4.5. Modest overclocking, perhaps. At stock, or modest overclock, Ivybridge is surely better (end of story). Is that not the case?

Considering that Ivy Bridge produces a lot more heat than Sandy Bridge when overclocked, and heat affects stability, an overclocked Sandy Bridge chip would be better. And even an aggressively overclocked chip can stay 100% stable if proper cooling is in place.
August 30, 2012 12:04:06 AM

TheBigTroll said:
so you were on a rant about irrelvant information. nice trolling there. never would of thought of that

Quote:
My opinion is from a price to performance range you can't beat either the i5 2500k or i5 3570k. Even more so for gaming.

My point was directed at him. Then you proceeded to shove strawmans and make points more or less irrelevant to this topic. BigTroll, surprisingly suitable name.
!