Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Your opinion please: i5 2500k build or i5 3570k for a bit more

Last response: in Systems
Share
September 23, 2012 5:00:37 AM

Hello all,

I would like some advice for myself, the cheap ass.

I am currently getting back into PC gaming after a really long time away. I built my current rig several years ago (I think mid to late 2008) using:

ECS GF8200a Black MB
AMD x2 7850 Black 2.8ghz @ 3.2
6gb of DDR2 800
EVGA GeForce 9800 GT OC edition.

Needless to say I cant run my current addiction (Guild Wars 2; I've been playing on my i5 laptop) at above 25ish fps @ 1680x1050 with all settings on Low.

I picked up an Sapphire 6870 on the cheap and it increased my FPS to an average of 30ish with peaks of the 50s and lows (in town or wvw) of the low 20s. And again this is with all settings on Low.

The real bottle neck is my CPU and ram. I thought I could just purchase a Phenom II x4 945 and give myself a boost, but I figured I would still have to have every thing on low just to get decent fps. So now I'm thinking of upgrading everything; however, I only want to spend around $350 to update my comp. So here is what I have put together:

Opt1:

i5 3570k $189.99
ASRock z77 Extreme 4 $84.99 (Combo price @ Micro Center w/ the 3750k)
8gb DDR3 1600 $38.00
Hyper 212+ CPU Cooler $25.99
Total with tax: $365.24

Opt2:

i5 2500k $159.99
MSI Z77A-G45 $129.99 (w/o $10 rebate)
8gb DDR3 1600 $0 (free with MB purchase at Newegg)
Hyper 212+ CPU Cooler $25.99
Total with tax: $340.45 (or $330.45 if rebate comes through; I have little faith in rebates).

So my question comes down to: is it worth the extra $25-35 to go with the 3570? I plan to do a mild OC to around 4.2. I have read that Ivy is a little different in OC style but easily capable of hitting 4.2.

My main concern is having PCIe 3.0 capability in the future. I can always upgrade my CPU later to support PCIe 3.0, but my thought is why not make it ready now so I can just upgrade my Graphics card in the future rather than having to upgrade both.

What are your opinions?

For additional reference I'm running Win7 Pro on a WD Black 250gb HD w/ WD Green 1TB as backup storage. I thought about an SSD as well, but that really only helps load times not performance and I'm not a hardcore gamer. I'm also on a 500 watt PSU.

Thanks.

Edit: Updated for MB links.
September 23, 2012 5:27:51 AM

for that small differencce i would go woth the 3570k
m
0
l
September 23, 2012 5:28:55 AM

Quote:
My main concern is having PCIe 3.0 capability in the future. I can always upgrade my CPU later to support PCIe 3.0, but my thought is why not make it ready now so I can just upgrade my Graphics card in the future rather than having to upgrade both.


That automatically rules out the 2500K - it won't be able to handle PCI 3.0.
m
0
l
Related resources
September 23, 2012 5:34:44 AM

Yea, that's what is making me lean toward the 3570. I've just been out of the comp game for so long I figured I would price together these two and see what people thought since the cost is so close.

I figured there might be some advocates for the 2500, or possibly a reason not to worry about PCIe 3.0 for now. Or even poor MB choices on my part, as I'm looking for a deal.
m
0
l
September 23, 2012 5:59:33 AM

btoast said:
Yea, that's what is making me lean toward the 3570. I've just been out of the comp game for so long I figured I would price together these two and see what people thought since the cost is so close.

I figured there might be some advocates for the 2500, or possibly a reason not to worry about PCIe 3.0 for now. Or even poor MB choices on my part, as I'm looking for a deal.


There's no reason to really purchase the 2500K, it's all but been replaced by the 3570K. The motherboard choice is decent, I'd go with this instead: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
m
0
l
September 23, 2012 5:59:38 AM

3570k over the 2500k. Bit faster, lower power draw, PCI-3, better integrated graphics(however still useless).

Only reason for a 2500k is its "superior" overclocking ability. Sandy doesn't get as hot as Ivy when applying extra voltage, so you can hit higher speeds before having to stop due to heat. I personally think this is void given that the 3570k performs better to begin with, it at 4.2Ghz is equal to a 2500K at 4.5Ghz.

Only reason for a 2500k IMO is if you want a pure clock speed number to show off, not the actual performance behind it.
m
0
l
September 23, 2012 8:59:51 AM

g-unit1111 said:
There's no reason to really purchase the 2500K, it's all but been replaced by the 3570K. The motherboard choice is decent, I'd go with this instead: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...


Thanks for the response. I figured the 2500k has been replaced, but since the price of the chip was still high and still very popular I figured there might be a reason behind it. That's the MB that Micro Center bundles with the 3570k. Seems like a decent board.

Thanks again for your input.
m
0
l
September 23, 2012 9:05:31 AM

manofchalk said:
3570k over the 2500k. Bit faster, lower power draw, PCI-3, better integrated graphics(however still useless).

Only reason for a 2500k is its "superior" overclocking ability. Sandy doesn't get as hot as Ivy when applying extra voltage, so you can hit higher speeds before having to stop due to heat. I personally think this is void given that the 3570k performs better to begin with, it at 4.2Ghz is equal to a 2500K at 4.5Ghz.

Only reason for a 2500k IMO is if you want a pure clock speed number to show off, not the actual performance behind it.


Thanks for the reply. I don't need any numbers to show off. Your sig seems to be the setup I posted in option 1. Same chip and board. I assume you like that configuration. How do you like the MB? How are the bios? I have yet to use a UEFI capable MB.

I'm pretty convinced on getting the 3570k setup.
m
0
l
September 26, 2012 8:43:51 AM

OK. I just wanted to say thanks again to you guys. I picked up:

i5 3570k
ASRock z77 Extreme4
Corsair 8gb 1600
Hyper 212+ cooler

I hooked everything up last night and it seems to be working great. Although, it runs a bit hot, but I think within normal temps for IB.

My ambient temp here in my home in the desert of California is around 27c (electric bills get insane if I run the ACs all the time so they are normally set to 79-82) and my comp idles around 32-36c with one core that seems to love the 38-41 range. An hour of P95 I hit 72c. I thought that might be too hot so I removed, cleaned, and reapplied a thinner layer of paste thinking I put too much (I wanted to make sure I got in the crevices of the heat pipes and aluminum block). But the temps came back the same.

I figure I'll run the comp for a few weeks and read up a bit more on IB temps before I attempt an OC. I would like to push it to at least 4, preferably 4.2. But as long as my temps are with in reason.
m
0
l
!