i5-10500 or i510600k

[hoover9]

Hello good people.
building a system for general use, some light photoshopping and occasional video encoding. i am not replacing the system too often, so this system should hold for about 5+ years.

Am going with a b560 board, Gskill Ripjaws V 3200MHz and the built in IGPU.

I wont be doing any gaming or overclocking beyond what the board itself does in turbo and so on mode. the question is what would be the better long term investment, the 10500 which i believe is fine for my needs, or the 10600k which gives you more power for the future with its higher clock speeds. the deference in price is beyond that of the CPU, since it calls for better cooling, better case to accommodate the cooler at roughly 120$.

Thanks all.

 

[Deleted member 202104]

For your needs, the 10500 is fine - especially since you have no interest in overclocking.

If it were me, I'd choose the 11400 over either of the two you have mentioned. It's faster than either in Photoshop, Premiere, and Office.

 

[phanbuey]

+1 for 11400

 

[ThrashZone]

Hi,
No way wait for the 12600k

 

[Selaya]

I would go for the 11500 min since the OP's planning on using the IGP.
Otherwise, 10500 or 10600K are both fine.

EDIT: Actually, the 11500 and above have a better IGP, in that case going for that would probably be smarter.
Just keep in mind that they'll consume quite a bit more power than a 6-core Skylake would so you should be mindful of your cooler (doesn't have to be a 360 CLC, but the stock cooler or something like that won't do, unlike a 10500).

 

[Why_Me]

For your needs, the 10500 is fine - especially since you have no interest in overclocking.

If it were me, I'd choose the 11400 over either of the two you have mentioned. It's faster than either in Photoshop, Premiere, and Office.

+1 for 11400

The 11500 has better graphics than the 11400 ... more EU's.

 

[Deleted member 202104]

The 11500 has better graphics than the 11400 ... more EU's.

And for the intended uses provided by the OP it means exactly jack shit. Even if it was for gaming, the comparison is like a steaming pile to a flaming pile.

 

[Why_Me]

And for the intended uses provided by the OP it means exactly jack shit. Even if it was for gaming, the comparison is like a steaming pile to a flaming pile.

I'd opt for the better onboard graphics seeing how it's just a few dollars more.

 

[Deleted member 202104]

I'd opt for the better onboard graphics seeing how it's just a few dollars more.

I'd put the extra aside for a dGPU if I ever needed anything faster for compute. Building a PC you can just 'a few dollars more' yourself quickly to a $5k box. Pretty soon you're an idiot like me with a 5950x for gaming.

 

[phanbuey]

I'd put the extra aside for a dGPU if I ever needed anything faster for compute. Building a PC you can just 'a few dollars more' yourself quickly to a $5k box. Pretty soon you're an idiot like me with a 5950x for gaming.

but you also have a 10850K which is pretty cost efficient

 

[hoover9]

Thank yolu all for your good opinions, two follow up questions:
Considering my essentially low waight needs, is there a point in a discreet graphics?
second for the case of 11400 , would a Arctic Freezer 34 CO suffice, or should i go for the doubled price Noctua NH-U14S?
For the 10500 is Arctic Freezer i13 X / 7X good enough?

 

[R0H1T]

so this system should hold for about 5+ years.

Well you also mentioned this, I'd personally wait for 12600k in that case albeit it'll come with a major premium & of course DDR5. That or if you're interested maybe a Ryzen 5700g?

AMD Ryzen 7 5700G Review: Fastest Integrated Graphics Ever

Your best choice, if you don't use discrete graphics

www.tomshardware.com

 

[Solid State Soul ( SSS )]

i5 10500 is a better value

 

[P4-630]

10600K has a higher clock speed.
Or if you can wait a bit @ThrashZone mentioned a new gen 12600K or a 12400.

 

[hoover9]

Id really prefer not to go all premium on this system, this is why i keep for mostly entry level parts, today hardware is really powerful to begin with.
My options for now are 10500 - 11400, they fit my budget and leave enough for the EVO plus 970 SSD and so on.

Thank yolu all for your good opinions, two follow up questions:
Considering my essentially low waight needs, is there a point in a discreet graphics?
second for the case of 11400 , would a Arctic Freezer 34 CO suffice, or should i go for the doubled price Noctua NH-U14S?
For the 10500 is Arctic Freezer i13 X / 7X good enough?

Could you please comment on this?

 

[docnorth]

I think 10500 is the best Intel CPU you can really use with the stock cooler, you can also find a very good review here on TPU. A Alder Lake i5 would be more future-proof, but probably at a higher cost.

 

[Deleted member 202104]

Thank yolu all for your good opinions, two follow up questions:
Considering my essentially low waight needs, is there a point in a discreet graphics?
second for the case of 11400 , would a Arctic Freezer 34 CO suffice, or should i go for the doubled price Noctua NH-U14S?
For the 10500 is Arctic Freezer i13 X / 7X good enough?

Since you mentioned you aren't gaming at all I wouldn't see a reason for discreet graphics. If you find yourself using Photoshop more and need some additional 'oomph' a lower end nvidia card with cuda support could speed things up a bit. Unless you need one right now, even the bottom end cards are pretty overpriced.

As far as cooling goes, if you run the 11400 at the Intel power limits, a cooler like the AF 34 CO is good enough. If you want to extract the most performance out the CPU, removing the power limits would require a better cooler.

If you choose the 10500, I ran one a 10400 with the CM Hyper 212 Black full out (100% CPU load 24/7) for World Community Grid and it never went above 65c

 

[hoover9]

Thank you for your reply, i am thinking about removing the power limit, so i guess I'll be going for the U14S for the 11400, thank you again.

 

[Why_Me]

Thank you for your reply, i am thinking about removing the power limit, so i guess I'll be going for the U14S for the 11400, thank you again.

If you run that cpu with the power limits turned off then make sure you get a board with decent VRM's. Here's two B560 boards that will allow you to run that cpu balls to the wall.

https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16813144396
MSI MAG B560M BAZOOKA $139.99

https://www.newegg.com/gigabyte-b560m-aorus-pro/p/N82E16813145332
GIGABYTE AORUS B560M AORUS PRO $139.99


https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/MAG-B560M-BAZOOKA

B560M AORUS PRO (rev. 1.x) Key Features | Motherboard - GIGABYTE Global

Lasting Quality from GIGABYTE.GIGABYTE Ultra Durable™ motherboards bring together a unique blend of features and technologies that offer users the absolute ...

www.gigabyte.com

 

[Nike_486DX]

I would personally just grab the 10500, keep in mind that the K letter means nothing nowadays. Because well, u can squeeze like 200-300 extra mhz above the boost frequency, but that would make no sense at all. Not even +20% performance. Back in the day (2600K) u could squeeze like 1000mhz no problem, without even touching the voltage. Just get the 10500, and invest the extra into mobo and GPU.

 

[hoover9]

I have been doing lots of reading and the Rocket Lake CPU really makes me iffy, yes it is powerful , but also extremely power hungry, maybe it would be wiser for a more cool, and longer lasting system to go with the 10500 rather then 10400, not to mention simpler by cooling means.