i5 2500k or i7 2600 (non K) - Debate! [resolved: the 2500k wins!]

[Mussels]

So as an interesting dilemma, i'm being given for free, an i5 2500k when i already own the 2600.
I've got two systems, so the 'loser' will end up in my secondary PC.


Which would you choose for your primary *gaming* PC, and why?

 

[Kanan]

i5 2500K, because most games don't like or don't use HTT and you can overclock the i5 2500K higher to have much more performance than a i7 without HTT being used. But in the end I would try both and decide upon the games I play. So it comes up to you.

 

[newtekie1]

That is a tough one. I'd say stick the 2500K in your main rig first and see what you can get it up to. If it can do 4.4GHz or better I say go with the i5.

 

[Kursah]

I agree if you want to OC, otherwise it might not matter. If you're gaming and doing a lot of stuff I'd stick with the 2600, but we're in the middle of an era that still benefits from fewer faster cores than more threads...so an OC'd 2500K might suit you best. I vote you just test them both in your primary machine and let us know what you decide on!

I'm sure your secondary PC can wait until you have.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

I don't overclock so naturally I'd say the 2600. If memory serves, 2600 has some features that the 2500K lacks like hardware virtualization.
http://ark.intel.com/compare/52213,52210

Intel® vPro™ Technology is a set of security and manageability capabilities built into the processor aimed at addressing four critical areas of IT security: 1) Threat management, including protection from rootkits, viruses, and malware 2) Identity and web site access point protection 3) Confidential personal and business data protection 4) Remote and local monitoring, remediation, and repair of PCs and workstations.

Intel® Virtualization Technology for Directed I/O (VT-d) continues from the existing support for IA-32 (VT-x) and Itanium® processor (VT-i) virtualization adding new support for I/O-device virtualization. Intel VT-d can help end users improve security and reliability of the systems and also improve performance of I/O devices in virtualized environments.

Intel® Trusted Execution Technology for safer computing is a versatile set of hardware extensions to Intel® processors and chipsets that enhance the digital office platform with security capabilities such as measured launch and protected execution. It enables an environment where applications can run within their own space, protected from all other software on the system.

 

[manofthem]

Which would you choose for your current gaming PC, and why?

Going by your system specs, your 2600 is @4ghz. Any 2500k will hit that and more so throw the 2500k in your main rig for some OC fun and good gaming; the 2600 will be great for a 2nd pc.

BTW congrats on the free cpu gift, that's a pretty epic "attaboy"

 

[Mussels]

Going by your system specs, your 2600 is @4ghz. Any 2500k will hit that and more so throw the 2500k in your main rig for some OC fun and good gaming; the 2600 will be great for a 2nd pc.

BTW congrats on the free cpu gift, that's a pretty epic "attaboy"

i also put the clock speeds in the survey question too
A friends work dumped a bunch of 'dead' office machines out, and had to be strippped. Being their last 1155 boards he salvaged the CPU's - he scored about 10 CPU's, mostly i5 2500's and i7 2600's with just the one random K chip he donated to me.


At this stage i'm leaning towards OCing the 2500K as high as i can, leaving the 2600 at 4GHz in the secondary PC. if i need virtualisation or anything, i can simply run it on there i guess.

 

[manofthem]

i also put the clock speeds in the survey question too
A friends work dumped a bunch of 'dead' office machines out, and had to be strippped. Being their last 1155 boards he salvaged the CPU's - he scored about 10 CPU's, mostly i5 2500's and i7 2600's with just the one random K chip he donated to me.


At this stage i'm leaning towards OCing the 2500K as high as i can, leaving the 2600 at 4GHz in the secondary PC. if i need virtualisation or anything, i can simply run it on there i guess.

Didn't even notice the poll... Been a loooong night But congrats at the awesome score!

 

[oinkypig]

HOW CLOSE CAN YOU GET TO 5 GHZ REALLY. holics

 

[Jetster]

I don't think it matters

 

[oinkypig]

i wouldnt waste one more second thinking how i cuda got so lucky...2500k hands down

 

[hat]

For strictly gaming, 2500k. I suppose any thread intensive tasks you could delegate to the 2600 system, but at higher clockspeeds the 2500k would probably beat it anyway.

 

[Ferrum Master]

OC the last crap of the i5 . Let him burn...

 

[FireFox]

Definitely i5.

 

[xfia]

I think i would have to go with the i7 here unless i really wanted to try for 5ghz and still the i5 may not be as useful.. at least to me.
I play modern games mostly that have no trouble using more threads but some I use to play the i5 with a overclock would be more useful.
Both are older and of the same gen but the i7 still shines pretty bright when put to the test with all 8 threads loaded down.

 

[st2000]

I'd say better go 2600 cause modern games dont got any boost from ocing cpu(most of them) if this cpu dont bottleneck gpu.
both cpus wont bottleneck your 290 even at stock, dont think you'll get significant boost from ocing in games.
thats why 2600

 

[jboydgolfer]

i get fairly decent jumps in performance from oc'ing my 2500k. gta5, bf3/bf4 , farcry games...and many others. i've had both, and the i5 all the way. why use pretend threads, when all you need is the real ones

but the extra threads would be nice when they are needed. if ever. id go for the chip You KNOW is better in your heart

 

[xfia]

http://www.cpu-world.com/Compare/491/Intel_Core_i5_i5-2500K_vs_Intel_Core_i7_i7-2600.html
Seems like overclocking the i5 to try match the ability of the i7 in threaded and memory intensive tasks is kind of a dead end since the i5 is just going to get a ass kicking especially with the i7 at 4ghz plus if we are talking more than one monitor any contest that might have been is non existent imo.

 

[AsRock]

.4Ghz aint going make much if any difference unless in benchmarks, so it depends on what you run on your main rig. Personally i would use the 2600k as at least one of my games use those threads.

 

[FreedomEclipse]

I had a 2500k@4.9ghz. HT or not at that speed it totally smokes the 2600

 

[vega22]

until we know the unknown any debate is moot.

what clocks the 25 will do on the same volts as the 26@4ghz is what counts

 

[Mussels]

http://www.cpu-
world.com/Compare/491/Intel_Core_i5_i5-2500K_vs_Intel_Core_i7_i7-2600.html
Seems like overclocking the i5 to try match the ability of the i7 in threaded and memory intensive tasks is kind of a dead end since the i5 is just going to get a ass kicking especially with the i7 at 4ghz plus if we are talking more than one monitor any contest that might have been is non existent imo.

that article itself contradicts what you're saying. at stock, the i7 is only 20% faster in multi threaded - despite a 50% thread advantage.

So if i got a 20% overclock on the i5 than the i7, would i not have equal 4+ multi threading performance AND faster <4 thread performance?

I guess i'll update the thread once its in and see how high i can OC it.

 

[hat]

Well, you'd have to reach 4.8GHz to make that happen... not sure how sustainable that's gonna be.

 

[xfia]

that article itself contradicts what you're saying. at stock, the i7 is only 20% faster in multi threaded - despite a 50% thread advantage.

So if i got a 20% overclock on the i5 than the i7, would i not have equal 4+ multi threading performance AND faster <4 thread performance?

I guess i'll update the thread once its in and see how high i can OC it.

I was just doing the math on that after reading a few of the most recent posts and the overclock of the i5 would be like your saying. It could be a close race and even down to voltage like @vega22 mentioned.
It would be nice to see some before and after benchmarks on your overclocks especially since the cpu world ones are looking a bit outdated.
The i7 does show higher than 23% performance advantage in some cases per cpu world.

 

[Mussels]

Well, you'd have to reach 4.8GHz to make that happen... not sure how sustainable that's gonna be.

lets say 4.6Ghz which is definitely possible - i'd get 15% faster performance for anything using four threads of less, and a 5% loss for anything using all 8 threads*.




*Going by the linked benchmark above, HT performance really can vary between programs.