Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

Is the Core i7 2600K really worth the extra cost over Core i5 2500K?

(1/6) > >>

Deozaan:
I've been building a NewEgg wishlist for a new computer I'm saving up for, and I've been drooling over the new Core i7 2600K ever since I heard about it a few months ago. But dang! It's nearly 1/3 of the entire build cost just for the CPU!

So today I decided to look at the Core i5 2500K and compare the two. According to NewEgg's Details pages on the two CPUs, there are only three differences between the two:

The Core i7 has

* Hyperthreading support
* 2MB more (8MB total) for the L3 cache
* 0.1 Ghz faster clock speed
Is it really worth almost $100 more just for that? Is there more to it that I'm not seeing or thinking about? E.g. does the i7 overclock a lot higher or with more stability than the i5?

I went to Tom's Hardware to compare the two and of course in most cases the i7 performs better, but is it really going to be that big of a boost to justify the extra cost?

My uses for the PC would be as a gaming machine, as well as a media server (probably just music but possibly video), as well as some (relatively) lowpoly 3D modeling, and of course having a zillion tabs open in my browser. Possibly all at the same time.

40hz:
IMO, if you're doing professional video editing, CGI/animation, or serious 3D modeling, the i7 may be worth the extra money. For everything else most mortals will be doing, the i5 2500 should do just fine. And then some. It should be overkill for what you're using it for. If I had an extra $100 burning a hole in my pocket, I'd opt for a more powerful video card rather than spend it on a hotter CPU. But that's me. I'm usually out for more 'bang for the buck' than I am for absolute specs. So I always look for that sweet spot. Which is usually two or three down from the flagship when it comes to Intel's CPUs.

Not having deep pockets does that to you.  ;D

Deozaan:
If I had an extra $100 burning a hole in my pocket, I'd opt for a more powerful video card rather than spend it on a hotter CPU. But that's me. I'm usually out for more 'bang for the buck' than I am for absolute specs. So I always look for that sweet spot.-40hz (May 31, 2011, 07:59 PM)
--- End quote ---

Yeah, that's the situation I'm in as well. I don't have extra money for the luxury of a new PC, so I doubt I'll be buying this "Wish List PC" for several months. But shaving about $100 off the cost would allow me to spend it elsewhere or not have to save up for so long before having the money to buy it.

I'm just so sick of my doggone slow AMD 64 3500 that I keep thinking I'm going to spend a lot of money on a really nice CPU so I won't have to worry about upgrading it for a good long time. But now that I've looked into the differences between the i5 2500K and the i7 2600K I think it's probably not really worth the extra cost.

Then again, maybe by the time I've saved up the money to buy the machine the difference in cost between the two CPUs will be more proportional to the difference in performance. . . :-\

Ath:
so I doubt I'll be buying this "Wish List PC" for several months.
-Deozaan (May 31, 2011, 08:50 PM)
--- End quote ---
If you wait a few more months the difference will have eroded off, because by then even faster/better CPU's in the i7 line are probably released, and the net effect of that is the current generation goes down in price :Thmbsup:

phitsc:
What budget are you targeting for, if you don't mind me ask?

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page