This is my dilemma.

I currently have a Core 2 Quad Q9550S on an X48 platform.
I recently received a very nice P67 motherboard (article up soon) and I'll now need to buy a Sandy Bridge CPU to complete my platform upgrade.

I have completely skipped the 1st generation Core-i5 and -i7 and now I need to decide which CPU to purchase (as soon as they are available on Newegg!).

So let's discuss the merits of Core i5-2500K vs. i7-2600K vs. the $100 difference.

Isn't the only REAL difference hyperthreading? You are going to be overclocking, right? So the very minor speed difference in mhz between the two will be even less noticeable when overclocking.

Ya. Overclocking is a must in my book. I do see where Hyper-Threading would help me in some of my day to day tasks.

However, I also have the readers of ABT in mind. What would you guys want to see represented in my test bench from now on? I need to know that if I'm going to be spending this money, what would be a better investment and is the extra $100 worth it.

I am currently leaning 90% towards getting the i7-2600K.

Forgive my bluntness, but what the hell are you running day-to-day that will see a benefit from hyperthreading on a quad-core processor?

Also, I seem to remember a few reviews where they turned off hyperthreading on i7 systems and noticed a benefit in gaming. Not that I recommend reading anything at Tom's, but this was the quickest thing I could find:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/Int ... 57-12.html

Don't worry about being blunt. i have been saying the same thing. Q9550S at 3.8 GHz is not inferior to i7-930 at 3.8 GHz or even SB I7-2600k at 3.8 GHz in GAMING.

You get these silly benches - even from Anandtech - with midrange graphics cards and 1680x1050 with no AA and medium details necessary to show the "superiority" of the latest 'tic' or 'tock' from Intel .. who for the life of them cannot even deliver playable modern graphics on IG.

So they keep coming out with more smoke and mirrors for the tech sites to try and exite their readers into buying. UNLESS you have *need* for a processor that excels where SB does, it is not an upgrade at all.

It is a $300 waste of your money, Leon. Especially since you are only running GTX 480.

But as i said when i upgraded to i7-920, "i upgraded so our readers don't have to"

Yeah, it's pretty laughable when you see there's barely any difference when actual details are turned up in games. A Core i7-920 is still a relatively high-upgrade for the average user; particularly for one who justice browses the internet and slays zombies.

Bluntness? Ha! Its okay, we're family.



Well for the longest while, I've wanted to be able to run SLI and CrossFire on the same platform. I got a P67 board so now is my chance.
And it wouldn't be a $300 waste, if anything it would be $100 since the very least I'd buy is the i5-2500K.

I'm getting a bit more into working with videos. I'm encoding a whole lot more these days and having 8 threads would help speed that up. Not to mention ABT's DC like Folding@Home and such. Next is the fact that just like you said, I'd be upgrading so the readers don't have to.

Really wanted to discuss the potential advantages versus the disadvantages of either choice.

ideally you should get them both

If not, get the best one that you can afford .. that is general advice unless one turns out to be "special"

It really comes down to whether you need HT or not. If you need it then get the 2600K; otherwise get the 2500K.

If I were buying a brand new processer today I’d get the 2500K.

I have HT turned off on my i7 870. It raises the TDP of the processor and also causes flakiness in some games.