Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
6850. As for the performance, depends on the resolution you use. Up to 1680x1050 the 6850 does fairly well.
I would also go 6850 for the $150 range. The Gigabyte 6850 is pretty sweet. I have heard that the NON-OC is the way to go. It has normal volt regs so you can use afterburner etc. to bump volts vs the OC version that uses nonstandard regs. It's usually $10 cheaper also. I can't figure out why Giga did that with the 6850s, it makes little sense.
OP please list ALL your specs and resolution when asking for video card advice. a 6850 might not even be appropriate for you.
I would personally get the i5 2500k, and put that extra money towards a better video card. Unless you need the hyper-threading capabilities of the i7.
the 2500k and 2600k usually oc just the same.Why get the i5? The only thing I really want to get top of the line is the processsor. The video card doesn't matter as much to me. Plus I plan to overclock the processor, and I heard the i7 2600k is the best overclocker.
Why get the i5? The only thing I really want to get top of the line is the processsor. The video card doesn't matter as much to me. Plus I plan to overclock the processor, and I heard the i7 2600k is the best overclocker.
I'd get the Gigabyte Windforce 6850.
What are you doing that requires the absolute best processor? The i7 is basically the i5, except it has hyperthreading.
Its not that I necessarily need the absolute best processor, but I plan to use this computer for a long time, and the i7 2600k is only $279. Its not like I'm spending $1000 on a 990x. I would rather have a high end processor than video card.
If you have your mind set on the 2600k, by all means get it and don't let guys talk you down. There are threads on here with people that have both showing and explaining just how and why a 2600k is better in everywhere even for those that are just gaming.
For all around summed up performance a 2500k provides performance similar to a Nehalem i7. The 2600k on the other hand walks away from it. Hyperthreading makes a big difference, it's not something to be knocked. Especially coming from guys that go out of their way to overclock their CPU's and video cards to get an extra 20-50% performance, why knock hyperthreading when having it is yet an additional 20%+ performance boost. Makes no sense, it's just guys ranting on stuff with no logical reason other than the sake of wanting something to rant on.
Is a 20% increase in performance for a few programs worth a 50% increase in cost? For some people, it might be, especially those who do video editing and the like. For most gamers, they would see more of a benefit in getting a better graphics card. It's not really about performance, but performance for the dollar with what you plan to be doing with the computer. In OP's case, if he uses his computer mostly for gaming with rare to no video editing and the like, his money would be better spent on the graphics card, not the CPU.
We aren't talking about cost/performance ratios. The OP stated he was already planning on buying the 2600k.
And as I've already stated, even if you are just gaming, the improvements having the hyperthreads are already stated in this forum, go find them. I'm not arguing a lost cause.
Bottom line, whatever it is that is being done on the computer, having the hyperthreads will keep everything running smooth as silk while the 4 main cores are being taxed by limited programs.