2500K or 3570K for overclocking?

Zarathustra[H]

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
38,828
Hi all,

I'm planning an upgrade of one of my stepsons computers for the holidays.

I've read all about the TIM issue in Ivy Bridge and it has me a little bit concerned.

I know that IB has a small IPC increase over SB, but doesn't overclock as well due to the TIM issue.

So whats the best choice? A less overclockable 3570k with higher IPC or a more overclockable 2500k with lower IPC?

I have no desire to pry off the heat spreader.

Integrated graphics will not be used in this build.

I will be using a Corsair H80 for cooling.

Which would you pick and why?

Thanks,
Matt
 
I would go for what's the most cost effective for you, tbh. The overclock you achieve with either chip is going to be sufficient, unless you're running quad-fire/SLI.
 
For maximum overclocking, then the 2500k is your best bet as it is a very mature process at this point. For overall performance clock for clock, the 3570k has a slight edge.

I just picked up the 3570k for my new build since I needed a MB as well. If you already have a Z68 board, then I would go with the 2500k.

Good luck!
 
If you are looking to get the highest possible speed then go with the Intel® Core™ i5-2500K. However with the Intel Core i5-3570K you are going to be able to overclock it up to around 4.2GHz or 4.3GHz much effort and when matched with that 6% boost from the IPC you are looking at performance equal to the Intel Core i5-2500K at 4.6Ghz. So as I have heard in the past it is a wash as to which one is better.
 
IntelEnthusiast said:
If you are looking to get the highest possible speed then go with the Intel® Core™ i5-2500K. However with the Intel Core i5-3570K you are going to be able to overclock it up to around 4.2GHz or 4.3GHz much effort and when matched with that 6% boost from the IPC you are looking at performance equal to the Intel Core i5-2500K at 4.6Ghz. So as I have heard in the past it is a wash as to which one is better.
Click to expand...

That's pretty much what I had heard as well, but I figured I'd ask around to see what others experiences were.

There's also no PCIe 3 with 2500k, right, even on more recent PCIe 3 compatible motherboards?
 
IntelEnthusiast said:
If you are looking to get the highest possible speed then go with the Intel® Core™ i5-2500K. However with the Intel Core i5-3570K you are going to be able to overclock it up to around 4.2GHz or 4.3GHz much effort and when matched with that 6% boost from the IPC you are looking at performance equal to the Intel Core i5-2500K at 4.6Ghz. So as I have heard in the past it is a wash as to which one is better.
Click to expand...


This is pretty much it, I never had luck with any of the 2500k processors that I had, the highest clocking ove could only make it to 4.6ghz with less than 1.4v, however both of the 3570k's that I have owned both ran at 4.6ghz as well with less voltage, so they are clearly faster after figuring in the IPC boost.

It depends if you win the silicon lottery honestly, you may get a 2500k that will do 5.0ghz but probably not on an H80 anyways. I would get the 3570k and take advantage of the newer chips features.
 
Over 4.5ghz is going to just kick booty on either chip, but if the 3570K is near the price of the 2500K, I would get the 3570K.
The 2500K is about 200-300mhz slower then the 3570K after you factor in the newness(clock for clock), which isnt much of a difference. It comes down to price/performance.
 
It is all lottery. My 3570k does 4.8GHz happily and benches a little better than a 2500k at 5.0GHz. I think 2 GPU generations down the road you will find that PCIE 2.0 is not enough anymore. That could be as early as spring 2014 with an 800 series nvidia GPU if you look at the monster the 700 series GK110 is gonna be.
 
I'd say just get the 3570K. It might not clock as high as the 2500K (but then again it might), but you get lower power draw (if that matters to you), PCIe 3.0, improved IPC, improved memory controller, and improved iGPU (for what it's worth). Against the possibility of getting a higher number overclock (which probably washes out anyway since the IPC is lower), and lower temps with the 2500K.
 
Forceman said:
I'd say just get the 3570K. It might not clock as high as the 2500K (but then again it might), but you get lower power draw (if that matters to you), PCIe 3.0, improved IPC, improved memory controller, and improved iGPU (for what it's worth). Against the possibility of getting a higher number overclock (which probably washes out anyway since the IPC is lower), and lower temps with the 2500K.
Click to expand...


Ditto.
 
Forceman said:
I'd say just get the 3570K. It might not clock as high as the 2500K (but then again it might), but you get lower power draw (if that matters to you), PCIe 3.0, improved IPC, improved memory controller, and improved iGPU (for what it's worth). Against the possibility of getting a higher number overclock (which probably washes out anyway since the IPC is lower), and lower temps with the 2500K.
Click to expand...

This, agreed except the part about the 2500K having lower temps.

The 3570K will typically run cooler than a 2500K until that damned IB overclocking "heat wall" is surpassed...thanks Intel for cheaping out on your K-series enthusiast line and using TIM paste under the IHS. Unless this is what you meant.
 
If you can get a 2500K at a steal price go for that, if not, might as well get the 3570k.

Overclocking considered, they are pretty close in performance, so I'd look at price as the deciding factor.
 
Kind of in a similar situation myself.Contemplating upgrading the MB in my sig to a Maximus Extreme V.With the GTX690,I was thinking PCI 3.0 but my 2500k runs happily @ 5.ghz.Even if I got lucky with a 3570k @ ~ 4.6ghz,it seems to be a wash and maybe not worth the $$ outlay from what Ive been reading here.My 2500k idles @ 32c and rarely hit 60c in intense gaming @ 1.4v.Not sure if IB could match that.
 
g1xx3r said:
Kind of in a similar situation myself.Contemplating upgrading the MB in my sig to a Maximus Extreme V.With the GTX690,I was thinking PCI 3.0 but my 2500k runs happily @ 5.ghz.Even if I got lucky with a 3570k @ ~ 4.6ghz,it seems to be a wash and maybe not worth the $$ outlay from what Ive been reading here.My 2500k idles @ 32c and rarely hit 60c in intense gaming @ 1.4v.Not sure if IB could match that.
Click to expand...

its not worth it man... im sitting at 4.7 ghz right now with mine and its fast enough for any task i throw at it
 
dinlee23 said:
its not worth it man... im sitting at 4.7 ghz right now with mine and its fast enough for any task i throw at it
Click to expand...

Yeah,I'm not exactly hurting for frames per second.I game 1920x1080,have no desire for multi display and I can max any game @ 60fps rock solid..I overlooked the fact that PCI 3.0 requires an IB CPU and was gonna keep the 2500k @ 5ghz.Having to enter the OC lottery again..dunno,I just get the itch sometimes but a 5ghz 2500k is nothing to sneeze at..:p
 
SonDa5 said:
Ditto.
Click to expand...

Ditto's Ditto;)..For every 20 people here that claim to have a 2500K/2600K "fully uber stable @ 5+Ghz", there is probably 2-5 that have actually fully stress tested the system with multiple programs (IBT, Prime95 etc) for at least 12-24 hrs..When I see these guys that claim a "stable" 5Ghz o/c using a tiny 120mm AIO WC like an H50/60, well that number drops even more:rolleyes:..

You should have no problem reaching 4.3-4.5 with very low voltage and approaching Ivy's thermal wall..
 
I wouldn't buy Ivy Bridge and support Intels decision to put TIM under the IHS.
If you don't want that Intels future CPUs also have TIM under the IHS then don't buy Ivy Bridge.
 
ccityinstaller said:
Ditto's Ditto;)..For every 20 people here that claim to have a 2500K/2600K "fully uber stable @ 5+Ghz", there is probably 2-5 that have actually fully stress tested the system with multiple programs (IBT, Prime95 etc) for at least 12-24 hrs..When I see these guys that claim a "stable" 5Ghz o/c using a tiny 120mm AIO WC like an H50/60, well that number drops even more:rolleyes:..

You should have no problem reaching 4.3-4.5 with very low voltage and approaching Ivy's thermal wall..
Click to expand...

Actually my little 620 does pretty good keeping my 2500K cool @ 4.8, with temps around 72 at the highest running prime. It all depends on the chip, mine is a decent one maybe?
I havnt tried for 5 because it wont make much difference, also I want a better cooler anyways, and move the 620 to a different machine.
120mm is ok, but dual 120mm in push pull works great. ;)
 
Blackbird said:
I wouldn't buy Ivy Bridge and support Intels decision to put TIM under the IHS.
If you don't want that Intels future CPUs also have TIM under the IHS then don't buy Ivy Bridge.
Click to expand...

Good luck with that plan when you are still rocking a SB chip 10 years from now. The soldering ship has sailed - time to get over it.
 
Blackbird said:
Well in that case i would buy AMD.
If i would buy a CPU with TIM under the IHS i would sooner or later try to de-lid it, risking killing the CPU.

wabbitseason took the words out of my mouth.
http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1039198439&postcount=20
Click to expand...



AMD is making some nice CPUs lately at affordable prices but I don't think they use Fluxless Solder on the newer cpu's IHS. You can delid AMD or Intel IB for improved performance and fun.
 
I would recommed the Ivy...because in the real world you won't see the peformance difference between 4.2ghz and 4.5ghz...and especially if you are buying for someone else(or not your personal computer)...I would go with newer technology...futureproof a bit...maybe not by much but by enough
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top