• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

2500k upgrade

B

B!nd.

Gawd
Joined
Mar 14, 2012
Messages
757
I've been thinking about upgrading my 2500k to possiby a 4770k. It runs at 4.5 24/7 like a charm but I feel like I'm not getting full utilization from my GPUs. With the upcoming next gen games I fear they will be very CPU intensive and put my cards to shame. Some of the newer games like Crysis3 and Metro 2033/LL get dropped into the 30's at times. Playing at 1080p maxed out. Usually FXAA or the AA that runs best depending on the game.

Options -
1. I definitely have a bit of headroom for my 2500k; up the OC to I'm thinking 4.7? Will it even make a difference?

2. Upgrade my mobo and CPU for 4770k

3. Sell my 680's and buy a better single solution card, I guess a Titan.
 
I would get some firm fps numbers and then up your OC and check again. If you don't see a decent fps jump then you know for sure a cpu upgrade wont help.

Personally I don't think its worth a cpu upgrade right now.
 
It won't hurt but it's certainly not going to help. Waste of $50 that could be put towards the actual problem IMHO.
 
Yeah, feeling something is the start of the process, now you need to confirm it.
Check GPU use with MSI Afterburner and CPU use with Task Manager.
 
Seriously? What a minor upgrade. Turn down your settings a little on Crysis and wait for next-gen. Haswell is a very minor improvement over Sandy, and you still have current-architecture video cards. At least wait for Maxwell. Buying a Titan at this point is really dumb.

For now, fix your expectations. When the hardware is ready, THEN you can fix your PC.

Besides, there are plenty of games much better than Crysis that don't need as fast a PC. It's ridiculous that it got popular mainly because they seem to have no idea how to optimize anything.
 
Last edited:
No "upgrade" from your current system is going to make a significant improvement. 2500k and dual 680s is pretty high end already.
 
Nenu said:
Yeah, feeling something is the start of the process, now you need to confirm it.
Check GPU use with MSI Afterburner and CPU use with Task Manager.
Click to expand...

OK I have some Cry 3 numbers for ya.

First, I'm playing with Vsync on. I think it's a better way to really monitor how taxing the game is. I played around with no AA, FXAA, SMAA x 2, MSAA x2 and x8, and TXAA just to see.

Almost no difference in no AA vs FXAA which was expected. Minimum FPS was at 42. Stayed at 60 for a nice amount of the time. GPU usage was from 70-85%. CPU usage was 87-97%

MSAA x 2 is what you're probably expecting. GPU usage was 80-92%. CPU was 92-98%

MSAA x 8 GPU was always above 90 and CPU was pretty consitantly at 98%.

The times that I would maintain 60 FPS my CPU was still rocking at 85+

My analysis from this data is that since the GPU doesn't max out (with AA off) when my frames drop, the almost maxed CPU is to blame.

dandragonrage said:
Seriously? What a minor upgrade. Turn down your settings a little on Crysis and wait for next-gen. Haswell is a very minor improvement over Sandy, and you still have current-architecture video cards. At least wait for Maxwell. Buying a Titan at this point is really dumb.

For now, fix your expectations. When the hardware is ready, THEN you can fix your PC.

Besides, there are plenty of games much better than Crysis that don't need as fast a PC. It's ridiculous that it got popular mainly because they seem to have no idea how to optimize anything.
Click to expand...

You are right. I am just unsure if the 2500k is unable of handling the 680s efficiently compared to a single card. Correct me if I am wrong, and I am not entirely familiar with the relationship here, but I remember hearing that the newer gen Intel CPUs have or open up more PCIe lanes to handle more data coming from two cards.

Other than AA no settings seem to make a difference visually or physically, so I kept them on max.

Also, my cards are running different firmware versions. Their clocks are as close as I could get them to being equal. I'm pretty sure inequivalent clocks only result in some micro stuttering though and not actual performance loss. I could be wrong. If you guys recommend flashing my cards I would definitely look into it.
 
B!nd. said:
OK I have some Cry 3 numbers for ya.

First, I'm playing with Vsync on. I think it's a better way to really monitor how taxing the game is. I played around with no AA, FXAA, SMAA x 2, MSAA x2 and x8, and TXAA just to see.

Almost no difference in no AA vs FXAA which was expected. Minimum FPS was at 42. Stayed at 60 for a nice amount of the time. GPU usage was from 70-85%. CPU usage was 87-97%

MSAA x 2 is what you're probably expecting. GPU usage was 80-92%. CPU was 92-98%

MSAA x 8 GPU was always above 90 and CPU was pretty consitantly at 98%.

The times that I would maintain 60 FPS my CPU was still rocking at 85+

My analysis from this data is that since the GPU doesn't max out (with AA off) when my frames drop, the almost maxed CPU is to blame.



You are right. I am just unsure if the 2500k is unable of handling the 680s efficiently compared to a single card. Correct me if I am wrong, and I am not entirely familiar with the relationship here, but I remember hearing that the newer gen Intel CPUs have or open up more PCIe lanes to handle more data coming from two cards.

Other than AA no settings seem to make a difference visually or physically, so I kept them on max.

Also, my cards are running different firmware versions. Their clocks are as close as I could get them to being equal. I'm pretty sure inequivalent clocks only result in some micro stuttering though and not actual performance loss. I could be wrong. If you guys recommend flashing my cards I would definitely look into it.
Click to expand...

I would either crank that 2550K to 4.8-5Ghz, whatever you can reach with a Vcore of 1.5V..I would invest in a decent AIO WC option, like one of the super thick 120mm models, or a 240mm model if you case can support it..This will keep your temperatures in check and you can always reuse it in future builds..

If you don't as much improvement as you would like at that point, then sell the 2500K off and pick up a 3770K used for a good deal..You will get some IPC improvements, and they tend to O/C higher with much less effort then a 4770K, along with PCI-E 3.0 support..Plus you will not need a new MB since you have the Gen 3 of your MB...

The other option is if you 680s are great overclockers is to invest in a full WC loop, since you can push them much higher then using air cooling...Either way you are faster then a TITAN in any game with decent scaling, so I can't see selling off your cards for ~$450-500 and then forking out the difference for a TITAN..
 
If you feel that you GPUs are being underutilized, I would start with uninstalling/reinstalling you graphics drivers, testing several games to see if the bottleneck is specific to one, and report back to us with your findings. Another thing to check is to make sure that your chipset drivers are properly installed. As far as upgrading your hardware goes, don't bother. You will not see a difference in performance between a highly-overclocked 2500k, and any other currently-available CPU in gaming. There are bound to be small differences in benchmarks between a max-overclocked 2500k and a similarly-clocked 4770k, but I don't think you'd ever notice them in real world scenarios.
 
Joseph F said:
If you feel that you GPUs are being underutilized, I would start with uninstalling/reinstalling you graphics drivers, testing several games to see if the bottleneck is specific to one, and report back to us with your findings. Another thing to check is to make sure that your chipset drivers are properly installed. As far as upgrading your hardware goes, don't bother. You will not see a difference in performance between a highly-overclocked 2500k, and any other currently-available CPU in gaming. There are bound to be small differences in benchmarks between a max-overclocked 2500k and a similarly-clocked 4770k, but I don't think you'd ever notice them in real world scenarios.
Click to expand...

This.

I find it hard to believe that your CPU is a bottleneck with only 2-680's and your 2500k running at 4.5Ghz. New games like BF4 and very large 64 player maps would defiantly make use of more cores or HT, but a 2500k is still a beast of a chip when overclocked to 4.5-5Ghz. As the above posters said, you'd be better off looking into a better cooling solution and pushing your 2500k a bit more.

I plan on sitting on my 2600k for at least another year or two simply because there's nothing out there worth spending money on as far as upgrades that I'd notice. Very few of the Ivy bridge or haswell chips will do 4.7+ Ghz and my 2600k @4.8Ghz is faster then most of them and it's 3 years old.
 
Pitbully said:
I plan on sitting on my 2600k for at least another year or two simply because there's nothing out there worth spending money on as far as upgrades that I'd notice. Very few of the Ivy bridge or haswell chips will do 4.7+ Ghz and my 2600k @4.8Ghz is faster then most of them and it's 3 years old.
Click to expand...

This is why I love my de-lidded 3770K @ 4.8Ghz..I am moving it into a new body (MSI Z77 MPower) and fully expect to hit between 5-5.1Ghz, since I am also expanding my loop with a 2nd 360mm radiator to handle the extra CPU heat and another highly clocked 7950..
 
1. Haswell is only around 10% faster than Sandy - hardly noticeable.
2. SLI is much more demanding from CPU than single GPU
3. Highly overclocked 780 are faster than Titan

So putting 1+2+3 together - sell 680s and get one of those super overclocked version of 780 or wait for 290X release to see how it performs.
 
Pitbully said:
This.

I find it hard to believe that your CPU is a bottleneck with only 2-680's and your 2500k running at 4.5Ghz. New games like BF4 and very large 64 player maps would defiantly make use of more cores or HT, but a 2500k is still a beast of a chip when overclocked to 4.5-5Ghz. As the above posters said, you'd be better off looking into a better cooling solution and pushing your 2500k a bit more.

I plan on sitting on my 2600k for at least another year or two simply because there's nothing out there worth spending money on as far as upgrades that I'd notice. Very few of the Ivy bridge or haswell chips will do 4.7+ Ghz and my 2600k @4.8Ghz is faster then most of them and it's 3 years old.
Click to expand...

Michaelius said:
1. Haswell is only around 10% faster than Sandy - hardly noticeable.
2. SLI is much more demanding from CPU than single GPU
3. Highly overclocked 780 are faster than Titan

So putting 1+2+3 together - sell 680s and get one of those super overclocked version of 780 or wait for 290X release to see how it performs.
Click to expand...

I do realize that comparing my chip to Haswell is not that big of a difference but what about in regard to improving SLI performance? If it will improve the efficieny of my GPUs then maybe it is something to look at.

I am toying with the idea of buying a closed loop and trying to get a little more juice out of the 2500k. I don't think I can hit 5.0 but 4.8 may be doable with better cooling.
 
B!nd. said:
I do realize that comparing my chip to Haswell is not that big of a difference but what about in regard to improving SLI performance? If it will improve the efficieny of my GPUs then maybe it is something to look at.

I am toying with the idea of buying a closed loop and trying to get a little more juice out of the 2500k. I don't think I can hit 5.0 but 4.8 may be doable with better cooling.
Click to expand...

If we run with the assumption that Haswell is 10% faster (which is close enough IMO) then depending on how CPU-bound a particular task is, you'll get 0-10% of improvement with numbers around 10% being unlikely for the vast majority of tasks.

Worth it? No. Nor is buying new cooling systems. You can still buy stuff if you want, but if you're not satisfied now, the best you'll get is "well, this is a little better at least."

Seriously, your expectations are the issue here. Realize you don't need to play Crysis with every single setting maxed. Take a deep breath and turn down a few settings a bit. You'll be okay. Running AA at < 256x isn't the same thing as gaming in 640x480x8.

Wait until Maxwell. Don't just immediately run out and buy the new AMD cards (unless you really feel the need to spend as much money as possible as often as possible). They look good, but this again doesn't look to be that major an upgrade compared to others in the past ~5 years.
 
Last edited:
At 4.4GHz each, a 2500k and a 4770k perform very closely to each-other in gaming, when driving Crossfired Radeon 7950s.
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r28517633-I5-2500K-vs-I7-4770K-Gaming-Benchmarks

Again, check for software problems. If there turns out to be nothing wrong with your drivers, consider getting a couple of GTX 780s, and overclock them to the limit.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9D-QD_HIfjA

Lastly, as Dan pointed out above me, your performance expectations are somewhat high for the hardware you have. Shit, mine would be too if I sunk $1000 into my graphics processors. I don't know the specific tweaks for each game you play, but with most PC games, there are usually a couple of settings that do virtually nothing to better the visual experience of the game, but cut your framerates dramatically. Look into what settings other people are modifying, and see if you can live with them.
 
Last edited:
B!nd. said:
I do realize that comparing my chip to Haswell is not that big of a difference but what about in regard to improving SLI performance? If it will improve the efficieny of my GPUs then maybe it is something to look at.

I am toying with the idea of buying a closed loop and trying to get a little more juice out of the 2500k. I don't think I can hit 5.0 but 4.8 may be doable with better cooling.
Click to expand...

Maxwell and either Haswell-E or Skylake will be your best friends if you can wait.
 
I don't think any of the near future upgrades will be that significant either that it will make your game run at maxed out settings if you aren't close right now. Just look at SB -> IB -> Haswell and 580 -> 680 -> 780. There are certainly improvements, but nothing is a major increase (in your case almost 100% faster than current since I assume you want to maintain 60fps at max and you are dipping to 30fps right now?). Dual GTX 680 should beat a Titan in general, so I can't imagine a single card solution that will give you enough performance. Not now and not with future cards as I doubt Nvidia or AMD can double or triple Titan performance within the next couple of years.
 
I would just sell the 2500k for like 100-150 and then buy a 3770 or 3770k ,you can prob get one of these o nthe forums for like 250 ish
 
Carl, did you miss my post that showed that even a 4770k can only offer an imperceivable benefit over a 2500k in gaming?
 
Carl224 said:
I would just sell the 2500k for like 100-150 and then buy a 3770 or 3770k ,you can prob get one of these o nthe forums for like 250 ish
Click to expand...

When I can go to microcenter & buy a 4570k & get 30-60 off a board, who would buy a 2500k for $150'ish..??
 
Robstar said:
When I can go to microcenter & buy a 4570k & get 30-60 off a board, who would buy a 2500k for $150'ish..??
Click to expand...

A lot of people on eBay pay about that much for one. (But, of course, you'll keep about $125 of it after all of their bullshit)
 
Joseph F said:
At 4.4GHz each, a 2500k and a 4770k perform very closely to each-other in gaming, when driving Crossfired Radeon 7950s.
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r28517633-I5-2500K-vs-I7-4770K-Gaming-Benchmarks

Again, check for software problems. If there turns out to be nothing wrong with your drivers, consider getting a couple of GTX 780s, and overclock them to the limit.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9D-QD_HIfjA

Lastly, as Dan pointed out above me, your performance expectations are somewhat high for the hardware you have. Shit, mine would be too if I sunk $1000 into my graphics processors. I don't know the specific tweaks for each game you play, but with most PC games, there are usually a couple of settings that do virtually nothing to better the visual experience of the game, but cut your framerates dramatically. Look into what settings other people are modifying, and see if you can live with them.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the links, Joseph. I can really appreciate those comparison benchmarks. My drivers are a little out of date but I don't really predict the any benefits from the more recent ones. I'm currently using 314.22 because they were the most stable with Crysis 3. I'll update them and see if it makes a difference.

I also agree with my expectations being high. My max FPS in games is very nice and in some games I can justify buying a 120hz monitor. I don't think picking up a pair of 780's will solve my issue. I'm not concerned about the GPU power but the horsepower required from the CPU to handle these cards in SLI.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top