• 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 versus 2600k

C

cabanaboy38

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 10, 2005
Messages
226
Is the 2600k worth the extra 100 bucks. How much of a difference will not having hyperthreading make?
 
you can do a search and find all the answers you want. This questions has been passed around about 1172x now on these forums.

To answer your question I would say the following to let you sum up your own idea of what you want:

Both chips deliver exceptional performance, unheard of overclocking potential, and are just really good on power actually.

I own both chips and run them so I know first hand the difference and honestly besides video encoding, gaming is 100% identical between the two on the processor level at least.

2600K:
+ 4 true cores / 4 Hyper threading units = 8 active threads
+8 meg cache (great for video encoding once again)
+Fantastic for video encoding
+Fantastic for gaming
+Just Fantastic
+Has Intel VT-x extensions (you do the research;) )
+Can be overclocked to 5.0ghz sometimes a tad more

-Does not have Intel VT-d extensions
-Priced about $100 more than 2500K

2500K:
+4 true cores / 0 hyper threading units = 4 active threads
+/- 6 meg cache - depends on your viewpoint and what you will use it for, probably wont make a big difference for much
+Still great for video encoding but not as much as the 2600K with 4 more threads.
++Stellar gaming processor - Best bang for the buck period!
+Has VT-x extensions
+Can be overclocked to 5.0ghz just like the 2600K and beyond (not typical from what I see)
+Price is great compared to it's bug brother.
+Same IPC performance as the 2600K (opinion)

-Does not have Intel VT-d extensions
-Has no hyperthreading once again, but not a big deal if for games only.

Thats seriously about as simple as you can get.

Get the 2600K if you want to run lots of video encoding, transcoding, audio encoding/transcoding, etc..... games also run fantastic on the processor.
Get the 2600K if you want to just spend more cash for the best of the two.

Get the 2500K if you are gamer and dont care about video encoding etc..

Both processor are evil and powerful and are just awesome and can be highly overclocked on air cooling with ease.

If you want to do heavy VM work then dont get either of the K series. Get the non K as they have better VM support and can run circles around the K variants with the VT-d extensions.

And lastly and important to know..........

You will not be able to use Intel Quicksync on the P67 chip set as it requires the usage of a discreet GPU thereby disabling the Intel HD video processor. Quicksync uses this portion of the processor to enable ridiculous video encoding speed.

In order to use Intel Quicksync you need an H67 mobo. I might actually sell my P8P67 that my 2500K is on and use quicksync and it will probably run circles around my 2600K in performance video encoding.

To give you an idea - I get far better performance using my AMD 6970 to convert videos than I do with my 2600K CPU only. Quicksync is supposed to blow even this away.
 
Last edited:
I don't do video encoding but I do some photo work and a lot of gaming. thanks for the quick reply's I need to research that Quicksync thing, thanks
 
In gaming, if there is a difference it will never prove to be significant.
With the extra 100 dollars you can do a few things.
Buy more Ram- you do photoediting.. throw your scratch disk on a ram drive .. ubber fast.
You can get 16gb for 150 from the egg.
Buy a small ssd (60-64gb)- Watch photoshop load in 3 seconds.
You would be suprised at how much 64 gbs are if you move your the contents of your user directory to a different drive, (documents, downloads and so on).
On a new install I did for a client, Installed Windows 7 + Office Bussiness 2010 + CS5 = 30 gb free on a crucial ssd.

But hell i'm on the fence... I have a 2500k sitting on my desk, while I wait for a new board. The chip will do over 5ghz... but if i'm not satisfied... off to the 2600k I go.
 
avddreamr said:
In gaming, if there is a difference it will never prove to be significant.
With the extra 100 dollars you can do a few things.
Buy more Ram- you do photoediting.. throw your scratch disk on a ram drive .. ubber fast.
You can get 16gb for 150 from the egg.
Buy a small ssd (60-64gb)- Watch photoshop load in 3 seconds.
You would be suprised at how much 64 gbs are if you move your the contents of your user directory to a different drive, (documents, downloads and so on).
On a new install I did for a client, Installed Windows 7 + Office Bussiness 2010 + CS5 = 30 gb free on a crucial ssd.

But hell i'm on the fence... I have a 2500k sitting on my desk, while I wait for a new board. The chip will do over 5ghz... but if i'm not satisfied... off to the 2600k I go.
Click to expand...

I will be RMA'ing my P8P67 EVO for a new one from Frys. I am going to get a Maximus IV to replace it once I get the new B3 P8P67. If you want my board send me a PM. Well work something out. But I have to get it first from Frys and they are out of this model at the moment so I am waiting for them to get em in. It will be un-opened P8P67 Evo B3 once I get it from them. :)
 
I used some of the money I saved on getting the I5-2500K instead of the 2600K to get a SSD.... umm.... that was one of the better moves I have done in a while....:D

Needless to say, I'm not building another personal machine without one or two
 
cabanaboy38 said:
I don't do video encoding but I do some photo work and a lot of gaming. thanks for the quick reply's I need to research that Quicksync thing, thanks
Click to expand...

He forgot to tell you how you going to quick sync with a dedicated card or how are you going to play games with the integrated graphics.
 
Spooney please educate me because I have been trying and there is nonway to use quicksync at all period nada with the p67.

Atleast without some unknown hack or something.
 
tangoseal said:
Spooney please educate me because I have been trying and there is nonway to use quicksync at all period nada with the p67.

Atleast without some unknown hack or something.
Click to expand...

QuickSync video is available only when the processor's IGP is active and in use. Generally, that means the CPU must be installed in a motherboard based on the H67 chipset, since the enthusiast-oriented P67 chipset doesn't support a display output for the IGP. On that H67 board, your graphics options are limited, too, if you want to use QuickSync. The IGP must be connected to a monitor; using a discrete graphics card alone will disable the IGP.

Welcome Lucid to the table:
http://techreport.com/discussions.x/20217
 
Lucid still will not work with a P67 right now. You have to wait until Z6? whatever it is called comes out. And you will still have to utilize a monitor on the IGP to have the IGP become active.
 
This is the best answer to a post I have started on any forum. Very informative. thank you very much.


tangoseal said:
you can do a search and find all the answers you want. This questions has been passed around about 1172x now on these forums.

To answer your question I would say the following to let you sum up your own idea of what you want:

Both chips deliver exceptional performance, unheard of overclocking potential, and are just really good on power actually.

I own both chips and run them so I know first hand the difference and honestly besides video encoding, gaming is 100% identical between the two on the processor level at least.

2600K:
+ 4 true cores / 4 Hyper threading units = 8 active threads
+8 meg cache (great for video encoding once again)
+Fantastic for video encoding
+Fantastic for gaming
+Just Fantastic
+Has Intel VT-x extensions (you do the research;) )
+Can be overclocked to 5.0ghz sometimes a tad more

-Does not have Intel VT-d extensions
-Priced about $100 more than 2500K

2500K:
+4 true cores / 0 hyper threading units = 4 active threads
+/- 6 meg cache - depends on your viewpoint and what you will use it for, probably wont make a big difference for much
+Still great for video encoding but not as much as the 2600K with 4 more threads.
++Stellar gaming processor - Best bang for the buck period!
+Has VT-x extensions
+Can be overclocked to 5.0ghz just like the 2600K and beyond (not typical from what I see)
+Price is great compared to it's bug brother.
+Same IPC performance as the 2600K (opinion)

-Does not have Intel VT-d extensions
-Has no hyperthreading once again, but not a big deal if for games only.

Thats seriously about as simple as you can get.

Get the 2600K if you want to run lots of video encoding, transcoding, audio encoding/transcoding, etc..... games also run fantastic on the processor.
Get the 2600K if you want to just spend more cash for the best of the two.

Get the 2500K if you are gamer and dont care about video encoding etc..

Both processor are evil and powerful and are just awesome and can be highly overclocked on air cooling with ease.

If you want to do heavy VM work then dont get either of the K series. Get the non K as they have better VM support and can run circles around the K variants with the VT-d extensions.

And lastly and important to know..........

You will not be able to use Intel Quicksync on the P67 chip set as it requires the usage of a discreet GPU thereby disabling the Intel HD video processor. Quicksync uses this portion of the processor to enable ridiculous video encoding speed.

In order to use Intel Quicksync you need an H67 mobo. I might actually sell my P8P67 that my 2500K is on and use quicksync and it will probably run circles around my 2600K in performance video encoding.

To give you an idea - I get far better performance using my AMD 6970 to convert videos than I do with my 2600K CPU only. Quicksync is supposed to blow even this away.
Click to expand...
 
cabanaboy38 said:
This is the best answer to a post I have started on any forum. Very informative. thank you very much.
Click to expand...

Very good answer agree except for the last part. For video encoding and decoding its proved that the cpu plays only 1 role in the process. The 950 is a slower cpu clock for clock than the I7 2600k but it manages to pull ahead of it in video editing work on CS5. Mainly thanks to the bandwidth and a better disk setup due to not bound by the limitations of 1155.
Its not just cpu is the balance of your system that comes into play. Your system is only as fast as the slowest component. Doesn't matter what cpu you choose make sure it balanced overall from disks ->ram->cpu->gpu->disk.
 
jstutman said:
On that H67 board, your graphics options are limited, too, if you want to use QuickSync. The IGP must be connected to a monitor; using a discrete graphics card alone will disable the IGP.http://techreport.com/discussions.x/20217
Click to expand...
Many of the H67 boards have a BIOS option to force the IGP to always be enabled, hence discrete + integrated can be utilized together (a display to each would still have to be hooked up though).
 
Funny thing is all the cpu igps are unlocked and can be overclocked. K or non k version
 
Spooony said:
Very good answer agree except for the last part. For video encoding and decoding its proved that the cpu plays only 1 role in the process. The 950 is a slower cpu clock for clock than the I7 2600k but it manages to pull ahead of it in video editing work on CS5. Mainly thanks to the bandwidth and a better disk setup due to not bound by the limitations of 1155.
Its not just cpu is the balance of your system that comes into play. Your system is only as fast as the slowest component. Doesn't matter what cpu you choose make sure it balanced overall from disks ->ram->cpu->gpu->disk.
Click to expand...

Actually, that's not the proper way to compare platforms. Sure, the best i7-9xx systems on that list did outperform the fastest of the i7-2600K systems on that same list - but only because the total cost of either of the two i7-9xx systems in question is 2 to 3 times higher than that 2600K system in question. When compared with one another with both systems equipped with identical components, the 2600K actually comes out ahead.

And note that the "Bang For The Buck" rating includes only the CPU, GPU and RAM. The costs of storage and motherboard are not included in the rating. For all I know the motherboards used in the two top-scoring i7-9xx quad-core systems cost $300 to $400, which further degrades the bang-for-the-buck value of both of those systems on the whole.
 
Last edited:
the money i couldve spent on a 2600k went to a c300. best decision i made with the little amount of money i had left in my budget.
and if you already have an ssd, buy another!!
 
I used this thread as basis for my purchase this weekend. I am building a new box, and was contemplating this very decision. The geek in me says "2600k". My wallet says "2500k".

I ended up going for the 2500k for a couple of reasons: 1) I already have a SSD. 2) I actually needed a 2nd processor for a server build I'm also doing, so I spent the difference between the two on that. 3) I honestly don't think I really would utilize any of the features of the 2600k. I don't do video encoding...every DVD I rip to ISO, and don't convert to a different video format. I will be doing the same thing with Blu-Ray most likely. 4) My GPU is a 4890. I will probably never be able to afford a video card >$250, so I think I am unlikely to max my CPU. In the event that I do, I should be able to buy a 2600k and drop it in, and sell my 2500k for most of the cost.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top