Are you skipping 2500K/2600K?

Are you skipping 2500/2600K?

  • Total voters
    1,149
I think you will see alot more people waiting until after both BD and specs of 2011 come out. That's what I'm doing.

Once those numbers come out it will be a price vs performance to make the decision to go SB or not.




A better question is who is going to upgrade to a i7 (tripple channel only) from the list, include the 2100 2300 2400 etc... I'm pretty sure that answer will be zero for almost everyone.
 
I think the only other thing stopping me is the lack of the Z68 board.

Depending on the price of the z68 boards I might pull the trigger there before I knew BD or 2011 stats.
 
tlc4tvm said:
I think the only other thing stopping me is the lack of the Z68 board.

Depending on the price of the z68 boards I might pull the trigger there before I knew BD or 2011 stats.
Click to expand...

I'm in the same boat. I want a z68 so I can push my 4th monitor and get rid of my 8800GT powersuck. Quicker encodes and SSD caching also sound promising.
 
i did it, 2 days ago. bought a 2600, getting it on moday. i sold my pc, got a mac mini and now buying a new pc
 
glen said:
One thing to keep a look out for when S2011 launches is Intel dropping the 2500K/2600K, I suspect these low priced CPU's were unlocked simply to compete with BD. When SBE 2011 comes out Intel would be smart to drop them as they would cut into the enthusiast platform sales and they must be a warranty nightmare.
Click to expand...

lol Compete with Bulldozer? Bulldozer is nowhere to be found. They could be whooping AMDs ass with the Core2 line still.
 
Valshistixol said:
lol Compete with Bulldozer? Bulldozer is nowhere to be found. They could be whooping AMDs ass with the Core2 line still.
Click to expand...

Your post is a complete FAIL!!! and how is this at all helpful. :mad:

If you understood what the OP was saying it makes perfect sence. Intel released the 2500K to gain market. Sure the BD isn't out yet thats the point!!!
Alot of people were not going to go i7 like myself, but have bought the 2500K b/c BD isn't out yet.

I'm certain I wouldn't upgrade from a phenom II or an X58 to a 2500 or 2600 non-k.
What be able to overclock it from 100mhz to 103mhz if I'm lucky with the turbo boost?



The other point of taking away the K series when 2011 comes out... not sure about that but stranger things have happened.
 
I was considering springing for a 2600K but now I have decided against it.

I currently have a D0 Core i7-920, but its in a poorly cooled small form factor case (getting ti was a mistake). I plan on moving to a full desktop, and my though was that if I have to buy a motherboard anyway, why not just go Sandy Bridge?

Well, I've thought about it, and the truth is, for what I do, my Core i7-920 is currently fast enough even at stock speeds. With my GTX580 at 2560x1600, the CPU is never the bottleneck, no matter what I play, and I don't do a ton of encoding or other CPU intensive stuff.

When I get my full sized case and a real cooler in the near future, I should be able to overclock it to anywhere from 3.6 to 4.1Ghz depending on how lucky I am, meaning that the CPU will be just fine for even longer. No need to spend an additional $325 right now for a new CPU if I don't have to.

The Core i7-920 is really an amazing CPU. While I have had CPU's for longer before, never have I had a CPU stay relevant for so long before.

I got it just as the D0's where coming out in early to mid 2009. Now two full years later there is still no real reason to upgrade.
 
I've been really trying to decide for a while now whether or not to build a SB rig or just go X58 and use that for the next couple of years. I'm currently on a P55 setup with a i7 870 alongside 8gb of RAM. I was hoping for a mATX p67 board, but I haven't seen one online yet to buy (and the X58 has the Rampage III Gene) and that may very well influence my decision in favor of either platform.
 
Last edited:
I feel sorry for the folks skipping SB its been a pleasure to use, rock solid platform, great performance, and very very fun to OC and get great stable results very easily.
 
Falcon_CMH said:
I feel sorry for the folks skipping SB its been a pleasure to use, rock solid platform, great performance, and very very fun to OC and get great stable results very easily.
Click to expand...

Except for that SATA chipset bug, and the fact that inexplicably Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium HD boards just don't work right on systems with the P67 or H67 chipset :p
 
Well i was on an e7200 @ 3.2 ghz so upgrading to sandy bridge was a complete no brainer for me, now im on an i5 2500-k @ 4.4 ghz and it destroys my old setup so bad. :D
 
piXel said:
Well i was on an e7200 @ 3.2 ghz so upgrading to sandy bridge was a complete no brainer for me, now im on an i5 2500-k @ 4.4 ghz and it destroys my old setup so bad. :D
Click to expand...

am i skipping sb? it all depends on that bulldozer looks like when it comes out.
 
I agree with Zarathustra.

Of all the many (x86) computers I've owned, going back to my first 8086 and 8088 PCs, my i920 feels like it has and will continue to have the longest legs. It's surely not holding back a GTX580, and a couple of SSDs don't have it breaking much of a sweat. It has gobs of bandwidth, compute power and I/O expandability. I might build a SB box because I need a another PC for some database and virtualization testing, but this i920 is definitely not being replaced because I have not come close to outgrowing it.

In fact, for the first time since the early 1980s, I'm worried that I might not know HOW to outgrow it...
 
sphinx99 said:
In fact, for the first time since the early 1980s, I'm worried that I might not know HOW to outgrow it...
Click to expand...

Agree with everything you said... Except maybe that it's a worry :p


That being said, every time I've said something like this "I don't know how I'll ever use all that" it's come back to bite me in the ass :p
 
Its all great and good that the 920 was so great for so long....but the fact that you can sell a 920 and x58 board used for about the same price or MORE than what it costs for a brand new 2500k/board, makes the SB hard to pass up
 
Zarathustra[H];1037123646 said:
Except for that SATA chipset bug, and the fact that inexplicably Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium HD boards just don't work right on systems with the P67 or H67 chipset :p
Click to expand...

Never botherd me, I use on board sound on my ASUS P6P67 EVO Gen.1/2 MB and I use all SATA III(6Gbps) devices so I am not even returning my MB. My rig has been rock solid 24x7 since day 1 folding 24x7 at 4.8 Ghz. And Clocked to 5.2+ Ghz benching stable.
 
QuiteSufficient said:
Its all great and good that the 920 was so great for so long....but the fact that you can sell a 920 and x58 board used for about the same price or MORE than what it costs for a brand new 2500k/board, makes the SB hard to pass up
Click to expand...

Long answer - I hail from a different school of thought where it's good to run down computers to see how gracefully they age, in order to be better informed about the real-world lifecycle of these things. That's one of the things I like about this "hobby." During working hours I am responsible for several thousand clients, and while it becomes harder and harder to stay on top of every detail as the years wear on, having a good feel for how yesterday's hot tech behaves tomorrow gives perspective that makes up for not having time for the details because outside the rarified air of enthusiast sites such as these, most people have to keep this HW going for 3-5 years or longer. So, I'm keeping my i920 for the long haul because I want to know how a bandwidth-rich multi-core box holds up over the next 5+ years and how that compares to how well new-instruction-set-386s and big-proc-cache-PPros and lots-of-clocks-Northwoods and two-charts-in-Task-Manager-Core2s fared.
 
QuiteSufficient said:
Its all great and good that the 920 was so great for so long....but the fact that you can sell a 920 and x58 board used for about the same price or MORE than what it costs for a brand new 2500k/board, makes the SB hard to pass up
Click to expand...

New 930's go for ~$175 now... You'd probably not be able to ask more than ~$100 for a used one at best..... A x58 motherboard that used to go for $300 new, I wouldn't pay more than $175 for used.

You can get a CPU + mobo for $275?
 
My system tackles everything I throw at it with flying colors. Given the issues with launch and stupid high motherboards coupled with the fact I would not see any benefit in day to day performance, ...why would I upgrade?
 
Well, to be fair, the launch issues were just that, launch issues. I'm sure there are lots of reasons not to upgrade though i'm unsure why a now non-issue would be one of them.
 
RamonGTP said:
Well, to be fair, the launch issues were just that, launch issues. I'm sure there are lots of reasons not to upgrade though i'm unsure why a now non-issue would be one of them.
Click to expand...

Because it ruined it. Its now how long after launch and they are just now getting things worked out?? I really don't want to spend more money to get the same performance in what I do.
 
Zarathustra[H];1037124124 said:
New 930's go for ~$175 now... You'd probably not be able to ask more than ~$100 for a used one at best..... A x58 motherboard that used to go for $300 new, I wouldn't pay more than $175 for used.

You can get a CPU + mobo for $275?
Click to expand...


Where can you get a 930 for 175? They sell used on here and on eBay for about 200. Add in a mobo.

I just bought another sb combo for my brother at fry's tonight, 2500k and Asus p8p67, $358 put the door with price matching. He sold his 920 d0 and evga board on eBay for about 330 total. I guess worst case scenario he is out $28 to pick up faster IPC and potentially another 1ghz of OC room.
 
jifffy said:
I don't see how you can still have a Q6600 and not see the huge jump that would be had by upgrading to even a 2500K.

I say this also because I have a Q6600 and will be upgrading to a 2500k due to the great reviews.
Click to expand...

the Q6600 it really not lost yet, it's still a very powerful cpu and will play games just fine, I can play any of them I like maxed out on mine..

I just upgraded to a Q9550 for the cache but still, I would of still ran the 6600 if I hadn't upgraded..

reference.

Q6600
2j17cp5.jpg


Q9550
http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=1770175

I've compared FPS to a friend of mine who is running an i5 2500k, my fps scores are not really that much different than his..

so no I'm skipping..
 
On a Q9650 @ 3.6. No doubt the 2500/2600K are very good CPUs, but my system can still run everything I throw at it very well. I'm waiting to see what's available around fall.
 
nobody_here said:
Because it ruined it. Its now how long after launch and they are just now getting things worked out?? I really don't want to spend more money to get the same performance in what I do.
Click to expand...

Like I said, there are certainly valid reasons not to upgrade. Not seeing an improvement in what you do is one of them. A problem that no longer exists isn't.
 
Its not surprising people are skipping the current range of SB, especially as it's a mainstream part. The drop in PCI lanes and memory channels means it doesn't feel fully rounded, especially with multiplyer overclocking.

Peronsally in games I see 30% use. In rendering I see 100% but thats just how that works. When I upgrade now it will be for features like lightpeak. Though ill need a CPU for the SFF system. Will still consider it a sidegrade, definately not worth spending money for a whole new set of CPU + motherboard with less memory lanes + less native PCI lanes + marginal if any improvement in speed.
 
I'm currently running a QX9650@4ghz and it does everything I need it to without any problems so I'll be waiting for LGA2011.
 
Well, until something comes along that actually puts a hurt on my current cpu and platform....I just don't see the benefit of an upgrade. To be honest, for my needs...gaming, websurfing, video editing and photos....I'm fine. Heck, I probably could have just stayed on my Q9550 and been fine.

For the guys that base performance on benchmarks instead of real word use....I guess upgrades are more necessary. This is NOT a bash on those guys....just an observation.
 
LGA 478...I took the plunge ha...Been on a laptop for too long.

2500k
MSI GD65
560 ti

prices were to good to pass up.
 
tlc4tvm said:
Your post is a complete FAIL!!! and how is this at all helpful. :mad:

If you understood what the OP was saying it makes perfect sence. Intel released the 2500K to gain market. Sure the BD isn't out yet thats the point!!!
Alot of people were not going to go i7 like myself, but have bought the 2500K b/c BD isn't out yet.

I'm certain I wouldn't upgrade from a phenom II or an X58 to a 2500 or 2600 non-k.
What be able to overclock it from 100mhz to 103mhz if I'm lucky with the turbo boost?



The other point of taking away the K series when 2011 comes out... not sure about that but stranger things have happened.
Click to expand...

Sorry but it's true and we won't be seeing bulldozer for another few months. Intel could have continued gaining market share by just sitting on LGA1156. I'm not exactly expecting a Conroe out of AMD. We've heard this architecture being talked about for like 2-3 years and haven't seen anything come out of it yet.
 
glen said:
One thing to keep a look out for when S2011 launches is Intel dropping the 2500K/2600K, I suspect these low priced CPU's were unlocked simply to compete with BD. When SBE 2011 comes out Intel would be smart to drop them as they would cut into the enthusiast platform sales and they must be a warranty nightmare.
Click to expand...

If anything, I'm expecting a repeat of the Great Kentsfield Fire Sale with the unlocked K-series, as they can't go into LGA2011 motherboards, while the rest of i3/i5 head even further south (and kill off LGA775 entirely, if not LGA1366 as well).

It's those two lines (LGA775/1366) that are warranty nightmares for Intel - worse, Celeron DC (especially E3400) is a basement-dwelling dynamo that acts as a boat-anchor for those that would normally be looking at i3 (i3 has a use; however, it's priced closer to i5 than Celeron DC). If you have apps that need more L2/L3 on-die cache than E3400, i5 (not i3) has the bang for buck right now (i3 is C2D all over again - overpriced compared to CPUs further up, and not as much bang for buck compared to i5 or even non-K i7, let alone i5-K). Because I'm not under application (CPU) upgrade pressure, I'd normally be almost a prime i3 candidate; however, i5 is close enough in price to be a better value, despite it realistically being overkill for my needs.
 
On Q9550 and waiting to see what Bulldozer will bring to the table. Otherwise I'm gunning for X68.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top