For the 2500K/2600K users out there, what price for a 7700K would make you upgrade?

0

00Dan

Weaksauce
Joined
Dec 10, 2012
Messages
78
I've asked a similar question before but this year it is once again relevant. Microcenter is running 7700Ks for $279.99 and my 2500K is looking a bit long in the tooth.
 
I'd choose a Ryzen 1700 or 1700x setup over a 7700k any day the week. Longer prospective future with more cores and support for upcoming CPUs guaranteed for the next three years on the AM4 platform. You'll never get more than four cores with that 270 chipset. Intel has moved on. The future is wider core count.

Micro center also has great combo prices on the Ryzen chips. It would cost you nearly an identical outlay.
 
Last edited:
VanGoghComplex said:
Can you provide a source for that?

I was kinda hoping for an i5-8600k with six cores on Z270. Be nice to know if Intel has officially crushed my dreams. =)
Click to expand...
Some surmising based on Intel platform traditions, and the tick tock function Intel does with CPUs.
Z170 and Z270 boards don't support XEON, and so there is little hope of that kind of tech watering down into a I5 or I7 CPU. These Z170 and Z270 boards are consumer class boards which don't get the long lasting love of the workstation class boards like the X79, X99 and X299.

Intel has now moved onto the x299. That'll be the future. If you want Intel, and more than 4 cores, you'd be safer to consider a now end of life X99 board (with PLENTY of great CPU options still availalable now and in the future where the Intel Xeon 8 core, 10 core, etc processors that work with the X99 will be almost given away from upgrading server farms) or a X299 board with a long support roadmap still to come. Not to say the 7700K isn't the hot CPU performance item now --- just question will it be in 3-5 years??? as apps, games, and programs begin to utilize more cores. (consoles will help lead that direction for games).
 
Archaea said:
Some surmising based on Intel platform traditions, and the tick tock function Intel does with CPUs.
Z170 and Z270 boards don't support XEON, and so there is little hope of that kind of tech watering down into a I5 or I7 CPU. These Z170 and Z270 boards are consumer class boards which don't get the long lasting love of the workstation class boards like the X79, X99 and X299.

Intel has now moved onto the x299. That'll be the future. If you want Intel, and more than 4 cores, you'd be safe to consider a X99 board, or a X299 board. Not to say the 7700K isn't the hot item now --- just will it be in 3-5 years as apps, games, and programs begin to utilize more cores. (consoles will help lead that direction for games).
Click to expand...
That's curious. The Coffee Lake hubbub is all about 6 cores on a consumer grade platform. I know if I want more than four right now I'd need X299, but I'm talking about Coffee Lake. I'll never be an enthusiast grade customer. Too much cost and no justifiable use case on my end.
 
Wait a month till the 6C / 12T is released on the mainstream platform. It should be priced the same as a 7700K (retail not MC prices) and if you are considering AMD I expect the 6C /12T to push down the price on the 1800X (although not sure how much it will change the price on the other Ryzen 7 processors).
 
Archaea said:
The future is wider core count.
Click to expand...

I remember hearing this back in the Core2 days. I'm still waiting for more than a game or two every couple of years to be able to take advantage of more than 4 cores at a time.

I'm not saying it will never happen, but what are the chances that you'll still be running this platform once it does?

I'm going to wait for Kyle to post that VR performance benchmark comparing Sandy Bridge and Kaby Lake before I upgrade anything. Until then I feel as though it's better to overclock my 2500K as much as possible while running the fastest memory the motherboard can support.
 
To be honest, I don't do much on the tower these days... the 2500K is mostly only running 1 or 2 VM and surfing...
Whenever I launch a game (still rocking 1080p), I do not feel any need to upgrade.. even those old 380's 4GB..

I was looking at ryzen but since threadripper announcement... I'm waiting... the upgrade hitch is burning in me but don't see any reason...
Threadripper / Intel consumer 6 cores might make me jump... just because... We'll see.

I think at this point, more than 2500/2600K is mostly somewhat a niche market as most gamers (I said most...) are still rocking 1080p and "normal" people do not encore 4K non-stop or run insane PLEX server...
Making the last 2500K/2600K move onto more recent builds will be a challenge for marketing department I think more than anything else...

EDIT: and that 2500K watercooled H80 OCed to ~4.5GHz from memory has been running 24/7 for years without any issues... I just don't see myself decommissioning it right now with those offering for my current needs..

My 2 cents,
 
I Have a 2500k @ 5Ghz. Been waiting for 6 cores. Regret not going for 2600k at the time. Did not expect to wait so long. That BS about not needing more than 2 cores does not belong in a serious discussion. Keep in mind that 10nm performance will be less than 14nm++, according to the Intel slides. Go for more cores, next upgrade might be a while from now.
 
Tree fiddy.

MMitch said:
EDIT: and that 2500K watercooled H80 OCed to ~4.5GHz from memory has been running 24/7 for years without any issues... I just don't see myself decommissioning it right now with those offering for my current needs..

My 2 cents,
Click to expand...

Don't count on the 2500k lasting forever - the IMC in mine died randomly about a month ago, no warning. After it happened I looked in to it, and it's more common than I would've thought.
 
silent-circuit said:
Tree fiddy.



Don't count on the 2500k lasting forever - the IMC in mine died randomly about a month ago, no warning. After it happened I looked in to it, and it's more common than I would've thought.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the heads up, will monitor this... Only issue I had so far is with major win10 upgrades... seems like I need a clean install every time but that's another thing.
 
It's not just the cpu. It's having to get the Mobo and ram as well. Of course gpu, PSU, and disk will move, but dropping quite a few hundred into just those 3 components is not going to happen.

Hell, I'm looking at a replacement for an old core2quad pc right now and it'll either be a Sandy bridge based Xeon workstation like the HP z420 or maybe a 3770 based PC as long as it's got the juice to supply a 6 pin pcie.
 
00Dan said:
I've asked a similar question before but this year it is once again relevant. Microcenter is running 7700Ks for $279.99 and my 2500K is looking a bit long in the tooth.
Click to expand...

None, though I went to a 4790k a couple of years ago. I'd wait the 1-6 months to see how Coffee Lake 6 core chips shake out. I doubt MC is gonna sell out of $279 7700k's in the next 1-2 months.
 
I'll be keep my 2600k. There is nothing in the new gen CPUs that have any pull for me. I'll upgrade my GPU before I buy into another Intel performance snooze-fest.
 
I've seriously thought of upgrading from my 2600K for the past two years to the 6700K and then the 7700K, but I just don't think it makes sense. I mostly game and edit photos, do some video editing and conversion and my 2600K still performs quite well. I know a new Kaby Lake chip would knock seconds off waiting for a filter in Photoshop but is that worth $600-$800 for a new processor, mobo and memory when in the end I still have a four-core, hyper-threaded CPU? Anything less than six cores going forward is a side step in my opinion if you currently run a 2500K/2600K unless you absolutely need those FPS. Intel needs to understand this the way AMD clearly does.

With the current core wars between Intel and AMD, combined with the fact that gaming consoles are now essentially multi-core PC's, I do think we will start seeing more emphasis on multi-threaded apps and games. But who knows! o_O
 
Nimisys said:
Only thing holding me back is the current cost of DDR4 and GPUs now.
Click to expand...
Seriously, mobile phone manufacturers can all go to hell. $700 for a 64GB quadchannel kit? I paid $160 for the 32GB DDR3 in my current PC, FFS. 32GB DDR4 kits are going for double that price.
 
00Dan said:
I've asked a similar question before but this year it is once again relevant. Microcenter is running 7700Ks for $279.99 and my 2500K is looking a bit long in the tooth.
Click to expand...

There really isn't anything out there now that makes me want to upgrade. I was looking forward to Ryzen, but it's performance for the things I want to do with my 2600k system just isn't there atm. Right now I am still in waiting mode, but am much more excited to see if AMD can keep raising their bar to compete more with Intel.
 
Upgrade when the time is right for you, not when the time is right for someone else.

That is the best advice I can offer. I went from a 2600 to my 7700 and love it to pieces. But I upgraded quite a few components in the process. Motherboard+ram+CPU+ went from SSD to NVME storage.
 
I've thought about selling my 2500k just to get a 2600k lol...especially after the HardOCP review showing the 2600k matching ryzen 1700x at 1440p
 
I was still perfectly happy with my 2600k@4.3 and had no reason to upgrade. But I took the plunge a few weeks ago when I figured I could even net a few bucks after selling off the old sandybridge parts. Picked up a z170 board for $40, an i5 6400t (quad core) for $95, and 16gb of ddr4 for $90.

As I had hoped, I'm able to run 22x200=4400mhz with a respectable vcore:
QKVmD3o.png


Unfortunately, I've come to find that hyperthreading actually makes a huge difference for me. I now have to close down chrome in order to game without massive fps dips or stuttering.
As well, AVX performance on non-k overclocks is absolutely atrocious. Benchmarks utilizing AVX puts performance at around yorkfield levels. Disabling AVX (bcdedit /set xsavedisable 1) benches similarly to nehalem, better but still far worse than sandybridge. The consequence of doing so however is that various programs / features no longer work, GTAV, OpenCL etc. It's possible that a driver re-install might clear up the ocl issue but I haven't tested and have some doubts.

All in all, I wish I stayed put, but at least I'll be ready to jump on a good deal on a 6600k or whatever comes after kabylake if it'll be compatible with the z170.

I've got an old x58/x5650@4ghz rig as a home server, and I'm actually thinking about swapping roles with the skylake rig :(
 
Last edited:
for me its not the issue of just the cpu price. but that i have to rebuy memmory and motherboard and suddenly it does not look of that sexy of an upgrade to go from i7 3770k to 7700k
instead i would move to amd ryzen to get a hefty upgrade in raw cpu power since al ot of stuff i do requioes enormues cpu power.
 
SvenBent said:
for me its not the issue of just the cpu price. but that i have to rebuy memmory and motherboard and suddenly it does not look of that sexy of an upgrade to go from i7 3770k to 7700k
instead i would move to amd ryzen to get a hefty upgrade in raw cpu power since al ot of stuff i do requioes enormues cpu power.
Click to expand...
For what it's worth, people are buying used z68/77s at a decent premium, with budget ones going for ~$70-80 on ebay. There've been deals on z170s for as low as $40 recently. And with ram prices still being inflated, I was able to sell off my old ddr3 for more than I paid for it years ago.

The main cost would be in the cpu, unless you're willing to make sacrifices and go for non-K overclocking. Here's hoping coffeelake will work with z170s...
 
ziddey said:
For what it's worth, people are buying used z68/77s at a decent premium, with budget ones going for ~$70-80 on ebay. There've been deals on z170s for as low as $40 recently. And with ram prices still being inflated, I was able to sell off my old ddr3 for more than I paid for it years ago.

The main cost would be in the cpu, unless you're willing to make sacrifices and go for non-K overclocking. Here's hoping coffeelake will work with z170s...
Click to expand...

but hte same inflated prices keep the ddr4 up and still its small add'eon for used parts. its just not worth the hassle to stay with just 4 cores with HT.
if iwanted to upgrade i would get much better results just to move to amd ryzen platform
 
Funny... I just dusted off my 2500K rig for a rebuild. I was very pleasantly surprised to see that with two 770s in SLI (4GB), and the 2500k at 4.5GHZ, it maintained a rock solid 60FPS in BF1, ultra settings, at 1920x1200. So I would say if the 7700K gets down to about $200, I would upgrade it in an instant. I'm also doing a super small form factor build in a Custom Mod 3.24L case. I was tossing around the idea of using Ryzen 1700 (thread build) or a 7700T (quiet build), but If the 7700K was at the $250 mark, I would probably go that route.
 
Sold my 2500K when my motherboard decided to not work with UEFI GPUs. Went to a 6500 and new board as a temporary solution, then upgraded to 7700K on launch. Happy with the upgrade!
 
Sofor people that went from 2500k or 2600k to ryzen or kaby lake what is c your opinion on strictly gamng alone performance?
 
There is no point in upgrading if you don't do video encoding, heavy streaming, or something that would benefit from having many cores. Even less reason to upgrade right now with AMD and Intel releasing new platforms in the coming month or so.

IMO if you don't NEED a new rig right now and you just game, then save your money for when your current rig dies or becomes obsolete because tech is generally cheaper and better the longer you wait.
 
For me, there are several considerations even before the performance are in question:

1. Are you using win 10? If you are not, going to Kaby lake is only going to shoot you in the foot because of the new update 'policy' of non-windows 10's on Kaby lake. There are work arounds yes, but MS will work on work arounds around those work arounds. Both Ryzen and Kaby lake suffer from this however.

2. Do you 4k Netflix? If you do, do you use nVidia GPUs that are 1050ti or better? Kaby lake is only needed if your answer is Yes and No respectively. Otherwise Ryzen is also a strong contender

3. Do you require features on the Kaby Lake/Ryzen motherboards? IE M.2 NMVe SSDs? If not, then upgrading isn't going to yield a whole lot of benefit.

Sandy Bridge systems are actually extremely flexible as in it has drivers for 4~5 windows generations (XP, Vista, 7, 8 & possibly 10), so if your Sandy Bridge system isn't broken, there is no reason to throw it away either.
 
chenw said:
For me, there are several considerations even before the performance are in question:

1. Are you using win 10? If you are not, going to Kaby lake is only going to shoot you in the foot because of the new update 'policy' of non-windows 10's on Kaby lake. There are work arounds yes, but MS will work on work arounds around those work arounds. Both Ryzen and Kaby lake suffer from this however.

2. Do you 4k Netflix? If you do, do you use nVidia GPUs that are 1050ti or better? Kaby lake is only needed if your answer is Yes and No respectively. Otherwise Ryzen is also a strong contender

3. Do you require features on the Kaby Lake/Ryzen motherboards? IE M.2 NMVe SSDs? If not, then upgrading isn't going to yield a whole lot of benefit.

Sandy Bridge systems are actually extremely flexible as in it has drivers for 4~5 windows generations (XP, Vista, 7, 8 & possibly 10), so if your Sandy Bridge system isn't broken, there is no reason to throw it away either.
Click to expand...

As for #3, You can run and boot off NVMe drives with Sandybridge/Z68 motherboards. You'll be limited to PCIe 2.0 4x which hits a wall at about 1600MB/s read/write, but it works just fine.
 
Yeah, I wasn't sure if it will actually work on such an old motherboard (driver issues not withstanding), so I went with something that definitely does support it.
 
For me from my old 2600k with 16gb of ram running my 1070 video card pushing 1080p with a Samsum 840 pro 500 gig, going to the 7700k, 32gb of DDR4 ram, 960 EVO NVME at pcie 3 x4 speeds.. well it really opened the throttle on my video card triggering me to upgrade to a 1440p monitor as well.
 
Save as everyone else above. My 2600k system with 980ti/mobo/16gb RAM/Raid-0 SSD's is still fast enough for my 60hz/1200p monitor. Thats the limiting factor. A new monitor would drive my upgrades at this point, not cpu pricing.
 
Well bit the bullet. Went from 2500k @4.5ghz to 6700k @ 4.5ghz. Only tried bf1 so far but the difference was huge with 144hz monitor
 
I am never upgrading the processor on my PC ever again so nothing could get me to buy that chip.
 
silent-circuit said:
Don't count on the 2500k lasting forever - the IMC in mine died randomly about a month ago, no warning. After it happened I looked in to it, and it's more common than I would've thought.
Click to expand...

Just curious were you running 1.5v or 1.65v DDR3 and at what speeds?
 
I don't quite have a 2600k but my 3770k is pretty similar. A 7700k is way too similar in clock speed, performance, and platform feature set. Ryzen doesn't seem any more impressive either especially due to the clock limitations. I really need to see at least a 5 GHz 6-core with 36+ PCIe lanes before I'll drop cash to upgrade. Maybe the next generation of CPU's (8xxx series) for the X299 will get us there.
 
2700k @ 5Ghz here. I'm not opposed to the idea of upgrading, the issue is that my good 'ol Sandy Bridge still cranks out the frames and everything since Sandy Bridge seems more like a sidegrade than an upgrade.

I think I'll be hanging onto this beasty for a little while longer, keeping a close eye on AMD's upcoming solutions though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top