Intel Sandy Bridge 2600K and 2500K Processors @ [H]

with intel's ipc and clockspeeds they'd need to fully reinvent their cores (AMD would) to even match that OR put out stellar openCL tools for devs and the hardware to make it work (a legit fusion cpu) to really change the game, I really see AMD having to change the game to level the field and I just don't see AMD having enough clout or resources to be able to do that. Perhaps AMD will turn into a graphics only company and a low level (tablet and notebook) cpu designer.
 
I just put together an i7 970 system and this is still giving me the itch to upgrade again already.

Must....wait....for....socket 2011...
 
Now I have to decide if the $100 price premium for the extra threads are worth it. Then again, if a SB build will last as long as my q6600 has, that's not a lot extra to pay. Bought it back in Oct 2007... longest I've ever gone without upgrading the core of my rig!

Now to figure out which board I'll want. The asrock p67 board is interesting since it will allow me to re-use my ultra-120.

And honestly, I really hope AMD pulls a rabbit out of the hat with their upcoming CPUs. We need them around to keep Intel somewhat honest.
 
If Bulldozer doesn't put out comperable numbers I really don't know what AMD has left to bring to the table. It doesn't help that AMD isn't really looking to push the performance side of the market either.
 
Neither of those chips are a rice burner. Man.

The 980x is more like a big liter Dodge Viper while the Sandy Bridge is a more refined Turbo charged BMW M series :D or Lingenfelter Corvette.
 
rive22 said:
Neither of those chips are a rice burner. Man.

The 980x is more like a big liter Dodge Viper while the Sandy Bridge is a more refined Turbo charged BMW M series :D or Lingenfelter Corvette.
Click to expand...

That sounds about right actually.
 
The big boy LGA 2011 chips will be here in about 6-8 months time. I'll make the switch then.
I'm impressed with the power efficiency but like all new launches, the motherboards need time to be refined.
The better models will be released in the coming months.
 
canmanone said:
hey kyle good review. just a quick question. i have a q6600 oc to 3.6gig. where do you think that cpu oc'ed stack up against SB? The reason why im asking is because if my cpu can at least keep up somewhat to SB at their stock speed then any cpu/mobo upgrade would be pointless. tia
Click to expand...

It depends what you are doing really. In the gaming section of the Anandtech review the Q6600 isn't THAT far behind a lot of the time (despite being clocked at only 2.4ghz), so at 3.6 it would be even more competitive. Those tests also use pretty low settings (medium, no AA, etc), so the video card would come in to play more at realistic settings.

Depending on your current video card, you may get a lot more out of a GPU as an upgrade for gaming, and at a cheaper price too.

Of course all non-gaming tests SB blows a Q6600 away, but I know a lot of [H] user are focused mainly on gaming. If money is no object then upgrade everything obviously. But if you want the most bang-for-your-buck upgrade, then you have to carefully consider what you are using your PC for, and what your current hardware is.
 
travbrad said:
It depends what you are doing really. In the gaming section of the Anandtech review the Q6600 isn't THAT far behind a lot of the time (despite being clocked at only 2.4ghz), so at 3.6 it would be even more competitive. Those tests also use pretty low settings (medium, no AA, etc), so the video card would come in to play more at realistic settings.

Depending on your current video card, you may get a lot more out of a GPU as an upgrade for gaming, and at a cheaper price too.

Of course all non-gaming tests SB blows a Q6600 away, but I know a lot of [H] user are focused mainly on gaming. If money is no object then upgrade everything obviously. But if you want the most bang-for-your-buck upgrade, then you have to carefully consider what you are using your PC for, and what your current hardware is.
Click to expand...

I think you need to look at this comparison:

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/53?vs=288

The 2500K does NOT blow out the Q6600, nor the Q9550, etc., out of the water. But it is definitely faster.....duh....

AND, these are not overclocked numbers, so the C2 Quads are much closer than you think, if you have a nice overclock.

.
 
dekruyter said:
I think you need to look at this comparison:

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/53?vs=288

The 2500K does NOT blow out the Q6600, nor the Q9550, etc., out of the water. But it is definitely faster.....duh....

AND, these are not overclocked numbers, so the C2 Quads are much closer than you think, if you have a nice overclock.

.
Click to expand...

Well theres no accepted definition for "blown out of the water" ;) I'm seeing a lot of tests where the 2500K is 2-3x as fast, which to me is blown out of the water. Of course at 3.6ghz it may be a different story, but lets not forgot you can overclock SB too (well some of them anyway :p)

I actually agree with you for the most part though. C2Q are still holding their own very nicely (particularly in gaming), especially considering how old they are now. :)
 
dekruyter said:
I think you need to look at this comparison:

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/53?vs=288

The 2500K does NOT blow out the Q6600, nor the Q9550, etc., out of the water. But it is definitely faster.....duh....

AND, these are not overclocked numbers, so the C2 Quads are much closer than you think, if you have a nice overclock.

.
Click to expand...

There is nothing close about those numbers at all looking at the big picture. The only thing close is the GPU limited benchmarks run at high resolutions....
 
Last edited:
dekruyter said:
I think you need to look at this comparison:

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/53?vs=288

The 2500K does NOT blow out the Q6600, nor the Q9550, etc., out of the water. But it is definitely faster.....duh....

AND, these are not overclocked numbers, so the C2 Quads are much closer than you think, if you have a nice overclock.

.
Click to expand...

If twice as fast isn't blown out of the water on most of those benchies, then what the hell is?

Furthermore, you're going to have to overclock the Q6600 to like 4.8Ghz to get it even. IIIRC 3.6Ghz was more of a standard overclock, so at best you're ~75% of a stock 2500K. Then add on the moddest 4.4Ghz 33% overclock most people are getting on the 2500 and you're right back to blown out of the water. Overclock to overclock
 
dekruyter said:
I think you need to look at this comparison:

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/53?vs=288

The 2500K does NOT blow out the Q6600, nor the Q9550, etc., out of the water. But it is definitely faster.....duh....

AND, these are not overclocked numbers, so the C2 Quads are much closer than you think, if you have a nice overclock.

.
Click to expand...

don't know what Your looking at but those comparisons show how much faster a 2500k is compared to a Q9550 and it's CHEAPER! lol
 
Just people stuck with old CPU's without the cash, means, desire and over-all ability to make the upgrade trying to justify their less than favorable position. Nothing wrong with that. People do it everyday in one form or another. If you don't want to, can't afford the upgrade no one will think any less of you. Just, I dunno, I would be careful trying to justify that the Sandy Bridge isn't a worth while upgrade. The numbers prove all of you wrong. Remember, Hardocp is a hardcore enthusiast web site. By the very nature of being a part of these forums and community, we are almost mandated to upgrade if for no other reason than to see 5Ghz come across our screens on boot-up.

REPRESENT beeyotch.
 
These beasts trade blows with the high end i7 980 wow. Can't wait to see the performance of the LGA2011
 
grilledcheese said:
don't know what Your looking at but those comparisons show how much faster a 2500k is compared to a Q9550 and it's CHEAPER! lol
Click to expand...

Q9550%20vs%20SB%20Capture.JPG


Gray is the 2500K (3.3 GHz), Blue is the Q9550 (2.83GHz), all stock speed........and cpu speed is everything in gaming. Equalizing these cpu speeds could easily make them equal in fps performance.

I don't think this is double, or even 33%........these are the frames per second comparison results.

.
 
Last edited:
SixFootDuo said:
Just people stuck with old CPU's without the cash, means, desire and over-all ability to make the upgrade trying to justify their less than favorable position. Nothing wrong with that. People do it everyday in one form or another. If you don't want to, can't afford the upgrade no one will think any less of you. Just, I dunno, I would be careful trying to justify that the Sandy Bridge isn't a worth while upgrade. The numbers prove all of you wrong. Remember, Hardocp is a hardcore enthusiast web site. By the very nature of being a part of these forums and community, we are almost mandated to upgrade if for no other reason than to see 5Ghz come across our screens on boot-up.

REPRESENT beeyotch.
Click to expand...

QFT
 
dekruyter said:
Gray is the 2500K (3.3 GHz), Blue is the Q9550 (2.83GHz), all stock speed........and cpu speed is everything in gaming.

I don't think this is double, or even 33%........these are the frames per second comparison results.

.
Click to expand...

Bump up that res a bit and you will see a difference
 
Ryan45 said:
Bump up that res a bit and you will see a difference
Click to expand...

If you bump up that "Res", it would be more of a test of the GPU, not the CPU.....this is a single GPU situation, not sli/x-fire, and the cpu will not be stressed that much more by an increase in res.
 
dekruyter said:
If you bump up that "Res", it would be more of a test of the GPU, not the CPU.....this is a single GPU situation, not sli/x-fire, and the cpu will not be stressed that much more by an increase in res.
Click to expand...

If you're happy with your Q9550, then be happy, but don't take a dump on SB just because it blows the Q9550 away. And I mean blows it away in everything...not just FPS.
 
I thought that once you hit 16x12 in gaming, it becomes GPU bound. That's always been my struggle w/upgrading. My thought is that I want a 27" monitor with my 5870.
 
dekruyter said:
Q9550%20vs%20SB%20Capture.JPG


Gray is the 2500K (3.3 GHz), Blue is the Q9550 (2.83GHz), all stock speed........and cpu speed is everything in gaming. Equalizing these cpu speeds could easily make them equal in fps performance.

I don't think this is double, or even 33%........these are the frames per second comparison results.

.
Click to expand...

:facepalm:
 
ivy bridge is going to be even better so to each their own
 
dekruyter said:
I don't think this is double, or even 33%........these are the frames per second comparison results.

.
Click to expand...

No those results aren't double, but no one said they are. Most of the non-gaming tests which you excluded show about double the performance though (at least).

For gaming I agree, but for some reason you are just glossing over everything else as if it doesn't exist, AND ignoring that Sandy Bridge is even more easily overclocked than a C2Q.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/48?vs=288 (C2Q at 3.2ghz, the closest they have to 3.6). SB still has a large advantage, even when you use a stock clocked mid-range part against a CPU that was $1000 (ie, much faster than the typical C2Q).


Here's another interesting one, 3.1ghz dual cores: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/55?vs=289
 
Last edited:
people should quit bitching and upgrade their c2q's if they need the perf. From what I've seen the new SBs are gaming monsters. The SBs are newer, run cooler, OC like crazy, etc and for about 260 for the top end 2600K that's a really good deal. i've got an i5 750 OC'd so I wont upgrade till ivy bridge or later. My cash is short :-(
 
gigatexal said:
people should quit bitching and upgrade their c2q's if they need the perf. From what I've seen the new SBs are gaming monsters. The SBs are newer, run cooler, OC like crazy, etc and for about 260 for the top end 2600K that's a really good deal. i've got an i5 750 OC'd so I wont upgrade till ivy bridge or later. My cash is short :-(
Click to expand...

I agree If you aren't on a Bloomfield/lynnfield/Westmere chip the answer should be obvious.

The above 3 however depending on how the system is configured you will be fine till 2012+.
 
damn, 5ghz would be sick.

and i cant wait to punch my gtx480 in the face with this cpu.
 
Last edited:
Makaveli@BETA said:
Average overclocks seem to be in the 4.4-4.7 range for 24/7 overclocks. Good luck with 5Ghz!
Click to expand...

Some people say that is a BIOS limitation (multiplier wall), and a few companies have released new BIOSes that reportedly open up higher range overclocking. There's a thread on here somewhere about it.
 
I just want to say that I'm so happy that 'regular' overclocking is back, even if we pay extra. I've been sick of all this FSB/BCLK nonsense since the Pentium II.

OK, now I've got that off my chest.
 
Kyle or anyone...

So any informations regarding the life of 1155 platform?
or will it be quick and short like 1156 ?
Wondering about it's future upgrade on this new platform.
 
gigatexal said:
people should quit bitching and upgrade their c2q's if they need the perf. From what I've seen the new SBs are gaming monsters. The SBs are newer, run cooler, OC like crazy, etc and for about 260 for the top end 2600K that's a really good deal. i've got an i5 750 OC'd so I wont upgrade till ivy bridge or later. My cash is short :-(
Click to expand...

Who's bitching?....we're evaluating test data in this thread, that's all. Please don't get all huffy, and make it personal. This kind of discussion happens every time there is a new cpu introduced by Intel or Amd, does it not? Get over it. It's all useful information, as long as it's accurate and honest.

It does not take a rocket scientist to say that a new generation chip is faster/better than an older generation chip, but it does take some thought to determine, by "how much", and how this may help w/ an upgrade decision.

If I was to build a new pc now, it would most likely be a Sandy Bridge or an Ivy Bridge....Big deal.........it's a no brainer. Why?....because it's the latest and greatest.

If that's all we are talking about in this thread, whether a SNB is faster/better than a C2Q or i5, or i7, then there's really not much to talk about.....and that would be boring.

Also, keep in mind, the SNB is the "Tock" in the Tick-Tock cycle of Intel....some people like the bigger jump in the Tick, rather than the refinement in the Tock.

.
 
XXGG said:
Kyle or anyone...

So any informations regarding the life of 1155 platform?
or will it be quick and short like 1156 ?
Wondering about it's future upgrade on this new platform.
Click to expand...

I'm wondering too
 
XXGG said:
Kyle or anyone...

So any informations regarding the life of 1155 platform?
or will it be quick and short like 1156 ?
Wondering about it's future upgrade on this new platform.
Click to expand...
s1155 should be the consumer socket until Haswell arrives in Q1'2013. Provided that PCI-E 3.0 is pin compatible with v2.0 (and I don't know either way if it is) I wouldn't be surprised to see support for that in P77 alongside native SATA 6Gbps and USB 3.0. Probably not much else to highlight in the next s1155 chipset, however.
 
dekruyter said:
Who's bitching?....we're evaluating test data in this thread, that's all. Please don't get all huffy, and make it personal. This kind of discussion happens every time there is a new cpu introduced by Intel or Amd, does it not? Get over it. It's all useful information, as long as it's accurate and honest.

It does not take a rocket scientist to say that a new generation chip is faster/better than an older generation chip, but it does take some thought to determine, by "how much", and how this may help w/ an upgrade decision.

If I was to build a new pc now, it would most likely be a Sandy Bridge or an Ivy Bridge....Big deal.........it's a no brainer. Why?....because it's the latest and greatest.

If that's all we are talking about in this thread, whether a SNB is faster/better than a C2Q or i5, or i7, then there's really not much to talk about.....and that would be boring.

Also, keep in mind, the SNB is the "Tock" in the Tick-Tock cycle of Intel....some people like the bigger jump in the Tick, rather than the refinement in the Tock.

.
Click to expand...

I thought ivy bridge is gonna be the tock, and SB is the tick.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top