i3-4160 vs i7-2600 (non-K) for gaming

[Blue_Max]

I have some options open to me and I'd like to hear your thoughts.

I have the option to buy a used i7-2600 (non-K) and use it on an H61-class motherboard scrounged from a Dell machine, so no front panel connections, etc. USB2, SATA 3GB, not even a proper fan header.

Or a dirt-cheap i3-4160 and spiffy new LGA1150 motherboard with USB3.1, SATA6, working connections, etc.

(Yeah, we're only talking about $100 difference between "having it all" by getting a new board for the i7-2600...) :$

I've done as many comparisons as I can online... sure, benchmark utilities look great on the i7, but I never run ANY of those types of apps. Even unzipping files are just small things, so 30 vs 60 seconds for the occasional unpacking of a download means nothing to me. My Excel spreadsheets are too small of consequence for the benefit.

This is all about web browsing and gaming.

Gaming comparisons seem to be within 10% of each other, sometimes more, sometimes less. The i3-4160 is 2 generations newer tech with faster single-core performance. Fallout 4 is the only game in my library that has been proven to like more threads. Space Engineers is the big title around my place and doesn't have much info available... it's claimed to be a single-threaded game but every CPU I've run it on seems to jump to 100% use no matter what. *shrug*

Anyways, your thoughts are very welcome here!

 

[VirtualLarry]

I guess, I feel that platform features are important for a "daily driver".

Much like the difference between driving a Cadillac with all the amenities of a smooth ride, versus using a spartan stock car for your daily driver.

Edit: What about a Z97 1150 board, with a PCI-E M.2 slot? Those are amazingly fast, and might speed up your web browsing slightly.

Edit: You can always drop in a 4790K later on, if / when prices drop slightly.

 

[waltchan]

Unlike H81, H61 only has SATA II 3.0 G/PS. You need at least B75 minimum for SATA III.

 

[Blue_Max]

Unlike H81, H61 only has SATA II 3.0 G/PS. You need at least B75 minimum for SATA III.

Mentioned that in the OP... and it's a big consideration. As VL mentioned, the day-to-day benefits of newer technology shows itself. I'm leaning towards the i3 both for being 2 generations newer, but also to not be running a less-than-perfect system where none of the front panel stuff works (due to it being a scrounged Dell mobo) and having to press F1 to skip an error on every single boot. Just knowing that stuff is going on will tarnish the experience.

That or choose "neither" and just sit on the whole idea until I can find a super deal on an i5-K overclocking combo... after all, my number one app, Space Engineers, benefits most from pure clock speed.

Perhaps grabbing an overclocking board + this super-cheap i3 as a very functional crutch. Pity you can't overclock that generation of i3.

 

[AtenRa]

What GPU will you be using ?

 

[Blue_Max]

What GPU will you be using ?

A GTX 970... though it's tempting to sell it off with the current rig and go to a smaller-sized, cool & quiet GTX 950/960.

Wish I could support underdog AMD but the performance just isn't there.

 

[AtenRa]

With the GTX 970 i would go for the Core i7 2600K

Why do you want to downgrade to 950/960 ??

 

[Blue_Max]

With the GTX 970 i would go for the Core i7 2600K

Why do you want to downgrade to 950/960 ??

My option was the NON-K variant, so I think I've just talked myself out of the old 2600 to aim for sheer clock speed. i5-xxx0K is the tentative plan.

My current GTX 970 is speedy but I had a 960 before it (which I couldn't resist selling at profit!) and I'm just not feeling the big world of difference I expected to feel when moving up while still gaming @ 1080P. Surely an i5-2400 isn't going to be that much of a limiting factor.

The other reason to consider the downgrade is the noise that 970 makes... too loud for my liking. Plus the lower power requirements and temperature will aid in my pet project of making a powerful machine I can move from home to work pretty regularly and easily. Small machines get hot fast.

 

[AtenRa]

Well, why dont you go for 1151 Skylake mini-itx and wait for the new 14/16nm GPUs ??? they should come on small format and with better perf/watt than the 28nm Maxwell.

 

[nerp]

Skylake is good for you if you're just using it for web/office work. Built in gfx on the board should be good enough. Then you don't even need a video card.

 

[Blue_Max]

Well, why dont you go for 1151 Skylake mini-itx and wait for the new 14/16nm GPUs ??? they should come on small format and with better perf/watt than the 28nm Maxwell.

Skylake is good for you if you're just using it for web/office work. Built in gfx on the board should be good enough. Then you don't even need a video card.

"Gaming" is in the very title. Still, AR's idea of 1151 Skylake isn't bad... Intel 530 video would be just barely tolerable enough for some older games like Fallout:NV... just enough to hold out for the new NV cards around the corner.

If I were to go that route I'd have to go i5-6600k right from the get-go. Even so, that would cost more than double that of a used i5-2500k rig. I won't pass up a deal like that, now that I think of it.

So the $40 i3 is looking tasty... get a good overclocking board plus the cheapo i3 now, get an overclocker i5/i7 when a tasty deal comes up in the not-too-distant future.

The more I think about it, the old i7-2600 (non-K) with no working front ports and annoying boot errors to skip through.... naaaah. Every boot sequence would just make me a little less happy about the choice, eventually hating it completely. :twisted:

Decision's not final until the purchase is made though. It's good to bounce ideas off your heads and see what comes back...

 

[VirtualLarry]

I just finished playing a few minutes of Skyrim on my i3-6100 and HD 530. It auto-detected @ 1080P as "Low". But it was quite playable. I think my 260X on my Q9300 auto-detected at "Ultra" by comparison.

 

[Yuriman]

1150 ITX boards are starting to dry up and get expensive, so if you're planning to go small, the best time to do it on 1150 was yesterday.

I think an i3 will provide an adequate experience and is suitable for SFF, while the 2600 is less so, though would probably still work fine - assuming you can find a motherboard for it.

 

[dbcooper1]

With the right BIOS, your 2600 non K will likely go to 4.2; I've had 3 of them and they all did without changing the voltage.

 

[skipsneeky2]

With the right BIOS, your 2600 non K will likely go to 4.2; I've had 3 of them and they all did without changing the voltage.

What motherboard have you used to get those results?Has to have been a Z77 i am guessing?I only got 3.8Ghz out of my i5 2500 non k with a Asus Maximus V Gene Z77.I enabled the max multi of x38 and those were the results.Did you force a x39 multi and toss in a little blck oc as well?

Do to unfortunate events,i no longer have the Z77 but a H61 from Gigabyte and its letting me use a x34 multi giving me a full load 3.4Ghz vs the typical 3.3Ghz.

 

[dbcooper1]

I remember the Z68 and Z77 working and the chipsets everyone wanted at the time but there may have been others. I don't remember the specific motherboards but there was a setting called multicore enhancement or something like that and different manufacturers might have called it something else; I'm sure you can still find the info out there. It allowed overclocking by rated multiplier plus 4; not fantastic but a gain for not a lot of effort nonetheless.

 

[Denithor]

Why exactly would you be stuck with a crappy Dell board if you go with the i7? Couldn't you just get a Z68/Z77 board to use? Then you could OC somewhat (max turbo speed + 400mhz). Still not up to full potential of a "K" CPU but...still no slouch.

 

[Blue_Max]

Well, someone's offering me a 2500k + z68 + 8GB mATX combo (perfect!) for about $150 US... a steal of a deal... unless it's been overclocked to death. Less than half the price of a new combo... but we're talking about something that's been overclocked for 3-4+ years now. What'cha guys think - worth the risk? (If this was a non-overclocking combo I'd have no second thoughts - CPU's rarely die, motherboards though...

This is the board. Not bad. http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128495

 

[dbcooper1]

Is this someone you can ask questions of with a reasonable expectation of getting truthful answers about the system?

 

[Blue_Max]

Is this someone you can ask questions of with a reasonable expectation of getting truthful answers about the system?

Heh... delay for a moment and an opportunity will pass one by. I think there's a good reason the 2500k combo was selling so cheap.

A safely-used 2600 non-K plus new ITX board would be about $225 US all-in.
A new i5-K plus z-class board would almost invariably game better but cost almost $400 US. I'm leaning in that direction though... if I'm going to bother spending the money, it better be a BIG jump and I don't think the i5-2400 to i7-2600 is worth the time, effort, and cash.

 

[lyssword]

2600 is consistently faster than even haswell i5 in newer games, it will always be significantly faster than 4160 i3

 

[Geforce man]

If you are able to source a decent: p67, z68, z77 board, I'd take the 2600 non k. You can go 4 bins above the max turbo, which I think is 3800Mhz, so that would give you 4200Mhz (? I'm not 100% sure on this, this is from memory). That would be 4c8t @ 4200Mhz, which should stomp anything that i3 would do for you in games that take advantage of more than 4 threads, which are becoming a lot these days. The problem becomes, that you may lose out on some newer features, native usb3, m.2, etc.

I am stuck on my 5 year old p67 board, and the processing power is more than enough, but I am itching to upgrade to get some of the newer tech that is out there, just having a super hard time justifying it.

my .02!

 

[dbcooper1]

Yes, the 2600 will top out at 4.2 with a single core (assuming you don't increase bclk) but with all four cores loaded I think it was 3.9. Still pretty good for a CPU not known for overclocking, especially if you can make use of the hyperthreading. And temperatures were relatively low under load as well; I think they were in the high 60's and the three I built were using those closed loop corsair prefab coolers exhausted to the back of the case. Last I heard, all three were still in service and overclocked.