If you bought 2600k over 2500k were your reasons?

[Hulk]

I'm curious how 2600k buyers rank the following three choices?

Possible better binning and overclock of the 2600k.

Extra 2MB cache.

Hyperthreading.


I'm considering the 2600k but mainly for the hyperthreading. Is it possible that Intel started pulling the best chips for the faster variants of the 2600k to come along in the months to come or are the current 2600k's the best Intel has from this process currently?

 

[Castiel]

Would have regretted it down the road

 

[ShadeZeRO]

I'm curious how 2600k buyers rank the following three choices?

Possible better binning and overclock of the 2600k.

Extra 2MB cache.

Hyperthreading.


I'm considering the 2600k but mainly for the hyperthreading. Is it possible that Intel started pulling the best chips for the faster variants of the 2600k to come along in the months to come or are the current 2600k's the best Intel has from this process currently?

In order:

Possible better binning and overclock of the 2600k.
Hyperthreading.
Extra 2MB cache

 

[Hogan773]

I'm curious how 2600k buyers rank the following three choices?

Possible better binning and overclock of the 2600k.

Extra 2MB cache.

Hyperthreading.


I'm considering the 2600k but mainly for the hyperthreading. Is it possible that Intel started pulling the best chips for the faster variants of the 2600k to come along in the months to come or are the current 2600k's the best Intel has from this process currently?

You mean they're ALREADY stockpiling "best" chips so they can sell them as 2700Ks later?

 

[Hulk]

You mean they're ALREADY stockpiling "best" chips so they can sell them as 2700Ks later?

I was just wondering if that might be the case.

 

[poohbear]

OP has a good question. Im actually waiting for a 6 core sandy bridge. Does hyperthreading on the 2600k negate the need for 6 cores? I imagine no, please tell me if that's not the case though. Thanks!

 

[Markfw]

hyperthreading

 

[Mugenx]

i haven't upgraded to Sandy yet, as I am pooling resources for it as we speak. yes, not everyone is made of gold!

my reason: for the first time ever. i won't be getting yesterdays technology today. and e-peen, too!

 

[nOOky]

In order:

Possible better binning and overclock of the 2600k.
Hyperthreading.
Extra 2MB cache

This, and I've done extensive research and it seems they overclock just a touch better. I usually keep my builds for about 2 years, so I would probably be regretting a lower purchase a few months from now. I'm sure an i5-2500K is more than adequate, I just wanted the best.

 

[Jumpem]

I haven't bought onr, but my reasoning would be: hyperthreading, cache size, higher clock speeds.

 

[Hogan773]

I got 2600K "just because"

Because I've had current PC for SIX years (that's a long time, on these boards at least), I've got some extra fundage, and I while I don't NEED the extra oomph it offers, I also don't want to have that little nagging regret six months into it....why didn't I just spend a little more and get the big gun. Plus the MicroCenter pricing was pretty good on the chip.

 

[faxon]

HT, possibly better OC vs 2500k, 2MB$. My CPU spends most of it's time running SETI@home, and the extra threads will make a huge difference. The other 2 will help with gaming performance as the games I all play are incredibly CPU bound for the most part

 

[Spike]

I almost bought the 2600k for all the reasons above. In the end I decided to spend the extra $100 on an SSD which beneifted my system much greater than the cache and HT. However, if I had the money you can bet I would have bought the 2600k instead. Still, 4.4ghz was my original min acceptable OC goal so I'm pretty happy.

 

[Chaoticlusts]

I'm still tossing up between them..at one point there was rumours going around that the 2600k came with that cool heatsink in the reviews while the 2500k came with a more normal stock heatsink...seems that was false from what i've gathered and they both come with the crappy heatsink which sadly makes it a harder decision...basically I'm going to have to wait till all the bits come out I want and see how much spare cash I can justify in my budget but from what I understand of the performance difference and the fact that it's about a 50% increase in price....it's hard to justify the 2600k unless you already are buying very nice components in every other area

 

[Dark Shroud]

Hyperthreading and the extra cache give the CPU a little longer usability life span for me. I tend to keep my PC builds for a few years. My next planned build will be no less than an 22nm Octo-core CPU a year from now at the earliest. Depending on Intel's next official road map announcement.

 

[Dadofamunky]

I'm OK with settling on the 2500K after a lot of agonizing. Ivy Bridge might be my reward for waiting. I do know, either way, I upgrade to a 2600K down the road or to Ivy Bridge. I don't care that much about a CPU swap. A board swap, now that's a bit more trouble, as I know from being mid-build right now.

 

[Beace]

I upgrade my computer roughly every 3-4 years (new CPU, MB, Memory, probably graphics card). So when I do upgrade I want to make sure it'll last a long time, without going crazy and spending 1000€ on a CPU or anything like that. For me the biggest point was HT, and then the extra cache and possible binning. Just feels more future proof.

 

[T101]

I did go for the 2600k instead of the 2500k. And I have not regretted it. Granted, I do a lot of video encoding where hyperthreading really do some good. Considering the overclocking reached on the 2500ks vs the 2600ks I have seen, and actually reached myself, I dont regret it even if the hyperthreading is not affecting performance.

 

[smakme7757]

I got it because it is the fastest chip on the platform while still offering great value!

 

[VigilanteCS]

I really agonized over this decision too (except I wound up going 2500k). I figured I never do anything too demanding except for gaming, w hich the 2500k is perfectly fine fore. The fact that I got the CPU for $40 helps too.

 

[Edrick]

I got the 2600 for $259.99.

I decided to get the 2600 over the 2500k because of the 2MB and HT.
I decided to get the 2600 over the 2600k because of TXT and VT-d. Plus it cost me $40 less. I can still overclock to 4.2-3.9, which is what I planned to do anyways. I am not an extreme OCer, I like to keep it mild.

 

[poohbear]

So what actually benefits from HT? A 6core sandy bridge (when they're released in future) would be superior to a 4core one with HT right?

 

[Edrick]

A 6core sandy bridge (when they're released in future) would be superior to a 4core one with HT right?

Yes.

If & When. And there will be a nice cost difference too.

 

[scrubman]

2600k for Hyperthreading to help performance with video that I have just started getting into. Also to help justify the upgrade from quadcore to quadcore I needed that little something extra called hyperthreading. Then knowing how much caches size matters it helped getting that extra 2meg. I didn't have concern for overclocking capabilities.

 

[GprophetB]

I got a 2600k because of hyperthreading and the price wasn't a huge omg difference.