I got a 2600k because of hyperthreading and the price wasn't a huge omg difference.
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?
You mean they're ALREADY stockpiling "best" chips so they can sell them as 2700Ks later?
With 2011 socket, and IB around the corner, it's a tough choice.
If you call Q4 '11 and Q1 '12 "around the corner", then sure. Then when IB comes out, Haswell will be "around the corner" too.
Intel really made this a touch decision. If the price premium was $50 or $75 to move to the 2600k then for me it would be a no brainer. Same if the premium was $125 or more, I'd go with the 2500k.
But $100 really makes it a tough decision. You DO get Hyperthreading, more cache, a little bump in clockspeed, the possibility of a more "cherry" chip, and knowing that you have the latest and greatest. To me Hyperthreading is becoming more of a benefit with every passing day since it only seems logical that as new applications hit the shelves (web?) and old ones are rewritten, they will be optimized for multicore computing. So in 2 or 3 years those 4 extra logical cores may keep things a little more current for those of us on the long (4 to 5 year) update cycles.
So when are those "Z" boards coming? Q2 right?
both the 2500k and 2600k will be equally as irrelevant before then...I plan to keep this new computer until early 2019 so I bought a 2600K because it has longer legs.
this is exactly what I was thinking since gaming is my main concern. now for those that actually use apps that take advantage of the HT then I can understand going 2600k though.2600k is not worth $100 more in my opinion.
Sure I'd buy if I truly could afford it though.
By the time the 2600k has a real advantage over
The 2500k, we will upgrading again