• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Intel CPU question: E8400 vs i5-2500K

thecoffeeguy

thecoffeeguy

Senior member
So simple question.
They are relatively close in price.

The E8400 is $170
The i5-2500K is $225.

$55 dollar difference.

So I am curious, which would be the CPU to buy these days?

If someone were not a overclocker, but just used their PC for gaming and the usual internet and email, but wanted couple years out of a rig, which would be the CPU to get?

It would appear that the i5 would be the way to go. Am I wrong?

Just trying to think about my next step here when I buy my next goodies.

One thing I meant to ask:

Why is the Q9550 SO much more expensieve than the above? I know its a quad core and all, but its A LOT more.

Thx.

TCG
 
The i5 2500K is hands down the better choice out of the two. Even without overclocking it, it's much faster than the E8400 and with four cores will serve you much better down the road.
 
The e8400 and q9550 are legacy outdated chips. The reason they are priced so high is probably because the supply is drying up.
There is no reason to purchase either(or any 775 chip) for a brand new system. Even the i3 2100 would blow the e8400 away.
 
2500k: if you live by a microcenter it is $179 plus tax.
You can also find it for sale new and used for $180-$200 on forums and ebay.
 
thecoffeeguy said:
So simple question.
They are relatively close in price.

The E8400 is $170
The i5-2500K is $225.

$55 dollar difference.

So I am curious, which would be the CPU to buy these days?

If someone were not a overclocker, but just used their PC for gaming and the usual internet and email, but wanted couple years out of a rig, which would be the CPU to get?

It would appear that the i5 would be the way to go. Am I wrong?

Just trying to think about my next step here when I buy my next goodies.

One thing I meant to ask:

Why is the Q9550 SO much more expensieve than the above? I know its a quad core and all, but its A LOT more.

Thx.

TCG
Click to expand...

2500K (by a large margin) is the better chip. if you expect a few years out of your system the 2500K will serve you a lot better than the e8400.

obviously there is a cost involved in changing platforms as well, but this is to be expected. if you wish to stay on lga775, then i would recommend the q9550 over the e8400. both are great overclockers though, and so is the 2500K. there is a lot of performance to be gained by overclocking and the 2500K is the simplest one to perform it on.

the q9550S is a chip binned for low power characteristics. it commands a premium so that it may be used in smaller devices such as in an all-in-one pc or small form factor pc.
 
thecoffeeguy said:
So I am curious, which would be the CPU to buy these days?

If someone were not a overclocker, but just used their PC for gaming and the usual internet and email, but wanted couple years out of a rig, which would be the CPU to get?
Click to expand...

if someone were not an overclocker, why are they even looking at the 2500k? (its unlocked) go w/ the 2500 which is locked and cheaper.

Anyways, the 2500k is more powerful than the C2D, better architecture, and more power efficient. Just look at benchmarks. U're comparing stuff from 3 years ago to stuff from this year?
 
^ The only other difference in-between the 2500 and the 2500k is that the 2500's GPU is only half as powerful (IIRC) as the 2500k's. Not important if you're going to add a discrete graphics card but may be important if you're going to stick with the on-die GPU.
 
Let me put it this way, Ihad a e8400@ 3.8Ghz ran resident evil benchmark on a 1440x900 monitor with my 5870 and got an average of 98.1fps, did the test again when igot the i5 2500k stockspeed same settings and 189.3fps. that should give you a hint.
 
Necc said:
Let me put it this way, Ihad a e8400@ 3.8Ghz ran resident evil benchmark on a 1440x900 monitor with my 5870 and got an average of 98.1fps, did the test again when igot the i5 2500k stockspeed same settings and 189.3fps. that should give you a hint.
Click to expand...


eeeeehhh i don't know about that man, that's kinda close, LOL 🙂
 
Perhaps to put things in perspective, I got the E8400 about 3 years ago for cheaper than it is now. I'm shocked every time I'm browsing around and I see that.
 
A better question would be, E8400 vs Core i3 2100

$170 vs. $125.

Oh and did I mention the Core i3 2100 still dominate it (E8400) and most of the quad core LGA775 socket processor?

All for $125.

I found that out when I was doing a little research on upgrading my current system or build a new one.

For me upgrading the current system would cost $250 (New Socket 775 Intel QUAD core Q8400 $170, and 4 GB of ram @ $75)

Or....

Get a new mobo, core i3 2100, and 8gb of ram for $362 and you have a system that will dominate any core 2 duo/quad on the LGA775. And oh yea, it's future proof in case I want to upgrade to a better sandy bridge processor in the future.
 
Last edited:
You can get it for cheaper sometimes at Microcenter when they do the $99 i3-2100 + $20 H67 mobo. Add $80 8gb DDR3 from newegg and that's $200 before tax and shipping...
 
Necc said:
Let me put it this way, Ihad a e8400@ 3.8Ghz ran resident evil benchmark on a 1440x900 monitor with my 5870 and got an average of 98.1fps, did the test again when igot the i5 2500k stockspeed same settings and 189.3fps. that should give you a hint.
Click to expand...
that does give a clear example of how much stronger the 2500k is but what genius would play games at 1440x900 with a 5870? 😱
 
toyota said:
that does give a clear example of how much stronger the 2500k is but what genius would play games at 1440x900 with a 5870? 😱
Click to expand...
Well Idid an Overhaul this month and the monitor is the last thing on my check list. I already ordered a Dell U2410, its arriving nextweek.
 
Well 170 dollars for a E8400 is a huge rip off. Soo many quad chips out there with good prices, Where are you doing your shopping at ? Will it be worth it, yes it will be! Your going to have 8 logical cores , instead of 2 physical cores

225 dollars for i5 ,, go to www.amazon.com and search for that I bet you its much cheaper @ amazon .... 225 is a bit high. so is 170 outragously high price.. sighs,,,

thecoffeeguy said:
So simple question.
They are relatively close in price.

The E8400 is $170
The i5-2500K is $225.

$55 dollar difference.

So I am curious, which would be the CPU to buy these days?

If someone were not a overclocker, but just used their PC for gaming and the usual internet and email, but wanted couple years out of a rig, which would be the CPU to get?

It would appear that the i5 would be the way to go. Am I wrong?

Just trying to think about my next step here when I buy my next goodies.

One thing I meant to ask:

Why is the Q9550 SO much more expensieve than the above? I know its a quad core and all, but its A LOT more.

Thx.

TCG
Click to expand...
 
tweakboy said:
Well 170 dollars for a E8400 is a huge rip off. Soo many quad chips out there with good prices, Where are you doing your shopping at ? Will it be worth it, yes it will be! Your going to have 8 logical cores , instead of 2 physical cores
Click to expand...

the i5-2500K has 4 logical cores, not 8. It does not have Hyperthreading.
 
Anandtech Bench has lots of answers for you 🙂

E8400 vs i5 2500k:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/56?vs=288

The i5 is almost three times as fast in some stuff.

E8400 vs i3 2100:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/56?vs=289

i3 2100 still wins on every test, sometimes by as much as 60%.

Q9550 vs i3 2100:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/50?vs=289

This actually surprised me a bit... i3 STILL wins at everything except the heavily-threaded rendering benchmarks where the quad cores in the Q9550 allow it to pull ahead of the dual core i3 2100.

LOL, my Q6600 is put to shame, it only beats the dual core i3 2100 by like 10% in one benchmark... meanining speed per core has nearly doubled from a high-end/midrange 2007 part to a el-cheapo 2011 part.

Necc said:
Well Idid an Overhaul this month and the monitor is the last thing on my check list. I already ordered a Dell U2410, its arriving nextweek.
Click to expand...

Excellent choice, I have one and it's fantastic. IPS panels are worth the extra money hands-down. My only regret is I'd kinda like to try out 3D glasses, but I can just buy a second cheap 120 hz monitor later... or a 3d-capable projector.
 
Last edited:
evilspoons said:
Anandtech Bench has lots of answers for you 🙂

E8400 vs i5 2500k:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/56?vs=288

The i5 is almost three times as fast in some stuff.

E8400 vs i3 2100:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/56?vs=289

i3 2100 still wins on every test, sometimes by as much as 60%.

Q9550 vs i3 2100:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/50?vs=289

This actually surprised me a bit... i3 STILL wins at everything except the heavily-threaded rendering benchmarks where the quad cores in the Q9550 allow it to pull ahead of the dual core i3 2100.

LOL, my Q6600 is put to shame, it only beats the dual core i3 2100 by like 10% in one benchmark... meanining speed per core has nearly doubled from a high-end/midrange 2007 part to a el-cheapo 2011 part.



Excellent choice, I have one and it's fantastic. IPS panels are worth the extra money hands-down. My only regret is I'd kinda like to try out 3D glasses, but I can just buy a second cheap 120 hz monitor later... or a 3d-capable projector.
Click to expand...

can't really use the gaming benches. Who plays at that low resolution it was benched on
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top