• 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 i5-2500K or 3550?

M

mogans

Member
Hi,

Having a small confusion whether to go for Intel i5-2500K or 3550?
Not interested in overclocking.Just need a good performance in multi tasking and gaming.
 
IMO, spend the extra $20 on the unlocked 3570k over the 3550. Even if you don't plan to overclock now, you may in the future, especially since you said this is for a gaming machine.
 
While you may not overclock right now, having the ability to overclock in the future adds value to your processor investment. A year down the road having the ability to go into the Bios and change the multiplier to 42 or 43 and get a processor that runs 100s MHz faster for $20 more is a heck of deal. So I would go with the Intel® Core™ i5-3570K.
 
Grab the 2500k so your motherboard will be cheaper. Youll see no diff with the 3550. You save money and you get a known awesome chip!! in the 2500k. All your game will run to the video cards fullest power.. enjoy. gl,
 
Last edited:
Ivy is faster per clock. The Ivy vs Sandy argument revolves around Sandy typically having a higher over clocking cap. At stock I'd take Ivy any day, it's both faster and runs cooler.
 
I'd also recommend a 2500K or a 3570K. You can overclock locked chips such as the 2500, but you are limited to about +500mhz. That is +400mhz from increasing the multiplier plus another 100mhz from a small BCLK adjustment. I am running an i5-2500 (work machine) at 3.925ghz (38x103.3). I wasn't allowed a 2500K because I made it too clear I would overclock it and well... with simulation work, any computer crashes could set me back a full day or more. And that's the risk that comes with overclocking. But I did what I could with the plain 2500. 😀
 
The higher price I spent buying the 2500k vs the 2500 was one of the BEST decisions I've ever made. Get the 3570k.
 
Get the 3570K.

Boot into the BIOS set the multi to 40 and Save & Exit. It's so easy even a caveman can do it. I wouldn't call this overclocking... I'd call it ... spoonfeedclocking. Stock heatsink is sufficient for 3570K @ 4.0.

If it is only a $20 dollar difference between the 3570K and 2500K then it will be the best gamble you've made. Even if the multi change don't work you can just set everything to default and carry on.
 
TJCS said:
Get the 3570K.

Boot into the BIOS set the multi to 40 and Save & Exit. It's so easy even a caveman can do it. I wouldn't call this overclocking... I'd call it ... spoonfeedclocking. Stock heatsink is sufficient for 3570K @ 4.0.

If it is only a $20 dollar difference between the 3570K and 2500K then it will be the best gamble you've made. Even if the multi change don't work you can just set everything to default and carry on.
Click to expand...
For mild overclocks, you can use the 3550 just as well (as long as you're on a Z-series motherboard). The 3550 with +4 overclocking will turbo to 4.1 on 1/2 cores and 3.9 on 3/4 cores. Use the $20 for something else - more RAM, better SSD or just save it for the next machine.

And "real overclocking" doesn't make much sense given IVBs heat problems. To get IVB to 4.5 or higher you need to use a real good cooler, which costs $30-50. So @4.5 GHz you can hope for an average 13% performance increase for a 24% price increase, when taking the costs for CPU+cooler into account. Not to mention increased energy costs, which may also add up to a few $/€; depending on country (=electricity costs) and usage patterns, that may be an additional $10-40 over a 3yr life-span. Not big bucks, but real costs nonetheless.

That's why I settled for the 3550 on my new build. While I was sorely tempted by both the 2500K and the 3570K, they're not rational choices if you view your computer as a tool instead of a toy.
 
Yuriman said:
Ivy is faster per clock. The Ivy vs Sandy argument revolves around Sandy typically having a higher over clocking cap. At stock I'd take Ivy any day, it's both faster and runs cooler.
Click to expand...

The argument is that stock Ivy Bridge thermal interface material is crap compared to Sandy, overclocking or not, if you leave the stock tim on you'd be better off with Sandy.
 
BD231 said:
The argument is that stock Ivy Bridge thermal interface material is crap compared to Sandy, overclocking or not, if you leave the stock tim on you'd be better off with Sandy.
Click to expand...

While true, that's beyond the scope of the OP's question.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top