Time to upgrade your Core i5 2500K?

[Carfax83]

Great video from Digital Foundry which discusses the viability of the venerable Core i5 2500K in today's games.

He also discusses relevant factors like memory speed, and driver overhead between NVidia and AMD...

Personally, I don't recommend any of the i5 series for high end gaming. The i7 series is starting to have a much more pronounced advantage these days over the i5, since the majority of game engines will use more than four threads..

 

[RaistlinZ]

I wish he would have tested a hex-core.

 

[escrow4]

I'm debating whether any of these AAA games are worth keeping my 5930K around.

 

[Ken g6]

Why are they comparing to an overclocked i5 6500 non-K, when Intel yanked that ability from the latest microcodes?

 

[pantsaregood]

If anything, this shows that an overclocked Core i5-2500K is still quite capable. My roommate is running an Core i5-2300 at 3.3 GHz (maximum multiplier) with a Geforce GTX 960 and the lowest his framerate drops to when running Witcher 3 is around 50 FPS.

Even a Core i5-750 at 4.0 GHz could probably push "mostly" 60 FPS gaming at this point. We're finally hitting a point where the Core 2 Quad Q6600s and Q8400s running at 4.0 GHz are limited to 30 FPS for a good experience.

Q6600 is over nine years old. You can feasibly still game on a Q6600 running at 4.0 GHz.

Of course, pushing a Q6600 to 4.0 GHz would put its TDP above 175W for performance that's (at best) comparable to a 35W Skylake Core i3.

 

[SPBHM]

Why are they comparing to an overclocked i5 6500 non-K, when Intel yanked that ability from the latest microcodes?

you can expect a 6600K to perform the same at that clock, also they tested a stock 6500 to

stock 2500K should be a good match for a 960 at best it seems.
also the AMD Tomb Raider performance was horrible.

 

[skipsneeky2]

Moving to 1440p or 4k from 1080p and pretty much even a stock i5 2500 is going to be far from being the bottleneck at least with the current single gpus.I would rather be gpu limited with a high end resolution then be cpu limited at 1080p or lower.

I think eventually what will force people like me to upgrade my i5 2500 is perhaps a new video card that requires a new type of slot.

 

[Zstream]

Meh... Still mainly on my i5 2400 with a 270->270x and have no issues playing any game so far. Granted, I mainly play bf4 and civ5 but talk to me when there is something that looks much better than bf4 and I might be tempted.

 

[SPBHM]

Meh... Still mainly on my i5 2400 with a 270->270x and have no issues playing any game so far. Granted, I mainly play bf4 and civ5 but talk to me when there is something that looks much better than bf4 and I might be tempted.

with this combination I would think is possible to be both GPU limited and CPU limited very easily, but it's very dependent on settings and resolution, but yes it should be good, I run an even slower CPU (i5 2310) and while it's slow for some games (like MMOs), it's not to bad, specially if you are willing to use a FPS lock.

but, do you use Mantle on BF4? just wondering if people actually still use it or if it's dead.

 

[Carfax83]

I wish he would have tested a hex-core.

Yeah I agree. A guy on YouTube benchmarked a 5930K vs a 6700K with both at 4.4ghz, but the games he uses are kind of old if you ask me other than maybe GTA V.

The latest cutting edge games like the Division, scale really good on hex and octa core CPUs..

I'm debating whether any of these AAA games are worth keeping my 5930K around.

You're thinking about selling it? I think that will be a mistake. The 5930K is an exceptional processor, and I speak as an owner myself. But if you don't need or want the CPU power, then I can see why you might want to get rid of it.

 

[frozentundra123456]

I am still gaming on an i5 2320. I have been able to play W3, DAI, and FO4. Of course my limiting factor is the HD7770 video card. Even then, I was able to play at 1080 except for W3 which I ran on my secondary monitor at 1440 x 900. I am sure if I upgraded the video card I would start to see cpu limitations, but there just arent any new games coming out that interest me enough to upgrade.

 

[know of fence]

Personally, I don't recommend any of the i5 series for high end gaming. The i7 series is starting to have a much more pronounced advantage these days over the i5, since the majority of game engines will use more than four threads..

Timing
This is the only thing that a buyer really has control over. Before the new generations of gaming-cards is released an upgrade is quite a bad move.

Value
How long can Intel get away with their i-core SKUs and selling dual cores on the desktop. People are pushed into the 350$ i7, because it's the only CPU that offers 8 threads to match console ports. It's just like raising prices!
We've seen the massive improvements (comparable to a 500-700 MHz increase) that an eDRAM L4 cache brings with it especially when it comes to frame times, but Intel is holding that back, probably because it will permanently increase cost.

Successors
The Z170 chipset will likely see two generations of CPUs that are bound to be slightly/much better than SL, which doesn't bode well for the long term value of 6700K.

Power efficiency and Heat
Skylake offers no improvement in that regard compared to the previous node. AT review even states that it appears to be getting hotter faster when OC'ing. Sandy Bridge is much less efficient of course, but it's also the last soldered dual channel CPU Intel produced; and dual channel means that it only takes 2 sticks to upgrade your RAM.

 

[frozentundra123456]

I don't really see what the new generation of gpus has to do with a CPU upgrade. One can do a system upgrade and keep the gpu until the new gpus come out. As far as how long Intel can "get away" with their pricing, I would say until a better alternative is available. If you insist on solder or more cores, there is the HEDT line up. Intel did make an attractively priced hex core available there. Granted, Intel needs a mainstream hex core, but constant complaining about TIM and lack of edram seems kind of pointless, especially since another poster has already "been there and done that" over and over again for basically an entire thread.

Edit: I also believe cpus are a *great* value, especially since each generation has shown slow improvements while in real dollars the price has come down. When one thinks of the huge number of transistors in a cpu, all the design, research, testing, validation and manufacturing required, and the processing available for 250.00 or even 350.00, it is an amazing value. Now of course, we as a consumer would like more, but all in all they are a fantastic value.

 

[Spjut]

Digitalfoundry has an article about it now, and also includes new tests with an i7 3770k
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/d...it-finally-time-to-upgrade-your-core-i5-2500k


I've personally always paid extra for the better CPU due to the chance of it aging better and it's good to see it being true for the i7 CPUs as well now that we do get games using more than four cores/threads.
I've never agreed with the "skimp on CPU go big on GPU" mentality.

 

[stockwiz]

Timing
This is the only thing that a buyer really has control over. Before the new generations of gaming-cards is released an upgrade is quite a bad move.

Value
How long can Intel get away with their i-core SKUs and selling dual cores on the desktop. People are pushed into the 350$ i7, because it's the only CPU that offers 8 threads to match console ports. It's just like raising prices!
We've seen the massive improvements (comparable to a 500-700 MHz increase) that an eDRAM L4 cache brings with it especially when it comes to frame times, but Intel is holding that back, probably because it will permanently increase cost.

Successors
The Z170 chipset will likely see two generations of CPUs that are bound to be slightly/much better than SL, which doesn't bode well for the long term value of 6700K.

Power efficiency and Heat
Skylake offers no improvement in that regard compared to the previous node. AT review even states that it appears to be getting hotter faster when OC'ing. Sandy Bridge is much less efficient of course, but it's also the last soldered dual channel CPU Intel produced; and dual channel means that it only takes 2 sticks to upgrade your RAM.

yep... all these models of processors they are coming out with, even for kabylake at the end of the year, that are a dual core and quad core without hyperthreading and overclocking... I mean seriously who buys this stuff? 4 and 6 core parts should be the mainstream by now.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Who buys this stuff? Oh about the 90% of the market that is not enthusiasts. And even a pentium, much less a hyperthreaded i3 is more than adequate for that market.

 

[stockwiz]

My 2600K system is fine for me... now going on 5 years old? The last 5 years seemed to go by in a blur....

 

[skipsneeky2]

I wonder where a i5 2500 non k lands with DDR3 1333,the official speed out of the box and the max supported by the H61 chipset which i have atm.

I have 16gb of DDR3 1600 pretty much stuck at 1333,only something like a B75 chipset allows memory overclocking to 1600?

 

[Head1985]

Not bad not bad.
Stock i5 6500 runs at 3.3ghz with 4 cores in use and still manage beat 2500K 4.6ghz with 2133Mhz ram.
There is HUGE IPC increase with skylake.Holy shit.

 

[TheELF]

Value
How long can Intel get away with their i-core SKUs and selling dual cores on the desktop. People are pushed into the 350$ i7, because it's the only CPU that offers 8 threads to match console ports.

LOL,you so funny.

 

[Yuriman]

Not bad not bad.
Stock i5 6500 runs at 3.3ghz with 4 cores in use and still manage beat 2500K 4.6ghz with 2133Mhz ram.
There is HUGE IPC increase with skylake.Holy shit.

It's has been incremental. Skylake is only marginally better than Haswell, but it adds up. Performance per watt is also very significantly better.

 

[Head1985]

It's has been incremental. Skylake is only marginally better than Haswell, but it adds up. Performance per watt is also very significantly better.

with 3200Mhz ddr4 skylake is way faster than haswell in cpu bottleneck scenes/games.
http://www.purepc.pl/pamieci_ram/te...pamieci_ram_wybrac_do_intel_skylake?page=0,11

% gain vs haswell with 2400DDR3/1600DDR3
Bf4-9% and 18%
Crysis3 14% and 18%
Fc4-12% and 25%
watchdogs-11% and 22%
Arma3-11% and 19%
Skyrim-10% and 16%
Sc2-6% and 16%
So even haswell with 2400DDR3 its still around 9-14% slower than skylake with 3200DDR4.
Haswell with DDR3 1600 is way slower around 20%.

 

[dualsmp]

It's has been incremental. Skylake is only marginally better than Haswell, but it adds up. Performance per watt is also very significantly better.

For mobile the gains are fairly significant, however on the desktop with overclocking not so much.

 

[Yuriman]

For mobile the gains are fairly significant, however on the desktop with overclocking not so much.

I meant when compared with Sandy Bridge; I should've been more explicit.

 

[Zstream]

with this combination I would think is possible to be both GPU limited and CPU limited very easily, but it's very dependent on settings and resolution, but yes it should be good, I run an even slower CPU (i5 2310) and while it's slow for some games (like MMOs), it's not to bad, specially if you are willing to use a FPS lock.

but, do you use Mantle on BF4? just wondering if people actually still use it or if it's dead.

Just dx11 here. I don't have any slow downs or hitching so I'm good. I play on 64 player servers