Upgrading from i5 2500k

[j03h4gLund]

I'd like something around the $300 price point. AMD or Intel. Which is better bang for the buck right now? Overclocking is not a problem. I plan on playing high-end next gen games that utilize DX12. Also plan on getting the GTX 1070 once that's available. Any recommendations?

Thanks in advance!

 

[Josh123]

I'm currently debating on if I should upgrade to a 6500k or not. My 2500k still runs like a champ and I've been told there isn't much point in upgrading because the performance gains aren't that much.

 

[j03h4gLund]

I'm currently debating on if I should upgrade to a 6500k or not. My 2500k still runs like a champ and I've been told there isn't much point in upgrading because the performance gains aren't that much.

Yah same, however, my GTX 970 will not run as good as other peoples who have newer CPU's so yah, the 2500k still fetches around $100 on ebay so why not upgrade. I've gotten good life out of it and there's really no debate that there -are- better CPU's out there right now...

 

[frozentundra123456]

I would not upgrade from a 2500k to a 6600K. If you are going to upgrade, I would go for more threads, especially with DX12 games coming. So I would go to either the 6700k or the 5820k. In either case, you will have to purchase a new motherboard and ram as well as the cpu, so the extra hundred dollars or so for 6700k or 5820k is not a huge additional cost. Between those 2, it is a tough choice. 6700k has faster stock clocks and better ipc, while the 5820k(or BW-E) has more real cores but you are depending on a good overclock.

With a 2500k at 4.5 though, I would be tempted to wait and see how it performs with the new gpu and in DX12. You might even hold out to see if Zen is a viable alternative, although it wont be available till late 2016 or early 2017.

 

[Killer_Croc]

I'd like something around the $300 price point. AMD or Intel. Which is better bang for the buck right now? Overclocking is not a problem. I plan on playing high-end next gen games that utilize DX12. Also plan on getting the GTX 1070 once that's available. Any recommendations?

Thanks in advance!

There was a recent article on the i5 2500K and even though it is a 5 year old CPU if it is overclocked you can match most modern cpu's and processors. For gaming it's still quite capable. The only upgrade you could really do would be to get a 6 or 8 core processor but it won't have much of a positive overall impact on gaming performance as one would expect.

 

[j03h4gLund]

There was a recent article on the i5 2500K and even though it is a 5 year old CPU if it is overclocked you can match most modern cpu's and processors. For gaming it's still quite capable. The only upgrade you could really do would be to get a 6 or 8 core processor but it won't have much of a positive overall impact on gaming performance as one would expect.

I agree for most gaming the i5 2500k is still quite capable... however for someone looking to run current & future games with textures/shadows all the way up, I am a bit skeptical.

If you look at my system(in my sig) what would you suspect to be the bottleneck?

 

[Josh123]

I agree for most gaming the i5 2500k is still quite capable... however for someone looking to run current & future games with textures/shadows all the way up, I am a bit skeptical.

If you look at my system(in my sig) what would you suspect to be the bottleneck?

I'd say your 970 which is the same card I'm currently running. I'm waiting to see what happens with the 1080 before I upgrade my GPU. I'll either wait for the 1080 Ti or snag a cheap 980 Ti.

 

[Killer_Croc]

I agree for most gaming the i5 2500k is still quite capable... however for someone looking to run current & future games with textures/shadows all the way up, I am a bit skeptical.

If you look at my system(in my sig) what would you suspect to be the bottleneck?

I can't really see any potential bottleneck there. Your processor is clocked high enough to avoid any bottlenecks and your memory and GPU are good enough and since you only have one GPU you will be running the GPU at pci-e x16 2.0. The 970 may be a bottleneck but it's still a capable GPU.

 

[frozentundra123456]

I agree for most gaming the i5 2500k is still quite capable... however for someone looking to run current & future games with textures/shadows all the way up, I am a bit skeptical.

If you look at my system(in my sig) what would you suspect to be the bottleneck?

Of course, it depends on the game and settings, but in most games you will be gpu limited with the 970.

 

[Sheep221]

I agree for most gaming the i5 2500k is still quite capable... however for someone looking to run current & future games with textures/shadows all the way up, I am a bit skeptical.

If you look at my system(in my sig) what would you suspect to be the bottleneck?

Your rig is completely fine, you probably only have temptation to spend some cash on PC upgrades do you? 😎
I don't game tho but my combo of 2550K and HD6850 does everything very well.

 

[HiroThreading]

If you look at my system(in my sig) what would you suspect to be the bottleneck?

Your GPU. A 390X would have been a wiser purchase.

Save your money and wait for AMD's Polaris/Vega launch. Hopefully Nvidia will bring their prices in line with the competition, and then you can make a better choice between the two vendors.

 

[Josh123]

Your rig is completely fine, you probably only have temptation to spend some cash on PC upgrades do you? 😎
I don't game tho but my combo of 2550K and HD6850 does everything very well.

This is my problem. I'm getting graduation money in and it's burning a hole in my pocket lol.

 

[JimmiG]

I agree for most gaming the i5 2500k is still quite capable... however for someone looking to run current & future games with textures/shadows all the way up, I am a bit skeptical.

If you look at my system(in my sig) what would you suspect to be the bottleneck?

Shadows and textures would be handled by the GPU though, not the CPU. More CPU threads might help in some strategy games with lots of AI etc., but keep in mind that all Intel mainstream CPUs are still 4C/8T or 4C/4T due to stagnation and lack of competition. Each generation has gotten 5 - 10% faster or so, but even cumulatively, the difference between Sandy Bridge and Skylake isn't that great, especially if the SB is overclocked.

Also games keep moving towards being more GPU bound rather than CPU bound (DX12, Mantle etc.).

If you absolutely need to buy something now (in the near future), get a GTX 1080 or 1070.

 

[2is]

Shadows and textures would be handled by the GPU though, not the CPU. More CPU threads might help in some strategy games with lots of AI etc., but keep in mind that all Intel mainstream CPUs are still 4C/8T or 4C/4T due to stagnation and lack of competition. Each generation has gotten 5 - 10% faster or so, but even cumulatively, the difference between Sandy Bridge and Skylake isn't that great, especially if the SB is overclocked.

Also games keep moving towards being more GPU bound rather than CPU bound (DX12, Mantle etc.).

If you absolutely need to buy something now (in the near future), get a GTX 1080 or 1070.

Rendering of shadows is on the GPU, calculating where the shadow gets drawn based on the lighting in the scene is done by the CPU as far as I'm aware.

As to the topic at hand, the 2500k is still good enough to give you good performance in any game out there, however, that doesn't mean you won't see a noticeable improvement by going with a Skylake i7 (I wouldn't upgrade from an i5 to an i5 personally)

If you're gaming at 1440p and above then the benefits of a faster CPU are probably going to be less since that 970 will be the main bottleneck. If you're at 1080p you would certainly see a benefit from a better CPU.

That said, if your 2500k is still giving you performance you're happy with, there's no reason to invest $500 in a new CPU/MOBO/RAM unless you simply feel the upgrade itch and want to scratch it.

 

[j03h4gLund]

Thanks all for the discussion.

The main problem I'm having is while playing CS:GO. Whenever there is gunfire, my framerate drops from 299 to like 100ish for like a millisecond then goes back to 299. I have a feeling there is something else wrong with my system, and am considering formatting my C drive. I am going to create a new thread in the support section if anyone feels inclined to help a brother out 🙂

Thanks again

 

[PingSpike]

If you have extra money, blow it on a video card or a SSD. If you have an intel quad sandybridge+ already, there just isn't really anything in existence that is a compelling upgrade.

 

[Sheep221]

Going from 300 FPS to 100 is something you are not able to see with your eyes so you shouldn't be bothered by it, or disable NET_graph altogether.

 

[j03h4gLund]

Going from 300 FPS to 100 is something you are not able to see with your eyes so you shouldn't be bothered by it, or disable NET_graph altogether.

Yah not just gonna ignore it because you say to ignore it lol. I didnt have this problem before I upgraded my 670 to my 970. I appreciate your advice but you said you dont play games, so I wouldn't expect anything less.

 

[escrow4]

I agree for most gaming the i5 2500k is still quite capable... however for someone looking to run current & future games with textures/shadows all the way up, I am a bit skeptical.

If you look at my system(in my sig) what would you suspect to be the bottleneck?

A 2500 is starting to creak:

If you want that breathing room and higher minimums there will be a difference between a 6600 and a 2500.

 

[poofyhairguy]

A 2500 is starting to creak:

If you want that breathing room and higher minimums there will be a difference between a 6600 and a 2500.

Yeah but look at that 2600k sitting up there. Might be cheaper to upgrade the CPU than the whole platform.

 

[2is]

Yeah but look at that 2600k sitting up there. Might be cheaper to upgrade the CPU than the whole platform.

No maybe about it. It'll definitely be cheaper, especially if he sells the 2500k. But I think he has other issues going on.

 

[Sheep221]

Yah not just gonna ignore it because you say to ignore it lol. I didnt have this problem before I upgraded my 670 to my 970. I appreciate your advice but you said you dont play games, so I wouldn't expect anything less.

What I was trying to say is that this is not performance issue, maybe driver/game issue.
You also can get dirt cheap 3770K, but not sure if going either with 2600K or 3770K would do any difference in CS GO.

 

[JimmiG]

A 2500 is starting to creak:

If you want that breathing room and higher minimums there will be a difference between a 6600 and a 2500.

Keep in mind that the 2500K only runs at 3.3 GHz with a max Turbo of 3.7 GHz, which won't always be activated with the default BIOS settings most likely used for benchmarking. At for example 4.5 GHz, it should be right up there in the high 80's or low 90's on the chart.

 

[AtenRa]

I would try to find a used Core i7 3770K, your motherboard support it.

If you can find one at close to $200 or less it should be better than the Core i5 6600.

Then upgrade the GPU.

 

[Sable]

Yeah but look at that 2600k sitting up there. Might be cheaper to upgrade the CPU than the whole platform.

I've been pondering this upgrade myself but they still go for like £190 on ebay. I keep resigning myself to waiting and just doing a total system upgrade. Won't be this year though.