When will there be value in upgrading a i5 2500k for gaming?

[BonzaiDuck]

I would probably just get a bigger SSD,and maybe a faster graphics card down the line.

Your CPU is perfectly fine and probably faster than what 90% of gamers have even today I suspect.

Yeah, the thought of it almost gives me an organism, but I'm old enough to have low-T. :biggrin:

See -- there isn't any voltage threshold line within which your processor is "safe" and beyond which it is "at risk" for reduced longevity. It's a probability distribution, coupled with a natural process by which the CPU degrades, whether you run it at lower or higher voltage.

Based on a consensus here going back to 2011, my load voltage is right at the doorstep, and the unloaded high idle voltage is about 30 mV above that.

But as I understand it, the unloaded high voltage would be much less detrimental, and with EIST enabled, there's not much else except the undetectable and momentary spike in load-to-idle transition.

I was surfing some forum posts going back to 2011 last night. People were speculating all sorts of things about running their Sandy-K chips at these speeds and the voltages above 1.30. People saying "well, it might last a few years." or two or three.

I don't buy it. No need to twist up your Sandy to 1.4V and try to hit 5Ghz, but the processor does not spend a lot of time at those voltages and speeds except for gaming sessions -- unless one is "Folding" or something similar. I don't think my 2.5 year-old Sandy is degraded at all, but I've been running it with a turbo-speed of 4.6 since August, 2011 -- 24 .. 7 . . . (almost) 365 . . .

 

[2is]

There IS performance to be had by upgrading now.

http://gamegpu.ru/images/remote/htt..._GPU-Action-Battlefield_4-test-bf4_proz_2.jpg

That said, the 2500k is still providing very good performance and isn't overclocked. But a 30 fps difference in minimum FPS vs a 4770k is nothing to sneeze at.

 

[Xpage]

I don't see me upgrading my i5 for a long time unless PCI SSDs become available to boot from an window OS. We'll have DDR4 by then too. So another MB, CPU, RAM upgrade for me. Probably get a new water block for the CPU instead of ghetto rigging my old one to fit a new socket again.

 

[Freddy1765]

Wouldn't there be a point in upgrading to something like a 3770k for HT, provided the price was low? I've got a friend with a 3770 lying around (he wasn't sure of the letter suffix), for a decent price I'd be hard pressed not to jump on it (if it is indeed a -K). It even uses the same socket as my 2500k and will therefore plug into my Gigabyte Z68 motherboard, right?

 

[Silverforce11]

I don't even notice the difference between my SB and IV.. and Haswell aint much better for gaming. It's sad times when every new generation bring about single digit performance improvements.

Before someone comes in here and screams about efficiency.. i could care less that power use is 10-30W less and I imagine neither do people who pay heaps of $$ for such a high end processor for their gaming rigs. Certainly not when total system power is 300-600W.

 

[SPBHM]

There IS performance to be had by upgrading now.

http://gamegpu.ru/images/remote/htt..._GPU-Action-Battlefield_4-test-bf4_proz_2.jpg

That said, the 2500k is still providing very good performance and isn't overclocked. But a 30 fps difference in minimum FPS vs a 4770k is nothing to sneeze at.

most people overclock the 2500K, and the 2500k is going to gain more from OC than Haswell I think, and it's going to achieve a pretty good level of performance, it's no easy to justify upgrading from a 2500k to something else when it comes to gaming...

 

[BonzaiDuck]

most people overclock the 2500K, and the 2500k is going to gain more from OC than Haswell I think, and it's going to achieve a pretty good level of performance, it's no easy to justify upgrading from a 2500k to something else when it comes to gaming...

I think your assessment is reasonable.

There are a lot of people here -- including myself -- who have varying degrees of an itch to scratch comparable to nicotine, sweets, smack, nasty girls or fast cars. [Fast cars! -- if only we could afford them. But virtual Datona Speedway is within the $3000 range for your occasional computer investment. Peace -- through su-PER-ior FI-ur-POW-ur.!]

Unless any of those machines are overclocked in the benchmark post -- indications would be there if they were -- the IB and Haswell upper-echelon would still keep the two favorite SB K cores in a dead heat.

NOw -- different benchmarks are apples and oranges. But if I can match an i7-4770K (apparently) clocked to 4.4 in the Cinebench runs, and with the known thermal limits to the last two gens, one would need to have money to burn if he wanted to cash in, shell out, and re-build.

The new 22nm cores can outstrip Sandy, but you probably need commitment to either of two things: the tedium and risk of a de-lidding project, or either WC with a big reservoir or a water-chiller in the loop. And, hey! I might go for phase-change under $1,000, if it's smaller than a shoe-box and good for another four generations of cores!

From one white-paper or review I saw recently, Haswell just points up how voltage requirements decline exponentially with increments of temperature decrease.

They have the computational power. They have to, if they can OC easily to 4.4 Ghz with a TDP of 84 watts. Cooling is again a big deal. De-lidding is a cooling proposition. Only reason it's discussed in this forum -- and a big one -- it's all about the CPU, not a case-mod.

 

[SlitheryDee]

My first inkling of a processor upgrade itch happened when I bought a R9 290X and started benching it and comparing scores. People are getting considerably higher scores than I do out of i7s in things like the physics tests in 3dmark among others. I don't know why I care about that. It's really just the difference between HT an non HT processors more than anything else. It doesn't change the fact that the performance I get in every game is fantastic with my 2500K. I can't shake the itch though. It's been 2 years since I upgraded, and that's starting to be all that matters. It's weird.

 

[BrightCandle]

I have had the 3930k for longer than any other processor in the past. Its not really looking likely it will get replaced soon. Even with the low bar of getting 50% extra performance in a new CPU it seems that might be 5 years after the purchase assuming a 10% climb year on year. That is still well below my 100% performance improvement expectation I have considered worthwhile in the past but since I overclock this CPU and the progress is also coming with additional instructions and capabilities if not performance it seems I will have to upgrade at some point before the performance goal is met.

 

[Gikaseixas]

I usually don't upgrade my cpu's as fast as some here but my trusty old i7 860 @4.0 ghz was not cutting it anymore. I tried to replace it with the FX on my sig but was not much of an upgrade so i decided to get a i7 4770. Amazing chip and it could surprise you OP

 

[Homeles]

Skylake (presumably) brings DD4 to the desktop and you'll certainly see gains solely based on that leap.

Not to mention that Intel is in all likelihood pumping R&D dollars into that particular architecture, so maybe we'll get something unexpected as well.

If you have Sandy or newer, I would recommend holding on for Skylake unless you actually need the 10% IPC increase you'll see from SB to Haswell.

DDR4 won't do squat. Stacked memory might, but only if the CPU architecture is optimized to take advantage of it.

 

[ashetos]

Maybe it will become obsolete by a PCI-E 3.0 product. It's not always about the CPU cores.

 

[Mondozei]

Skylake is next after Broadwell, so it should be out next year if everything goes according to plan.

Although remember that mobile chipsets are now given preference from Intel's side, they see where the market is going. Broadwell isn't coming this year to desktops, but it is to the mobile market. So Skylake to desktop may indeed come in 2016 while for mobile it may come next year.

 

[piasabird]

I have been thinking that how Intel packages the processor could be causing them to go slower as they age. They thermal compound they use could be losing it ability to cool as the the processor ages. That and dust can do you in.

 

[lakedude]

Wouldn't there be a point in upgrading to something like a 3770k for HT, provided the price was low? I've got a friend with a 3770 lying around (he wasn't sure of the letter suffix), for a decent price I'd be hard pressed not to jump on it (if it is indeed a -K). It even uses the same socket as my 2500k and will therefore plug into my Gigabyte Z68 motherboard, right?

Excellent point. If you started out with a i7-2600K you would have little reason to upgrade but with the i5-2500k you lack HT.

I've got a 2500k and just had to try the 3770 for the HT.

If you care about lowering power consumption the newer chips are awesome, if not they are a bit lackluster.

 

[2is]

I have been thinking that how Intel packages the processor could be causing them to go slower as they age. They thermal compound they use could be losing it ability to cool as the the processor ages. That and dust can do you in.

I doubt it. Using a thermal compound isn't new, it's been done before with no long term ill effects to my knoledge. It's not as efficient as solder for heat dissipation but I have not seen or experienced a case where it degraded and caused problems years down the line.

 

[jpiniero]

If you are the type that only upgrades when you literally cannot play a game at a decent frame rate (and are ok with turning down details if needed), then it could be another 4-5 years easily.

I have been thinking that how Intel packages the processor could be causing them to go slower as they age. They thermal compound they use could be losing it ability to cool as the the processor ages. That and dust can do you in.

Losing the ability to overclock over time is not that unusual.

 

[cantholdanymore]

It's been 2 years since I upgraded, and that's starting to be all that matters. It's weird.

Same here

 

[Gundark]

For PC gaming there is no real need for upgrading 2500k. But if you emulate console games Haswell is absolutely worth every dollar. 20% for ps2 emulation and more than 30% for wii on the same clock. Also ps3 emulator is expected to be functional this year.

 

[Dave3000]

No I don't think it's worth upgrading from a 2500k for gaming only right now.

 

[JumBie]

well considering you can gain as much as 10fps more from a 4670 over a 2500, I call that quite substantial.

 

[OCGuy]

If you have a ultra high-end card or a multi-card setup, you may be leaving performance on the table. Even Ivy v Haswell

http://www.alienbabeltech.com/main/haswell-v-ivy-gaming/

 

[Majcric]

well considering you can gain as much as 10fps more from a 4670 over a 2500, I call that quite substantial.

But are you really seeing that much? What rez and what are you pushing GPU wise?

 

[cytg111]

Hi Guys,
I was just wondering when a chip will be released that is value for money to upgrade to? I have the excellent i5 2500k at the moment and see no need to upgrade. I tend to go for chips that are good bang for buck... but the higher end of bang for buck if that makes sense?

Well, a single precondition and you may just be looking at this fall:

- The "Oxide Prophecy(tm)" turns true, our scaling prayers have been heard and there is a software revolution coming in terms of scaling-threaded game engines.

Then Haswell-E, an 8 core monster with ddr4 will certainly be a novel upgrade from you 2500k.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

If you are the type that only upgrades when you literally cannot play a game at a decent frame rate (and are ok with turning down details if needed), then it could be another 4-5 years easily.



Losing the ability to overclock over time is not that unusual.

Sure. But when I think about when, how or with what it happened, there seemed to be a prevailing trend of motherboards that wore out sooner. I'm not sure I ever killed a processor through slow death, or that the processors were slowly dying. . .