4 ms·
Depends what your work-load is. For VR, CPU heft is becoming important again. I have an OC'd 2500K and that's the minimum for more advanced VR games. CPUbench
by drzaiusapelord 10y ago
Depends what your work-load is. For VR, CPU heft is becoming important again. I have an OC'd 2500K and that's the minimum for more advanced VR games.
CPUbench
2500k: 6400
6600k: 7921
That's a 20% improvement which doesn't sound like much on paper, but in real world testing that means about double the FPS for higher-end video cards at high res due to the older 2500k design lacking optimizations and other issues holding back those cards.
http://forums.joinsquad.com/topic/5973-my-2500k-vs-6700k-upgrade-fps-results-hefty-fps-increase/ http://forums.joinsquad.com/topic/5973-my-2500k-vs-6700k-upg...
Lastly, gamers would most likely opt for the i7 6700k which benches at 11000, so almost double that of the 2500k.
- alkonaut 10y agoYeah the step from 2500k to today isn't nothing, but 2500K was also released in Januray 2011 making it six years, which is about a million years old in CPU terms.
- gsnedders 10y agoAt the same time, i7-2700k is around 8900: quicker than the 6600k. A generation later, and socket compatible, is the i7-3770k, around 9500. On CPUbench, there's a big difference between i5 and i7 parts, and going to a i7 that's generations old gets you better scores than a current top-of-the-line i5.
- vardump 10y agoWell, 2500k doesn't have AVX2 instructions (for 256-bit width), so integer stuff needs to use 128-bit wide SSE2+. In some [1] cases that can make quite a bit of difference, up to almost 2x. [1]: Real improvement is of course anywhere between none and 2x. A lot of software (most even?) is still not using AVX2 at all. Sorting, memory block operations (strlen, memcpy, etc.) and operations that need to do integer math on big chunks of data can benefit significantly. Some real world code I wrote saw up to ~1.9x improvement on systems with sufficient memory bandwidth.