2500K & P67 or 2600 & H67 ? - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HUKD, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HUKD app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit

2500K & P67 or 2600 & H67 ?

yorkie Avatar
5y, 10m agoPosted 5 years, 10 months ago
I can get the two setups for roughly the same price, looked at a few benches and an ock'd 2500K performs similar to a stock 2600 in many tests. Therefore it seems a no brainer to go with the 2600 & H67, however I'm probably missing something, I usually do.

What other factors should I consider? I'm not an extreme overclocker.
yorkie Avatar
5y, 10m agoPosted 5 years, 10 months ago
Options

All Comments

(7) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
#1
Probably not, but not a hardcore gamer, I currently have a Radeon 4850 and may or may not upgrade.

Edited By: yorkie on Jan 15, 2011 17:22
#2
I'm thinking of going the 2600 route though, not the 2500. The 2600 has hyperthreading and is clocked slightly higher hence why I assume it is roughly on a par with an ock'd 2500K, a stock 2500 & H67 is going to be way slower than both i'm guessing.
#3
dcx_badass
Just overclock the 2500k to 4+ghz. Sorted.

It seems you've already made up your mind anyway, so I'm a bit unsure as to why you bothered to make this thread.


I bothered to make this thread because I wanted to know if there were any other things I needed to consider. I already explained that from benches a 2600 and 2500K come out similar in performance, or at least the ones I have seen are. Just wondered if anybody knew of any other reason i.e. differences in P67 & H67 chipsets that might be worth knowing. I'm open to informed opinions based on experience and fact.

I've already said it seems a 'no brainer' to go with a 2600 & H67 setup so yes I am favouring that option based on what I have read and researched. However I thought I'd ask the question so that anyone with a more in depth knowledge than I have could impart some of their wisdom should they be kind enough.

Stating 'Just overclock the 2500k to 4+ghz. Sorted' helps how? What does it sort? What benefits does this give me as opposed to the H67 & 2600 setup.

You may be correct, I don't know but come on give me something to backup the statement.
#4
It would be stupid to buy a 2600k and get a H67 motherboard.
#5
hello55060
It would be stupid to buy a 2600k and get a H67 motherboard.


It would that's why I was going to get a 2600 ;)
1 Like #6
heh i should learn to read properly next time.

I got a 2600k at launch and am very happy with it so far, managed to clock it to 4.6 GHz, not going to try and push it any more. Overclocking is really really simple with the 2nd gen intel chips. I'm not a huge overclocker by any means and it really is as simple as just changing the one setting (CPU multiplier) in the BIOS or UEFI, reboot and it's done.

As for the 2500k overclocked being no better than a 2600 it depends on the program really.

A 2500k overclocked to something like 4.4 GHz which seems to be an easy figure to achieve on the chips would be better than a 2600 at stock if the program didn't utilise hyper threading.

The question really boils down to what will you be using the PC for? If you use programs which would utilise hyper threading like going to be doing a lot of video encoding, photo rendering etc. then go for the 2600, but if you're just a gamer or general day to day user then there's no reason to have the 2600.
#7
hello55060
heh i should learn to read properly next time.

I got a 2600k at launch and am very happy with it so far, managed to clock it to 4.6 GHz, not going to try and push it any more. Overclocking is really really simple with the 2nd gen intel chips. I'm not a huge overclocker by any means and it really is as simple as just changing the one setting (CPU multiplier) in the BIOS or UEFI, reboot and it's done.

As for the 2500k overclocked being no better than a 2600 it depends on the program really.

A 2500k overclocked to something like 4.4 GHz which seems to be an easy figure to achieve on the chips would be better than a 2600 at stock if the program didn't utilise hyper threading.

The question really boils down to what will you be using the PC for? If you use programs which would utilise hyper threading like going to be doing a lot of video encoding, photo rendering etc. then go for the 2600, but if you're just a gamer or general day to day user then there's no reason to have the 2600.


Thanks for that, I guess I do a bit of everything, some games (although the most challenging I played recently was Oblivion The Elder Scrolls), video encoding and photo editing but not every day maybe once a month or so. I tend to only do a major rebuild every couple of years and so just want to get it right. At first I was going to go for a 2500K as it gets excellent reviews, but for a decent mobo you are talking between £30-£60 more for a P67 than a H67 which brings both combos in at roughly the same price.

Part of me wants to wait until the Z68 but who knows what price bracket that will fall into and 1156 & 1366 passed me by as I kept waiting for price drops etc. I know if I wait too long will end up waiting for socket 2011, lol.

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!