I5 2500k or i5 3570k for gaming

[lpiotoole]

Hello,
Just wondering which of the two would be better for gaming and if the i5 3570k is worth the extra $30 and I would like to be able to OC in the future but heard IB has heat problems?
, the rest of my build is as follows
Sapphire 7850, g.skill 8gb 1600, antec 650w earthwatts. Seagate barracuda 1tb 64mb,
Thermal take dokker, hypercooler 212 evo

Thanks for any replies

 

[ubercake]

For gaming both would be fine. You probably wouldn't notice any difference from a gaming standpoint. The choice of video card will make the bigger difference with most modern games, but you already have that picked out. IB offers a PCIe 3.0 controller, but no video card on the market even uses the full bandwidth of 8 lanes (x8) of PCIe 2.0. I'm guessing we're about 3 years out with necessarily having to move to a PCIe 3.0 solution to maintain acceptable gaming performance.

The real hype with IB is the improved integrated video and better encoding functionality. But as gamers, since this integrated video capability seems to still be in its infancy from a performance standpoint, we don't even consider using it.

As a result, I would recommend the 2500K.

--- edit ---
I'd also look for better prices on the 2500K after the IB processors have been out a few weeks. On the other hand, if you live by a microcenter you can pick one up for $179 now.

 

[yumri]

from what i have read on the forum post http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/332702-28-stupid-question-3770k which is also about this the only differnece will be seen IF you are doing video and/or audio encodeing or program compileing or any other highly threaded task other wise there isnt any noticeable difference between them. So save the many on the more powerful cooler which you will need to keep it cool and get more and/or faster RAM instead as you will see the difference more form the faster RAM then the i5 3750k from the i5 2500k

 

[lpiotoole]

But the thing that gets me confused is its only another $20, and its performance is slightly better from what I can see from benchmarks so why not just pay the extra 20?

 

[digdog]

IB hands down. not only the heat problem has been exagerated (IB hits a heat wall around 4.5/4.6, while SB hits hit around 5.2), IB is slightly more performant per-clock and it's more common for IB to hit 4.6 than it is for SB to hit 5.0 (IB 4.6=SB5.0 in benches).

regardless of the heat wall you can still hit 5.0 on IB if you buy a H100 or other WC solution (or even air if you lap the IHS)

 

[whatsthatnoise]

Tthe "heat issues" only come into play when you plan to overclock by a lot and you will need a comparably better cpu heatsink than an SB chip would need for the same clockspeed.

IB has some more features, is only slightly more expansive and, if you aren't planning to hardcore overclock, the better choice in the long run.

 

[Robi_g]

IB, the TPM on IB is higher than SB so I wouldn't worry as much about the heat, also SB supports less.

 

[lpiotoole]

Best answer selected by lpiotoole.