i5-2500k Sandy vs i3-4160 for gaming

[dfk]

Hi,

Assuming not overclocking the Sandy i5, is it worth buying used 2500k instead of newer 4130 for gaming, that is within the budget of i3 procs. Price wise it's almost the same but it seems 2500k might be better for multitasking/gaming because of 4 cores. Also it's harder to find used LGA 1155 mobos where I live. LGA 1150 might be better if upgrading in the future?

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2013/11/14/intel-core-i3-4130-haswell-review/5

Thanks.

 

[gskill support]

The 2500K is better, but you're right, with LGA 1150, you may be able to upgrade to i5-4590 or something in the future.

 

[Bassblaster505]

go for the 2500k for Performance, get the 4130 for Future Upgrade Compatibility

 

[DSzymborski]

I'd get the 2500k unless there's a very real chance you might go up to the i7 rather than just an i5 on the 1150. After all, the Haswell i5s aren't *massively* better than the 2500k and up to that point, you'd have a 2500k over i3. In general, I think people tend to overrate the probability they'll actually upgrade to a same platform CPU - by the time you're unhappy with your 2500k, you're more likely to consider a newer option anyway.

 

[Ibreakthings]

Get the 2500K and overclock as need in bumps

 

[velo3100]

The i5 is better than the i3.

 

[RobCrezz]

The 2500k is vastly better, more so when overclocked. If you can pair it with a Z68 or Z77 motherboard and a half decent CPU cooler you can easily match the Haswell i5s with an overclock.

 

[XxMongermaniacxX]

the 2500k is one of the best intel processors out there. it overclocks like a champ, and many chips have performed equally to the 4690k

 

[Zerk2012]

I still run my 2500K not because I can't aford to upgrade but because their nothing worth upgrading to!

 

[Ibreakthings]

My i7 4790k runs at 5.0ghz pretty sure it beats the 2500k but theres no real use for it other than benchmarks

 

[Suzuki@1473780084@1473780163]

The i3 4160 is 11.5% faster in single core performance. It's also ~30% slower than the i5 in multithreaded apps. I agree with the upgrade talk above, may be worth it IF you are going to be buying a 4th gen i5 or i7 later on.

 

[whoratesit]

From a performance perspective, the 2500K wins in just about every department.

UserBenchmark: Intel Core i5-2500K vs Core i3-4160
Effective CPU Speed: 77% vs 73.9%
Intel Core i5-2500K - 57th / 848
Intel Core i3-4160 - 77th / 848

In terms of upgrades even the brand new skylake 6600K is only around 30% faster than a 2500K:

UserBenchmark: Intel Core i5-2500K vs Core i5-6600K
Effective CPU Speed: 77% vs 102%
Intel Core i5-2500K - 57th / 848
Intel Core i5-6600K - 2nd / 848

I would take the 2500K if I didn't already have a 2700K

 

[dfk]

I prefer the 2500k myself too surely but used z68 / z77 mobos in good condition are kinda hard to find over here. They are also most likely out of warranty thus harder to replace =/

 

[whoratesit]

If you want something upgradeable you need to wait for Intel to release the cheaper skylake CPU's (so far only the expensive 6700K and 6600K have been released). From an upgradability perspective, there is no point getting a Haswell socket now considering that skylake is just around the corner. So either wait for the cheaper skylake CPUs to come out or find a z77 on ebay .

 

[RobCrezz]

The i3 4160 is 11.5% faster in single core performance. It's also ~30% slower than the i5 in multithreaded apps. I agree with the upgrade talk above, may be worth it IF you are going to be buying a 4th gen i5 or i7 later on.

Only at stock clock speeds though. The 2500k was one of the best overclockers in recent times, many people seeing 5Ghz on air coolers / AIOs