I7 950 vs i7 2500 vs i5 2500K vs i5 760

[IntelEnthusiast]

The problem with the Intel® Core™ i7-950 is that it is a 1st generation Intel Core processors on average the 2nd generation Intel Core processor are outperforming them by about 15% at the same clock speed. Also by going with the Intel Core i7-950 you are stuck with the old technology.
So to be clear the only time I would be going with a 1st generation Intel Core processor is if I was doing heavy video/audio work or some other multi-threaded job and I was getting the Intel Core i7-990X Extreme Edition processor. If I was going to be mainly gaming without question I would go with the Intel Core i5-2500K. Since almost no game takes advantage or more than 3 thread the value for the Intel Core i7 processors isn’t as valuable for gaming.

Christian Wood
Intel Enthusiast Team

 

[sizzling_fates]

Thanks, i think imma add £50 and go for 2600K cos its better

 

[sizzling_fates]

no, its not worth spending, i7 2600k is just like an i5 2500k with hyperthreading. you will be needing a triple channel memory for animations, also its new Turbo mode only works effectively with single threaded applications, or applications that use less than the available cores, so the impact of the Turbo mode in animations will be small. i see sandy bridge as turbo version of the old LGA 1156, a gaming cpu for an average user, but not definitely for an intensive user such as animator and video editing 3D renderers.
i7 950 or i7 960 would be a better choice for that usage.
the main problem with the Sandy Bridge is the CPU may be fast enough, the rest is no more than mediocre at best. the problem with its chipsets, P67, Q67 and H67, is identical to the P55 chipset The lack of PCI-e lanes. This prevents one to use a nVidia MPE capable video card AND a raid controller. For high performance both are needed, but it is impossible on these platforms, due to the lack of PCI-e lanes. In addition only PCI-e 2.0 lanes are supported, not 3.0.The new platforms have the same shortcomings as the P55, making it unsuitable for serious editing. The H.264 test results with software MPE i thisn Tom's Hardware show 20:55 for the 2600K and 26:02 for the i7-950. 24% difference.
The best i7-950 in the PPBM5 benchmark has 93 s in the H.264 test and 127 s for the render test. An overclocked i7-920 has 65 and 73 s respectively. 43% and 74% respectiviely. These tests are incomparable, but the conclusion is clear Sandy Bridge is not faster than an OC'ed i7-920/930/950, still needs a nVidia card and still needs a raid controller, which is impossible. Sandy Bridge has no noticeable benefits over an OC'ed 920 and seriously suffers from the memory architecture for NLE work, combined with an intergrated graphics 'chip' that is unusable.

I dont even know how to overclock!

 

[jlavely86]

also the price difference, i7 970 vs i7 2600K, £120 beetween them. also the 1155 socket still has a lot coming for it, including ivy bridge, unlike X58, which is soon to be replaced with sandy bridge-e, and therefore a dead socket.

Aren't we moving to LGA 2011 for Ivy Bridge? I think the only reason I didn't upgrade to SB is because Intel is blowing through sockets like Nvidia is going through GFX cards right now. I am cool with them making new cores and such, but I don't want to replace motherboards every eleven months.

 

[mdd1963]

SandyBridge-E (flagship, replacing X58/socket 1366) will be on the new socket 2011, and a new socket was inevitable if desiring quad channel mem access. (Ivy Bridge will be avail in the current 1155 format....)