Which I7 CPU - 2600 or 2600K

[flyingvguitarist]

I apologize for the redundancy here. I've spent much time reading posts as I pursue the best suited processor for my application. Most posts refer to same thing (e.g. unlocked over-clocking, HD2000/HD3000, etc.), but I still can't decide. I'm hoping the Tom's Hardware community can tell me which processor to buy. My current quad-core workstation is too slow. Thanks in advance for responding.

Computer Use:

1. General Use (Microsoft Office, etc.).
2. Render HD home movies to either Blu-ray or h.264/MKV for network streaming.
3. Convert older home movies to h.264/MKV for network streaming.

Additional Detail:

1. I'm not a gamer.
2. I will not over-clock.
3. Motherboard is Asus P8Z68 Deluxe.
4. Memory is 16 GB Corsair Vengeance (4 sticks of 4 GB).
5. Graphics card is ATI HD4850 w/ 512 MB RAM. May upgrade.

The Intel chip comparison identifies the following differences. Not sure whether I will need them. Also, a few online benchmarks show the 2600K noticeably faster than the 2600 (maybe the 2600k was over-clocked?).

1. Embedded Options Available:
■2600 (yes)
■2600K (no)

2. Graphics Model:
■2600 (Intel® HD Graphics 2000)
■2600K (Intel® HD Graphics 3000)

3. Intel® vPro Technology:
■2600 (yes)
■2600K (no)

4. Intel® Virtualization Technology for Directed I/O (VT-d):
■2600 (yes)
■2600K (no)

5. Intel® Trusted Execution Technology:
■2600 (yes)
■2600K (no)

Which CPU is best for my application? Thanks.

 

[o1die]

The price difference is only $15 (newegg.com), so it's up to you. The K series have unlocked multipliers for simple overclocking. They also will be easier to sell if you ever have to.

 

[Emperus]

You need not have selected such an expensive Z68 board if you do not want to overclock. But now since you have, getting the i7 2600K becomes the logical choice. Overclocking will surely help you some time down the line.

 

[UnitedExpress4180]

There is really not much, if any difference between the 2600 and 2600k, other than the 2600k being overclock able. Personally, even if I weren't a gamer, I would still get the 2600k, because even though it comes at 3.4Ghz stock speeds, there would be a noticeable difference in render time if you overclock it by as little as 500 megahertz. If you are going to be working with a lot of HD video, the faster you can go the better, which is reason enough to get the 2600k. Plus the price difference is not that great between them anyway

 

[flyingvguitarist]

Emperus -- you're probably right, but when I pay this amout of cash, I always go top-of-the-line. Besides, the investment should hold me for 4-5 years. I'll then give the computer to one of my kids and upgrade to the latest technology.

UnitedExpress4180 -- I agree. Seems the 2600/2600K differences (besides over-clocking) are related to security -- which is typically not relevant in a home workstation. The price difference is negligible, so I'll go for the 2600K....and maybe I'll even over-clock it a bit

Thanks for the feedback. It's exactly what I needed.