i5 2500K or i7 2600 ?

tommmi

New member
Hi guys! I'm just building a new mid-range PC for producing music and i can't decice between I5 2500K or I7 2600 (non K). What do you think, which one would be better for my usage?
Is it really worth the extra money for I7? 2600K is over my budget, so 2600 would be the only chance, but this one has worse graphic card then i5 2500K. Is this important for me if i don't play games and only produce music, watch movies and surf the internet?

For now i think i will go for this:

Gigabyte GA-H67MA-USB3-B3 (rev. 1.0)
I7 2600
BE QUIET! PURE Power L7-530W
Kingston ValueRAM - Memory - 8GB (2 x 4GB) - DIMM 240-PIN - DDR3 - 1333 MHz - CL9
Samsung F3 1TB

Should i change something? Maybe rams with 1600mhz? More W power supply?

Thanks for your help!
 
I have a 2600k and have it overclock and stable at 4.6Ghz! If you don't care about overclocking then stick with the 2500k. The benefit of the 2600k is that the multiplier comes unlocked especially for overclocking.
 
i built my computer with an AMD Phenom II Quad Black Edition (overclocked to 3.8Ghz) runs great but i wanna build another computer with the 2500K. that way ill have one AMD computer and one Intel/Nvidia Computer :)
 
Not to start a debate or anything, but unless cost is your first concern, stay away from AMD... they have unfortunately fallen far far far behind Intel the past few years... even their top of the line Quad Black editions can barely keep up with Intel's dual-core offerings! Don't take my word for it, do a search for Intel vs. AMD and you'll see all the objective bench marks backing what I'm telling you.
 
Last edited:
well like i said mine runs great. i have no problem with AMD. it ran Pro Tools 8 with no problem
 
i hear what you saying velocity101. i know Intel Sandybridge chips are better than AMD Phenom II chips but im just going off the performance of my computer. and if it does the job that's all that really matter in the end. but like a said i do wanna build a 2500k computer also ;)
 
Seen some incorrect info here.. The "k" means the multiplier is unlocked - regardless of the i5 or i7. Performance wise the i7 really shines because of the Hyper-Threading. This matter for software optimized for hyperthreading. How much of our DAW software can use this ability? How well can it use it? I cant tell you...

Regardless, from what i have seen the performance gain is marginal. If you want the best possible performance go with the i7... If you want nearly the same performance but 100 bucks cheaper go with the i5.

---------- Post added at 11:15 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:12 PM ----------

If you really want to impact your systems performance you can go with the i5 and put that 100 bucks to a set of nice solid state drives.... A system boot drive with a fast read speed and a data drive with a nice read and write speed for your audio recording and sample libraries will impact your performance much more then an i7 over the i5...
 
Last edited:
Also, you probably wont even need over 400w psu without a video card. I know for fact you can run all that plus a single 1gig card under 460watts.
 
[/COLOR]If you really want to impact your systems performance you can go with the i5 and put that 100 bucks to a set of nice solid state drives.... A system boot drive with a fast read speed and a data drive with a nice read and write speed for your audio recording and sample libraries will impact your performance much more then an i7 over the i5...

I agree on the SSD's (solid-state-harddrives) but the only issue is that they're so damn expensive in comparison to the spinning platters... I've got two Intel 60MB SSD's in Raid 0 and they absolutely screem (windows loads in about 18 seconds)... but even with those in Raid 0, I only have about 100Megs after the OS install... not much for storing anything on. I only use them for applications I want to load really fast (mostly games). For the same price as a 100Meg SSD, you can pick up a 1.5TB Western Digital with a decent cache.
 
Back
Top