Information

Dear forum members,
We are delighted to inform you that our forums are back online. Every single topic and post are now on their places and everything works just as before, only better. Welcome back!



Discussion

Discussion on Article:
Core i7-990X Extreme Edition vs. Core i7-2600K

Started by: Pouria | Date 04/06/11 08:07:09 AM
Comments: 16 | Last Comment:  02/02/12 10:17:43 AM

Expand all threads | Collapse all threads

[1-15]

1. 
Thanks. Excellent review.
0 0 [Posted by: Pouria  | Date: 04/06/11 08:07:09 AM]
Reply

2. 
Wow!!

Amazing review, very complete and detailed!!

Greetings from Colombia!!
0 0 [Posted by: holmanextremo  | Date: 04/06/11 11:41:21 AM]
Reply

3. 
Since the Z68-based motherboards, which allow for enabling the integrated GPU as well as overclocking, won't be available until May, it would be interesting to see Sandy Bridge video transcoding performance on an H67 motherboard. It might just beat 990X in that category too.
0 0 [Posted by: Kisakuku  | Date: 04/06/11 01:12:28 PM]
Reply

4. 
love the 2600!
0 0 [Posted by: beck2448  | Date: 04/06/11 04:20:11 PM]
Reply

5. 
The TrueCrypt AES benchmark is questionable. The i5-2500K has the new Intel instructions (AES-NI) for encryption. But it's only 5% faster than the i7-i875K that lacks AES-NI. Maybe the i7-875K keeps up because of hyperthreading. My impression from Intel papers on AES-NI is that AES-NI (especially the enhanced version in Sandy Bridge) should accelerate encryption more than hyperthreading does. So perhaps the TrueCrypt AES benchmark inflates the effect of additional cores and threads. If the benchmark launches multiple instances of a file for encryption that result would occur. My impression, from a set of desktops with BitLocker, is that AES-NI has a greater effect than additional cores/threads on application launches, for example. Try the AIDA64 encryption benchmark (no, I don't work for them!).
0 0 [Posted by: SpaceTime  | Date: 04/06/11 04:29:29 PM]
Reply

6. 
It's sad Intel probably won't release Sandy Bridge features for socket 1366. Or if they do they'll just price it stupidly expensive or cripple it in their usual fashion. Socket 1366's biggest remaining asset of six-cores is still basically unobtainable unless you have $600 to throw away. You still pay $380 just to get a 32nm xeon with HT on 1366 with a usable overclocking multiplier, but that's with 2 cores disabled.

Intel just wants 1366 to go away it seems.
0 0 [Posted by: xrror  | Date: 04/07/11 01:11:40 AM]
Reply

7. 
So the 2600K is the best for gaming. Thought so....

Waiting for 2800K and 2900K....
0 1 [Posted by: TAViX  | Date: 04/07/11 02:45:47 AM]
Reply

8. 
Since when is 1.288V under load the 'nominal core voltage' on the 2600K? I'm guessing you dialed in load line calibration to the highest settings?
0 0 [Posted by: silentplummet  | Date: 04/08/11 07:49:02 AM]
Reply

9. 
This clearly shows that -for 1st time- LGA-1366 is just 2nd best for Audio. Add the ICH10 high power consumption and its mostly gone...
When you work in a studio you need fanless noiseless gear and that typically goes with low power consumption (lower count of fans -if any-), which is fairly the same you require when going on tour (and choose a low power matx portable system) And that is significantly achieved with Sandybridge, and obviously Ivybridge.

By the way... Sandybridge tech signals the first time an important segment of sound engineers, musicians, etc are considering the use of notebooks on professional sound activities... excepting the fact that desktops is yet the almost-only way to plug our expensive, dedicated pro soundcards.

Thus, if the remaining question of the processing advantages of 2600k with fully speced two channels v/s LGA-1366 with three channels of RAM is cleared, then I'll have to decide on a 2600K based system or alternatively wait almost a year for the LGA2011... plus Intel expected Ivy prices.

For first time I am considering LGA1155 !!!
0 0 [Posted by: djcl.ear  | Date: 04/08/11 10:04:41 AM]
Reply

10. 
Considering the i5-2500K is 100€ cheaper and second to i7-2600K, its the clear winner here.
0 0 [Posted by: Zool  | Date: 04/12/11 09:00:58 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
The i5-2500K is indeed impressive. Nearly the same performance as the i7-2600K in games, and not too far behind in most other tasks.
0 0 [Posted by: ET3D  | Date: 04/13/11 11:44:24 PM]
Reply

11. 
Great article, but 1000 bucks for a cpu? I doubt its worth 1000 bucks if you can get even close to it with any other cpu that's half as much or less that's just outrageous.

If you purchase a 300 dollar cpu and get 10 frames per second less in a game I'm wagering that 95% of the users wouldn't notice that loss of 10 FPS.

That 600 bucks you saved is better off spent on an SSD and video card.

0 2 [Posted by: DEADTIME  | Date: 04/14/11 12:28:45 AM]
Reply

12. 
one of the best reviews so far at Xbitlabs
1 0 [Posted by: 3Dkiller  | Date: 04/14/11 06:41:14 AM]
Reply

13. 
Just trying to find a link to my comments
0 0 [Posted by: TeemuMilto  | Date: 04/14/11 08:41:06 AM]
Reply

14. 
The best article I have read regarding high end LGA1366 vs Sandy Bridge.

Saved me A LOT of aggravation for a long time to come as I was jsut about ready to purchase a new workstation (dual LGA-1366's).

Now I'll make do for a bit and wait for their replacement's the Xeon Xeon E5-2600/Sandy Bridge-EP/Socket R.

Thanks Xbit. Well done.
1 0 [Posted by: Curtis LeMay  | Date: 04/20/11 01:26:15 PM]
Reply

15. 
Great article.

This is what keeps me coming back to Xbit.

How would a higher gfx load skew the outcome?

0 0 [Posted by: oldDummy  | Date: 04/24/11 05:53:50 AM]
Reply

[1-15]

Back to the Article

Add your Comment