i5 2500K and i7 2600K for CoD

[Codex]

Originally Posted by NLS61

Oh man,

Yes i follow now i'm over London chasing a 100 plus bogies then i want the faster of the two posibilities.
So I bought the most price sencible in the performance curve.
Furthermore you are assuming that I have a monitor that does 60 refresh rate.
You assume right but do you know the resolution?. I might be at 2550x1600
As it is i'm not because I would have bought a 580 card.
I Understand quit a lot a bout performance but also a bout what wich performance cost on the polar.
So what is sencible priced and what is not is a price performance equasion.
You might argue that my system is not the best price performance one can get probably that is where your AMD system scores.
I want a system that scores high on the performance curve without costing "me" an arm and a leg.
At under 600 euros this system does that.
In the end we will see who's got it right.
See you over London,

Greetz,

Niels

Respect to all those who upgraded now but NLS61's comment is exactly why I would wait until CoD is out.

I've got a nagging suspicion that as soon as we fly over London <paste Tree_UK's comments here > with some medium amount of objects the frames will drop dramatically. Just like with the Crysis euphoria in 2007, people upgraded before the game was out, mainly to have more GPU power, but when released the game just bought any system to it's knees.

With CoD I think it's going be CPU intensive and the 2500k and 2600k may not be enough, don't get wrong it's a great CPU, but a lot of what the reviewer sites base their comparisons and recommendations on are on games that are 12 months old or older and are GPU limited not CPU.

I hope I'm wrong but my male intuition is acting like my cautious wife telling me to wait.

[meshuggahs]

Originally Posted by Codex

With CoD I think it's going be CPU intensive and the 2500k and 2600k may not be enough, don't get wrong it's a great CPU, but a lot of what the reviewer sites base their comparisons and recommendations on are on games that are 12 months old or older and are GPU limited not CPU.

Taken that those two are the top line* processors on the market even beating the 1366 i7 extreme's with 6 cores in some CPU tests, specialy if you plan on overclocking(buying a K model means you are), you can't expect CoD not to run ok on those. If not, nothing will run it at the moment and it'll be just the same not to even buy the game

*not including server oriented multiple CPU builds

I agree waiting is allways a good choise, but this close to realease you realy can't go wrong with those 2 since nothing better is out realy.

[T}{OR]

Originally Posted by meshuggahs

Taken that those two are the top line* processors on the market even beating the 1366 i7 extreme's with 6 cores in some CPU tests, specialy if you plan on overclocking(buying a K model means you are), you can't expect CoD not to run ok on those. If not, nothing will run it at the moment and it'll be just the same not to even buy the game

*not including server oriented multiple CPU builds

I agree waiting is allways a good choise, but this close to realease you realy can't go wrong with those 2 since nothing better is out realy.

+1

With only 2 weeks to go, the smartest thing to do is wait. But on the other hand if you are one that can not wait - current top of the range SB models are the ones to get.

Since I am rebuilding my rig from scratch, I plan on waiting for at least a month or two after the release when we will have an accurate picture what exactly is needed to run this sim and what settings are possible for normal gameplay.

[lbuchele]

I did a new build, with a 2600k@4,6 GHz , cooled by a Corsair H70, with 8GB DDR3 RAM,
Mobo Asus P67 Pro, Nvidia GTX 580 , SSD 80 GB Intel, HDD WD 1TB,PSU Corsair 850W
I was able to run Crysis warhead in enthusiastic mode ,4AA without any hiccups at 1920x1200 with a processor rate of occupancy of 43% each core no more than that.
It's the faster system I ever had, period and it can run any game you think without a drop of sweat.
I highly recommend it for anyone interested.

[baronWastelan]

Also consider that it is very easy to sell used Intel CPU's on ebay, which makes the LGA1155 part very attractive now since you can sell it a year later for ~70% of what you paid for it. I just sold my E8400 last month, got over half of what I paid for it new over 3 years ago!

[kimosabi]

Ibuchele, that rig should crunch some numbers fo sho! I'm lookin at the Gigabyte UD7 myself. Will probably go for it.

Originally Posted by lbuchele

I did a new build, with a 2600k@4,6 GHz , cooled by a Corsair H70, with 8GB DDR3 RAM,
Mobo Asus P67 Pro, Nvidia GTX 580 , SSD 80 GB Intel, HDD WD 1TB,PSU Corsair 850W

Cool, that is quite the rig I was planning to buy, simply not sure if I should go for an SSD for the OS.

But definately:

2600k
GTX 580
8Gb DDR3
P67 Mobo
Enermax 620W (existing)

What Ram exactly is it btw?
May I also ask if you are happy with the H70 and what you changed to get the cpu that high and what the temps are?

[Tacoma74]

Originally Posted by Hecke

Cool, that is quite the rig I was planning to buy, simply not sure if I should go for an SSD for the OS.

But definately:

2600k
GTX 580
8Gb DDR3
P67 Mobo
Enermax 620W (existing)

What Ram exactly is it btw?
May I also ask if you are happy with the H70 and what you changed to get the cpu that high and what the temps are?

Screw the 2600k... waste of money compared to the 2500k. There is no way that 2mb L3 cache and hyperthreading (useless for gaming) is worth an extra $100+.

As far as SSD goes, it's really really not necessary at this point in time. Get 2 SATA III drives in Raid 0 and that is WAY MORE than sufficient for games. Even 7200 rpm SATA II drives are plenty fast still. SSD is way too expensive at this point.

8Gb of RAM is alright if you're running a 64 bit OS, but 4Gb is more than sufficient for years to come. It really depends how well it'll run by what kind of configuration you're running. What i mean by that is if your running say 4 x 2Gb sticks vs. 2 x 4Gb sticks. The latter is usually the better choice. Just remember the more sticks of RAM you have, the more stress it puts on the memory controller. This basically means that if you plan to overclock your RAM speeds and reduce timings, than you won't have near as much headroom without becoming unstable. Also make sure to get RAM that has a voltage under 1.65V to be safe. I've heard from several sources that the new memory controllers onboard the Sandy Bridge chips don't like high voltage RAM very much.

My 2 cents

Originally Posted by Tacoma74

Screw the 2600k... waste of money compared to the 2500k. There is no way that 2mb L3 cache and hyperthreading (useless for gaming) is worth an extra $100+.

As far as SSD goes, it's really really not necessary at this point in time. Get 2 SATA III drives in Raid 0 and that is WAY MORE than sufficient for games. Even 7200 rpm SATA II drives are plenty fast still. SSD is way too expensive at this point.

8Gb of RAM is alright if you're running a 64 bit OS, but 4Gb is more than sufficient for years to come. It really depends how well it'll run by what kind of configuration you're running. What i mean by that is if your running say 4 x 2Gb sticks vs. 2 x 4Gb sticks. The latter is usually the better choice. Just remember the more sticks of RAM you have, the more stress it puts on the memory controller. This basically means that if you plan to overclock your RAM speeds and reduce timings, than you won't have near as much headroom without becoming unstable. Also make sure to get RAM that has a voltage under 1.65V to be safe. I've heard from several sources that the new memory controllers onboard the Sandy Bridge chips don't like high voltage RAM very much.

My 2 cents

Considering the last interview, there might be Hyperthreading support.

I won't do anything with raid ..., but maybe I will keep my Velociraptor for the OS.

@ Ram: I will go for 2x 4 Gb for sure and yes, Win 7 64 bit

[lbuchele]

Originally Posted by Hecke

Cool, that is quite the rig I was planning to buy, simply not sure if I should go for an SSD for the OS.

But definately:

2600k
GTX 580
8Gb DDR3
P67 Mobo
Enermax 620W (existing)

What Ram exactly is it btw?
May I also ask if you are happy with the H70 and what you changed to get the cpu that high and what the temps are?

RAM is G.Skill Ripjaw,don't know the latency.
H70 is a totally sealed no maintenance liquid cooled solution.
Temps at this level of OC is no more than 68C
You need to choose well the fan that will work with the H70.
The guy who build my system did a good job.
My case helps a lot too is a NZXT Phantom.
The OC is really simple,you just change the multiplier,that's all.
And NEVER allow the BCLK change anything up of 100 MHz if you don't want a dead SB.