Is this new core i5-2500?
>>80342717No AMD has the NEW 2500k
>>80342717No, it is an i9
>>80342748If you bought an 2600 or 3600 from AMD you basically have the new i5-2500
>>80342765True. You also have some decent upgrade path (depending on your mobo), not some Ivy Bridge die-shrink and +267 MHz RAM frequency.
>>80342765>tfw 1700It still runs everything be it games or programming
>>80342717No, the 10850k is.
>>80342717let me guess, is this 14nm++++++++++++++++++++?
It's widely available, unlike inferior competitor's TSMC vapourware CPU and broken USB implementation on inferior chipsetshttps://old.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/lnmet0/an_update_on_usb_connectivity_with_500_series/
>>80342717>intel CPUs only just getting 20 PCIe lanes
>>80342717>Is this new core i5-2500?That would be the Ryzen 5 1600AF>Enormous upgrade path>(Unofficial) ECC compatibility>Extreme price/performance ratio while it was in production>built on reliable 12nm process>relatively low temps compared to other 6c/12t offerings>energy efficient>will stay relevant for years
>>80342843oh yes the usb issues that were ignored by the amd faggot shills until ayyymd finally acknowledged itfuck amdrones
>>80342759this, Is Intel so bad that the new i5 is an i9?
>>80342717the 2500 was good though. this 11900k is already totally inferior to amd's offering in every way.
>>80342717the i5 2500K wasn't a housefire
>>80344040I thought the motherboards were supposed to explode fucking injeet faggot nigger, now it's just usb problems
>>80344040first time I heard about this?been on 3600x for almost 2 years, what are you on dude?
>i5-2500(K)Cheap, efficient, solid, with great potential>i9-11900KCost about as much as a whole PC with i5 didYea...
>>80344105>unable to read usb media>random kb and mouse disc to bsod>vr and dacs hard lock your system>just usb problems>also affects loonixthe absolute state of ayyymdrones
>>80344196>boils your entire computerCope.
>>80344248>3rd worlder shills for ayyymdI'm never buying amd trash and always advice people to avoid it. Dial 8.
>>80342874love that AMD ECC support, i’ll check this out
>>80342717>up to DDR4-3200
>>80344493Wtf Intel is Jews and AMD is IndiansYou're confused dude
>>80342825Nope it is the 8700K and 9900K.These chips are thermally limited and are stuck on the same general architecture. They are mild evolution. Intel needs to move completely away from Core 2 and Skylake lineage if they want to seriously overtake Zen. Any of the 10-core Comet Lakes are jokes. They are severely thermally limited unless you running code is comically parallel, however in that use case you'll get a real workstation/server SKUs not bother with desktop SKUs.
>>80342765The 2600 was complete garbage.
>>80344750as opposed to?
>>80342765>If you bought an 2600 or 3600 from AMD you basically have the new i5-2500Still worse than a i5 10600K ffs
THANK YOU BASED INTEL
>>80342717>completely different pricing tier>already behind on single threaded performance>already behind on core count>last gasp of an old architecture>cranked clocks and hilarious power consumptionIf anything it's the new FX 9590.
>>80344903>chart starts at 110what kind of jewish tricks are those, the difference between all of them is 3-4 frames ffs
>>80344903>4fps difference>50% difference in visual representation
>>80344679What are you on about? I had the 8700 and now the 10900 and the 10900 can run the same speeds at lower voltages.10900 had 40% better performance at 100watt than the 8700.Nothing is thermally limited unless you're a stupid idiot who tries to overclock and removes the power limits.
the first DDR5 cpu will be the new i5-2500
>>80342765This. The 3600 was a nobrainer for a loong time. Im still laughing, bought it for 170
>>80344970Dumb tranime faggot. The first-gen DDR5 chips will be garbage with trash-tier memory controllers and unoptimised motherboards, just like Haswell-E and X99. I hope you buy one and realise what a huge mistake you made getting gouged. The smart people will be waiting for second- and third-gen DDR5 platforms, which is what Sandy Vag was.
>>803448831600 and 2600 are straight up garbage and cannot be compared to 2500k.They are garbage because they throttle 3070 amd above even at 1440p, that is deplorable.
>>80342717if you are a hardcore waitfag everything is a stop gap until they start slapping RAM on the CPU dies which should be around DDR6
>>80345163The 2500K "throttled" a 1070, so what's your point here? Seems on par to me. All pieces of shit together, all with delusional fanbases who can't admit it. It's like looking in a mirror for (You).
>>80344620It's not in production anymore sadly, the days of 85$ smt hexacores are long gone
>>80344248is linx some kind of synth bench?i have 65C on 5900x in Cinebench with a good air cooler.baka desu senpai
It can't be the new 2500k if it's the flagship top of the line processor, retard. The 2500k was good because it had massive power for the price range it was in.
>>80345800Linx 0.6.5 is a old AVX stress-test like Intel Burntest. There are newer AVX stress-tests that loads newer Intel-CPUs a lot harder(almost twice the power draw). Cinebench is a very meh test. I hate that it has become the "default" test. One can't just look at these graphs either, becuase they don't tell the most important factor: what's the powerlimit set to? I can limit my 10900 to 40watts and run it at 40C if I want to, or remove the limit and increase the voltage and burn it.
>>80342765anything below 5000 series are crap
>>80342717>i5 2500k>affordable >overclocking potential makes it an absolute steal>this shit>expensive as fuck>no room for overclockingNo.
>>80345900i agree on cinebench. i've used it only to verify that I build the pc properly and that everything is working as it should. And for that, it's very convenient
>>80345067this is a non-human, automated post.
>>80345930>And for that, it's very convenientMore convenient than other real benchmarks? I mean, downloading a 8mb zip-file and run the binary that will push the CPU to its very limit isn't very unconvenient in my eyes.
>>80344746Did you get into PCs this week? The Ryzen 2000 series was a huge leap in consumer CPUs.
>>80344644That's just the rated speeds, Ryzen's rated speeds are around that.
>>80346055i meant that it's convenient because it's so popular that I can compare not only the score but also the temperature since many others have used it on configurations identical to mine
>>80345163>all I care for is GAYMENThe 2600 is a CPU workload beast, it still runs casual gaymens fine regardless.
>>80342717>up to 3200 ddr4do intelcucks really?
>>80342717i5-2500 was easy to heat control
>>80346094didnt ryzen 5000 come up with similar claims? afaik it's an officially supported frequency not maximum
>>803460612000 series zen (zen+) was like 2-3%better IPC over zen1, clocked about 10% better, and had less hopeless memory controller. They were solid updates of the underlying processors, but they didn't blow the doors off the place. I've owned an fx-8350, 1800x, 2700x, 3950x and now a 5950x, and the real upticks have been architecturally the 3000 (zen2) and 5000 (zen3). Disregarding that even base zen is leaps ahead of the old bulldozer. I will agree that the 1600af (rebadged 2600) for 85 bux was impeccable price/performance, as was the deluge of other cheap 2000 series at the end of their production run.
>>803427652600 chad reporting in, for $150 dollars I went from a 4c/4t intel cpu to 6c/12t cpu and couldn't be happier
>>80342765140 euros from an 8300
>>80342717The 5600X already is. You aren't pulling a 30% OC out of it's ass like Sandy Bridge but you get a free +200mhz and longer boost times undervolting on a curve and it never wants to go above 60C with a H212 black edition.
>>80342717i5-3570K was the new i5-2500, silly
>>803427653600 = i5-25003700x = i7-2600
>>80344121wasn't the 2500k msrp 289 usd
>>80346094>being this fucking newEver since DDR manufacturers have exceeded officially rated speeds.Intel's 10th gen can clock memory to 4400 stable, despite being rated for 3000. Moron.
>>80342814Based. 1700X here, should have bought a 1700 instead because they overclock pretty much the same.
>>80346570>3700x = i7-2600No, 3900x = i7 2600.8-core Ryzen CPUs are a fucking meme.
>>80346696Anon, you do realize that the i7 2600k was NOT the top of the line chip when it was out... right? It was the best bang for the buck upper mid tier chip you could get, just like the 3700xContext mang
no. The new i5-2500k is the i5-2500k @5ghz
>>80344903>3.4 frames difference made to look like half of overall performanceThis is fucking embarrassing, even for shitlel.
>>80346722>Anon, you do realize that the i7 2600k was NOT the top of the line chip when it was out... right?Neither was the 3900x.>It was the best bang for the buck upper mid tier chip you could get, just like the 3700xNo, like the 3900x. The 3700x isn't a bargain just because the 3800x is a ripoff, it was also a ripoff and the 3800x was just a larger ripoff, especially when you compare the performance to the 3600.The reason why people falsely lionise 8 core CPUs is because they falsely believe in gamerlore nonsense about 8 being some magic number which games will work best on in the future.
>>80346537>The 5600X already is>300$no, this gen's 2500K is the 1600AF
>>80346804>The reason why people falsely lionise 8 core CPUs is because they falsely believe in gamerlore nonsense about 8 being some magic number which games will work best on in the future.Its for feature parity with the now current gen consoles anon... Its not exactly a crazy concept as both the PS5 and XSX have more or less cut down 3700 chips (FPU was found to be closer to Zen+'s on the console version of the chip)
>>80342765The 3600 is a fucking unfair cpu.
>>803468471600AF might have 5 years in it, 5600X might have 5-10. I bought a launch 2500K for around 200. With inflation and the dollar tanking 300 isn't really that bad. If 100 is make or break you can just scoop up a 3600.
>>80342765Based. 3600 is amazingly good for its price. Well, before tech shit went to the roof that is
It factually is the 9900k, those with it are set until 2028 or until their mobo dies.A 3600 will be trounced as soon as 8c16t becomes the norm (one year, two at most).
>>80346849>Its for feature parity with the now current gen consoles anon...A bullshit concept which has been disproven by every reviewer.>Its not exactly a crazy concept You're right, it's not a crazy concept, which is why reviewers tested it and showed it to be false.
>>80346849That bullshit argument has been touted for 4 console generations, "consoles are optimized and use specialized hardware so PCs have to catch up". >Console A is like High End PC CPU!>Console B is like slightly lower end CPU!The fact is they are cut down PCs that made some compromises so they won't burn down when trying to run your games.A six core CPU will still be enough in 3 or 4 years, then MAYBE we'll see 8core become necessary.
>>80342765i bought a 2600 for $120 right when the 3000 series came out in 2019. It has been great.
Wait they went BACK to 8 cores? Wtf the 10900 had 10 cores...
Never understood the 2500k hypeI went from a Pentium 4 pre-built to a DIY build i7 920 when it was first releasedI then retired the i7-920 for the 4770k, then retired my 4770k years ago with the 9900kIntel at this point is recycling the 8700k and 9900k until they move on from 14nm++++++++++
>>80342717>Top end SKU>8 coresWhat the FUCK are jewtel smoking lmao
>>80342717noalder lake is more likely
>>80344674Fuck off shitkike
>>80346139Now this, this is bait!
>>80344883>i5 10600Kcope intcel
>>80346791yes retard anon. this is a video on the official INTEL Youtube channel and not some random tech reviewer.........
>>80347753>this is a video on the official INTEL Youtube channeljesus fucking christ fuck int*l
>>80347746>200€>350€Is the 5600x better? Definitely. 150€ better?No way in hell.
>>80347706>housefirethat ain't a Vega card
>>80347767your bait is weak and I hope the second you pressed send you felt deep shame and utter remorse. Who am I kidding. Assburgers is too strong a disease
>>80347847are you using a fucking script? holy shit i'm searching the archive. you LITERALLY posted the same sequence of pics already 2 times
>>80347872>you can only post a picture once This is your brain on intelaviv
>>80342717R5 3600 is the new i5-2500
>>80344956Only in applications that have parallel as hell (Not mainstream/gayming shit). Otherwise, you only see a modest increase due to larger cache pool. Zen SKUs are better at parallel stuff anyway (Both in value and raw performance)Again, the 10900K is the paypig edition for Intel-fags. Coffee Lake-fags have no compelling reason to upgrade. Comet Lake is Cedar Hill 2.0
>>80342765doesn't 2600 barely beat i5-2500's ipc though...?
>>80342717Sure, if it costs 200$.
>>80346099Easy to OC as well, you could just bump the vcore offset a bit and get an easy extra 1,2GHz+ all core.
>>80347745Is it? Because I agree with him.
>>80342874Enjoy your 4 GHz m8
>>80347400They ported their 10nm core design to 14nm, and cut off 2 cores in the process.
>>80348883True, you lose out on single threaded performance but gain 2 cores, much much higher multithreaded performance, plenty of new CPU instructions, ECC support, DDR4, ability to upgrade to Zen2/Zen3 on the same mobo, etc.Before Zen came around, you'd have to spend around 600-800$ to get a comparable chip from Intel. They did it for 250$.
3600 and 10400f are great cpus that you can't go wrong with buying either, if only gpu prices weren't fucked.
>>80342717No that is the i9-11900k try to keep up
>>80346570>my last cpu I7 2600k>my cpu now R7 3700xAm i based?
>>80345914In perfomance they are worse, but 3600 will remembered as the best deal before AMD realized they can charge more now
>>80349059I am, m8, I am.Chip cost me $55. Enjoy paying 10x that.
>>80342717I really love how consistently paid Intel shills are trying to meme in retrospect their 10 years of stagnated performance as "product longevity". It's all over the web. I can see how they all sat in their messaging shop wondering how they could spin having forced 4c/8t as the consumer sweetspot for a generation, and then it went and became the low-end option in a couple of years as soon as they got just a little bit of real competition>doesnt it feel cheap and consoomer to get new and better cpus each year, you silly goys?>wouldnt it be better if you could keep your cpu for 10 years and there were no improvements?>yeah, that's the ticket!>go out my shills, out and shitpost
>>80350928>$55 for a 4 GHz cpuUnless you got it for free from digging through a dumpster, you got punked m8
>>80342826Intel has fully embraced 14nm. They will never change.
>>80350539Just a shame your next CPU can't be the i7-4800K.
>>80351662Don't worry they will finally get to 10nm later this year...while AMD prepares 5nm Zen4.
>>80342765Hardware is too new and hasn't stood the test of time yet. Come back in a decade see how viable it is. 10 years ago no one knew that the 4 core i5s would be good for a solid decade before becoming obsolete for things such as AAA gaming. I've been into computing since the early 90s. And some periods in PC history are very short lived and some aren't. But one thing I know is that no one can predict the future and "future proofing" doesn't exist.
>>80351035None of the tech companies are worth shilling for. Whether it's Nvidia, AMD, Intel, they all want your money and that's all they care about. Just buy what fits your needs and price point and leave it at that. It appears so primitive to idolize any company.
>>80351946AMD cares about security and openness as well as money. Intel cares about only money.
>>80342717Modern AMD and Intel processors are shit, they both require retarded amounts of power consumption to operate.
>>80342717No, it's the Pentium 4 Extreme Edition.
Where my 2700X bois at
>>80352567Fuck off ijeet
>$600+ MSRP>not even close to AMD's multi-core (50% to half as many cores as closest competitor)>insignificant single thread advantage>still needs reactor level cooling>new i5-2500try again shill
>>80342717>is intel's newest chip the new housefire?Obviously yes
10900KF is getting cheaper and cheaper, do i grab one boys?322 jewro for 5600X, 416 jewro for 10900KF.Kikes or poochinks?pic somewhat related, it's a cat!
>>80354922I would, but I just bought a 10700k. no ragrets
>>80355066I'm just worried i'll get BTFO next month when 11th gen comes out.Wait™ is the worst meme ;_;
>>80355129Realize there will always be something better. Grab a bargain and be happy.
>>80355158If those are the actual prices i think i'll just pre-order a 11900KF and save up the extra month or two to upgrade a few components. Like meme fast RAM, and a oversized PSU.Thanks buddy.
>>80355066Bought a 10700k tooCan't say it's been absolutely mind blowing coming from a 4690k but it's been the difference between going in dry and going in with lube on certain tasksYou get what you want either way but there is no more struggle
>>80355230I'm still deciding on a board to pair it with. I'm leaning Asus simply because they adhere to Intel power spec. What board did you go for?
>>80355066>>80355230bought a 10700KF, i really wish i had integrated graphics as it would be very helpful right now but i got it for $280 total when including tax and shipping.
>>80355248I went cheapMSI Z490 Pro-AIf your willing to spend more on a better board then definitely go for itI don't have much requirements, the only thing I hate about it is they choose the realtek 2.5gb instead of an intel gigabitPower limits where defiantly not enforced but I don't mind, I have a Nh-D15 and runs cool enough at load. My PC overall actually uses less power in general use than the 4690k
>>80355343>realtek 2.5gb instead of an intel gigabitI was going to go for a MSI Carbon as almost everything about it is good, including that nic. The Asus boards all have the Intel i255-v controller which have hardware flaws causing dropouts and packet loss. Fixed in the upcoming z590 boards, but I figure if it gets on my nerves (after firmware "fix" which sometimes doesn't work I've heard) then I'll just throw in a cheap nic card. Still debating between Asus and Msi tho.
>>80355282>bought a 10700KF, i really wish i had integrated graphics as it would be very helpful right now but i got it for $280 total when including tax and shipping.I wanted the igpu for gpu passthrough on linux. Also, I've contemplated using it and selling my dedicated gpu until stock and pricing comes back to normal then upgrade.
>>80355441>I wanted the igpu for gpu passthrough on linuxexactly what i needed it for too, i have a cheap graphics card laying around and i'm hoping i can make something work with that along with my main GPU. would've been nice not to have to use another PCIE slot just for this.
>>80342717>20 pcie 4>newlol?
>>80342717>8 coresNo.Like it's probably superb for single threaded, but with highly parallel stuff it's just never fast enough.
>>80356138>Like it's probably superb for single threaded>LikeLike, single thread is all that matters for gaymen. It's not a workstation CPU.
>>80342717>new>new>new>enhanced>backwards compatibilityYep. Sounds like a refresh of the 2500 to me.
>>80351725not directly comparable as every fab uses arbitrary rules to their nomenclature, but yes TSMC is still ahead of Intel and Samsung.
>>80351725>10nm later this yearanytime now, i promise, it is not vaporware.
>>80344903Now this is judiasm
>>80342717>11700k only $150 more expensivenah
>>80346676you need an "overclocking motherboard" to support high-speed memory now, man. That's what he's talking about.
>>80344903>5fps different>50% visual differenceHoly fuck even soros can't top this jewery.
>>80354732>half as much core>only 3°C lowerthird world indeed
>year of the lord 2021>still 14nm++++what the fuck is wrong with intel?
>>80347847explain this graph to a brainlet and why is it clown?
>>80342717>Is this new core i5-2500?new i5-2500 is DDR5OP picture is DDR4
>>80360077do you need more(less)?
>>80360728>DDR5 coming soon>PCI 4 will be replaced by PCI 5 almost immediately>5-3nm process almost ready>New RTX and DLSS standards will make current cards obsolete>cyclical catastrophe will hit in the next 15-25 yearsIf you have a computer throw it out, then wait until the robotech masters return.
>>80342717There will never be another i5 2500k. Let it go bro.
>>80352567Stop looking at gayming and overclocking edition SKUs you brainlet. These markets don't care much for power efficiency or consumption. There are a large number of SKUs that are incredibly energy efficient and drink as much power as an old-ass 386 while utterly decimating it.
>>80360547The second graph shows an apu vs an i3 with a 1050. That's such a shit comparison of a head to head.
>>80362234oh shit i didn't see it. this could be a shoop though. intelaviv can't be this stupid.
>>80362419>intelaviv can't be this stupid.You mean deceitful