i7 2600k, i5 2500k & 2300 1155 Sandy Bridge Review
Introduction and Technical Specifications
Published: 3rd January 2011 | Source: Intel | Price: £170 & £260 |
Introduction
Evolution is one of the most important things in the PC Hardware marketplace. The constant need to improve your product to be faster, more energy efficient, lower priced and more attractive to the audience is vital if you're to stay ahead in the technological war.
The real secret, the holy grail if you will, of a license to print your own money is to have something that hits the sweet-spot in ever category. If you can get a hyper-desirable product onto the marketplace at the right time, and the right cost. Probably the biggest recent examples of this are the iPhone and the Nintendo Wii Fit. Two mighty products that were instant successes and have held their value long after the initial buzz has worn off.
Back in the PC Hardware world this desirability has to come with longevity. It doesn't matter how much people want something if it's going to be obsolete in a few months, or even worse if they believe it will. The Intel LGA1156 socket, which was the value alternative to the mighty triple-channel LGA1366 had exactly these problems.
Initially coming hot on the heels of the LGA1366 Core i7s it was marketed as the more cost-effective choice. Unfortunately whilst the i7-870 is a complete nutter of a chip it was a long while before decent value chips appeared. By that point everyone had either saved up the extra for the 9 series of Core i7 Processors, moved to the Hex-Core AMDs, or heard the rumours that Intel were making a replacement for that socket.
One of the biggest benefits that AMD have is in their use of AM3 socket for many years. So you can purchase a setup safe in the knowledge you can keep upgrading for many years. The Intel Socket 775 was the last one that came from the Blue stable with a major shelf life and, thanks to its continued good performance, is still popular.
So where does this leave the recent Intel releases? The LGA1366 has been around for a while, but will soon see a replacement, and the LGA1156 has barely lasted 12 months before something new is on the scene vying for your attention. Although nobody is silly enough to expect to be future-proofed we'd at least like the ability to have something we can put one new generation of CPU in before we have to bin it off, so the new LGA1155 needs to be very good indeed to wash away some of the bitter taste that such a swift change leaves.
Technical Specifications
| Model | Cores | HT | Speed | Turbo | TDP | Price |
| i5-2300 | 4 | N | 2.8GHz | 3.1GHz | 95W | £140 |
| i5-2500K | 4 | N | 3.3GHz | 3.7GHz | 95W | £168 |
| i7-2600K | 4 | Y | 3.4GHz | 3.8GHz | 95W | £245 |
The i5-2300 is definitely the lower model of the bunch on test today, being 500MHz slower than the 2500K which looks like the it should be the sensible choice if Hyper-Threading isn't the be-all and end-all of your needs.
Most Recent Comments
Finally we have the latest range of Intel CPUs available to us. Do they keep up the performance levels of previous generations?
great reviews man, glad to finally see them.
considering these are mainstream cpus - they are really good. I dont like how they overclock tho... just seems silly to me.....
Id like to see them swinging in a good video crunch session.
Wow. Just.. wow. I agree with the Turbo-only mode being a tad obnoxious though. But, otherwise quite nice looking chips and awesome vids. Thanks mucho!
absolutely brilliant review Tom! wasn't expecting this when i woke up this morning. That 2500K definitely looks like the next must-have chip 
Think I'll have to get one when I finally get sick of my xeon 
Think I'll have to get one when I finally get sick of my xeon Excellent review Tom. The benefits of 32nm are outstanding, and one wonders why they didn't re-fab the i7 and i5-7xx chips last year when i3 came out. Capacity I suppose. You gotta love those numbers for power consumption and temperatures.
Bulldozer is going to have to be really good for AMD to stay in the market.
Bulldozer is going to have to be really good for AMD to stay in the market.
^^^Really good, or reeeeally cheaper. They don't have much threshold to work with, seeing these intel prices now. It's going to get good. Thanks guys for the reviews, I know it was a ton of work. Looking forward to more.
Great review Tom! You seem to be one of the few that took the time to test these stock and overclocked 
Man imagine what the cpus that are releasing later this year will be able to do!
The i5 2500K is definitely gonna be in my next gaming rig, due to it's epic performance and value. Plus most games that I play will fare better with 4 Cores without HT =D.
Great review btw, but any chance you can chuck in the charts of a i7 970 or 980x so we can see how they do against the king of the hill?
Great review btw, but any chance you can chuck in the charts of a i7 970 or 980x so we can see how they do against the king of the hill?
i7-2500K 4 N 3.3GHz 3.7GHz 95W £168
Typo in 1st page? Should be i5?
Still reading the review.
Edit:
Great review, do you think a Gigabyte would fair even better?
Glad I've been waiting for the i5-2500k. Although I'm getting very impatient now 
.
Typo in 1st page? Should be i5?
Still reading the review
.Edit:
Great review, do you think a Gigabyte would fair even better?
Glad I've been waiting for the i5-2500k
. Although I'm getting very impatient now .wow these look really nice and at 5GHZ 
really want to see in tests i7 @4+ and SB @4+
Good, good reviews Tom & Co.
mm lovely tech. replacing 1156 gives budget builders/core 2 users(the majority) a better opportunity. gauranteed this makes Intels market bigger/popular. is AMD gona sell CPU's now? maby 1 or 2
? 
thx
mm lovely tech. replacing 1156 gives budget builders/core 2 users(the majority) a better opportunity. gauranteed this makes Intels market bigger/popular. is AMD gona sell CPU's now? maby 1 or 2
? thx
^^ yeah but replacing the 1156 means that all of us who bought one less than a year ago now need to spend extra dough on a new motherboard as well, something I did not / do not want to do.
Top review though as usual
Top review though as usual
Great review Tom. Somehow I'm not really impressed... They do overclock to 5GHz, but with those voltages, it can't be used. And only few CPUs and motherboards can even reach 5GHz. So overclocking hasn't really been improved much, maybe by 300 MHz. The only bigger architectural change is the monolith design and the better graphics. The new chipset isn't that good either. Only 2 SATA 6GB/s ports and no native USB 3.0. The only reason for this seems to be for Intel to get more money, since some stupid people will go and upgrade their LGA1156 rig...
This means though that if Bulldozer is as good as claimed, it might have a fair chance against Sandy Bridge. I guess we'll have to wait and see.
This means though that if Bulldozer is as good as claimed, it might have a fair chance against Sandy Bridge. I guess we'll have to wait and see.
Great review.
Just a layman's question. If turbo kicks and increases the core speed according to usage, does that mean the chip uses a lot less energy/power when it is idle?
Just a layman's question. If turbo kicks and increases the core speed according to usage, does that mean the chip uses a lot less energy/power when it is idle?
Great review Tom! Will aria be selling the 2500k as that is my first purchase of the new year !
!Some fantastic results to be had, both artificially and professionally for me. The mobos will only get better imo, I'd lookout for some nice MSI/Gigabyte/ASUS releases in the near future.
As a point of personal interest, and just to look up some comparisons on a gaming pov. The purely gaming pc I have based on 775, real decent quad, el crappo memory, 480 and a physx card and a mobo I need to swap out for a spare cos it's stopped liking overclocks (needs a new psu also, but that's besides the point). I quickly installed the benches in the video to see:
3D Vant: P21489, G:19238, P:33107
3D 11: P5114
Heaven: 52.9 fps / Score 1333
Plays all the games on 1920x1200 without issues and massive quality settings, physx and so on.
Gaming wize, I still don't think there's a requirement to upgrade this generation. Of course, if you have to buy new, you have plenty of reasons. Luckily I have spares and sources.
As a point of personal interest, and just to look up some comparisons on a gaming pov. The purely gaming pc I have based on 775, real decent quad, el crappo memory, 480 and a physx card and a mobo I need to swap out for a spare cos it's stopped liking overclocks (needs a new psu also, but that's besides the point). I quickly installed the benches in the video to see:
3D Vant: P21489, G:19238, P:33107
3D 11: P5114
Heaven: 52.9 fps / Score 1333
Plays all the games on 1920x1200 without issues and massive quality settings, physx and so on.
Gaming wize, I still don't think there's a requirement to upgrade this generation. Of course, if you have to buy new, you have plenty of reasons. Luckily I have spares and sources.
Great review, answered the question about performance. This is impressive work from Intel, sort of raises a question of how good the enthusiast level stuff may be
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by benj3
Great review Tom! Will aria be selling the 2500k as that is my first purchase of the new year ! |
I think the 2500K will be the most popular SB chipQuote:
|
Originally Posted by cinek2
of course they will I think the 2500K will be the most popular SB chip |
better get in quick then haha!I was thinking of getting a new sound card along with a Z-5500 speakerset for my birthday (march 1), but since SB performs soo dang good I think I might just have to save up a little longer and get myself an i7-2600k, a decent p67 mobo, some sweet ddr3 memory and of course a D-14
I think this is a mistake, in the technical specification page http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/i7_2600k_i5_2500k_2300_1155_sandy_bridge_review/1
EDIT: looks like its either changed or something, or maybe I was seeing things
EDIT: looks like its either changed or something, or maybe I was seeing things
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by taz838
I think this is a mistake, in the technical specification page http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/i7_2600k_i5_2500k_2300_1155_sandy_bridge_review/1 EDIT: looks like its either changed or something, or maybe I was seeing things |
. Few more days now... ZzzzzMy sig image keeps going
.Woohooo! Ding dong! xDD
It seems like the sandy bridge CPU's are targeted at bench mark enthusiasts. I don't like the turbo feature at all for overclocking. if you overclock it should stay where you put it to begin with.
So overall I'm not that impressed yet
So overall I'm not that impressed yet
Yep, I was starting to get withdrawal systems having had no OC3D videos to watch.
These would fold like no other..
I'm still scratching my head here tbh Intel have released a new range of upgraded CPU's so soon after the i3's - i'7's and AMD will be also, despite only having released the bloody 1055 1090T last year !?!
Will people be able to trade in there i3's etc..will they heck.
Any ideas Tom?
Very exciting year for PC gamers
Will people be able to trade in there i3's etc..will they heck.
Any ideas Tom?
Very exciting year for PC gamers
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mr Muggles
Very exciting year for PC gamers |
I'm probably just being blind but when are these available to buy?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by happyshoppa2
I'm probably just being blind but when are these available to buy? |
Not a clue about how much are going to be in stock though.
Anyone found some reviews on 1155 mobo's?
Only found two (MSI GD65 and Asus P8P67.)
Reviewers are probably working very hard on the reviews, I'm just very, very impatient on this one haha
we have loads of motherboards here to do, but theres no point putting them all up on the same day. Giga UD7 and the MSI will probably be the next ones we will do.
when are you planing on reviewing the mid range boards (UD4/5 asus pro/deluxe etc)?
Havnt made any set plans dude. we'll get there when we get time.
Edit...Nice review as always Tom
I would be impressed if Sandy Bridge technology were put on 4-6 core current I5, I7, 1366 CPU's. Seems like all they did was update (correct short comings) the previous 1156 CPU / socket so they could say TADA...it's a new CPU, but I'm not an engineer.
It just leaves me scratching my head
I would be impressed if Sandy Bridge technology were put on 4-6 core current I5, I7, 1366 CPU's. Seems like all they did was update (correct short comings) the previous 1156 CPU / socket so they could say TADA...it's a new CPU, but I'm not an engineer.
It just leaves me scratching my head
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by happyshoppa2
I'm probably just being blind but when are these available to buy? |
2600k is €340 and 2600 is €320 at azerty.nl
Those prices have to drop. An i7-870 costs only €260, the i7-860 €230, and the i7-2600 replaces the i7-860/870 now doesn't it
i5-760 is €180, i5-2500k is €230? *sigh*
Those prices have to drop. An i7-870 costs only €260, the i7-860 €230, and the i7-2600 replaces the i7-860/870 now doesn't it
i5-760 is €180, i5-2500k is €230? *sigh*
Would like to see the 2500K in a HTPC with just the on chip GPU. Still scratching my head about them put a Direct X 10 on-chip GPU instead of Direct X 11.
Just a thought.
I'm interested in seeing Bulldozer.....
Just a thought.
I'm interested in seeing Bulldozer.....
TTL, I"d be interested to see if you could give a small idea over the time you use it, of any raise in your electric bill with that monster. hehe. Friend of mine has a 1000 Watt and I"ve heard its a socket hog from heck.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Filekutter
TTL, I"d be interested to see if you could give a small idea over the time you use it, of any raise in your electric bill with that monster. hehe. Friend of mine has a 1000 Watt and I"ve heard its a socket hog from heck. |
People forget that when they buy these overkill 1000w PSU's that they are actually going to end up paying higher leccy bills as a result. Well over £200 more a year
NO THEY DONT ...
A psu will only draw the power it needs. because its 1000w doesnt mean it draws 1000w constant its capable of it ...
hell my dads 400w psu in his quad draws more power than my 700w in my c2d ...
A psu will only draw the power it needs. because its 1000w doesnt mean it draws 1000w constant its capable of it ...
hell my dads 400w psu in his quad draws more power than my 700w in my c2d ...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by WelshD1K
NO THEY DONT ... A psu will only draw the power it needs. because its 1000w doesnt mean it draws 1000w constant its capable of it ... hell my dads 400w psu in his quad draws more power than my 700w in my c2d ... |
hmm how come you didn't do the obvious real life test on any sandy bridge ?
that being a x264 bench ?
if you compile x264 from git
a simple
make checkasm;./checkasm
checkasm –bench
would probably be a good start to 2011, you Probably want to disable SpeedStep though in the Bios to get consistent numbers OC.
if you get problems or want more help with making real life testing scripts etc then you can ask in http://doom10.org/index.php?topic=717.0 for instance or the IRC #x264 and #x264dev channel's where C/Assembly development happens (x86/64 and ARM etc) OC
that being a x264 bench ?
if you compile x264 from git
a simple
make checkasm;./checkasm
checkasm –bench
would probably be a good start to 2011, you Probably want to disable SpeedStep though in the Bios to get consistent numbers OC.
if you get problems or want more help with making real life testing scripts etc then you can ask in http://doom10.org/index.php?topic=717.0 for instance or the IRC #x264 and #x264dev channel's where C/Assembly development happens (x86/64 and ARM etc) OC
Thanks for the brilliant review guys, ordered a 2500k and the msi p67 C45.
Finally going to be back with the Intel boys.
Finally going to be back with the Intel boys.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by killablade
Correct, but a 1000w is more efficient stressed than when only 100-300w is being used. A 650w, for example, is usually more efficient at those loads. Therefore a 1000w psu would indeed use more power, simply because it's less efficient at those loads. |
.Most systems actually use only 200-300w or so even under load. Therefore a 600w PSU is most efficient in most cases.
I purchased my 700W as it was only a few quid more and gives a little more overhead
. Mine's 90+ pretty much down to 30% loading anyway, highest of all current PSUs .great reaview as always mate.
cheers.
cheers.
Tom ....love the video reviews... I'm learning so much!
The Sandybridge releases have thrown a spanner in my plans to build a new PC .. my first.
I'm not a gamer ... I need a multi-monitor (4x23") workstation for financial trading ... so only 2D graphics.
I was planning on using an i7-950 ... should I now consider the i5 2500K instead?
Many thanks in advance.
The Sandybridge releases have thrown a spanner in my plans to build a new PC .. my first.
I'm not a gamer ... I need a multi-monitor (4x23") workstation for financial trading ... so only 2D graphics.
I was planning on using an i7-950 ... should I now consider the i5 2500K instead?
Many thanks in advance.
I should have added... I'm not planning on over-clocking!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Pantani
I should have added... I'm not planning on over-clocking! |
Thanks Tom .. that's made me mind up then!
Tom Logan, I have recently purchased an I7 970 from eBay for 500$ a week ago NIB. Did I make a bad decision by not waiting for the 2600k? I have the Rampage 3 Extreme + corsair dominator gt and I love my setup at the moment but after watching and reading your review I feel I should of waited. Any thoughts ?
P.S. http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html Accord to this website the 2600k for 330$ almost out preforms the i7 970. Is that website correct or did they ramp up the multiplier to get those results.
P.S. http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html Accord to this website the 2600k for 330$ almost out preforms the i7 970. Is that website correct or did they ramp up the multiplier to get those results.
Maybe I'm just not getting it. I don't understand what all the fuss is about with the 1155's. I saw in one review that they don't have hyperthreading then read in another that they do, theydon't support more than 4x AA, they don't support above DX 10.1, they don't support cuda or physx, the Intel drivers aren't any good,are still immature. What good is anintegrated graphics core if it has all these short comings? Why do you even need an integrated graphics core, isn't that what the GPU does?? The IGC automatically gets disabled when you install a discreet graphics card (so your paying for substandard technology that wont ever be beneficial to most of us anyway??) 
If I'm misinformed or you can shed some light on all the overhype, I'd appreciate it.
EDIT...Just saw that the I5's don't have hyperthreading and the I7's do have it, but other problems still exist
If I'm misinformed or you can shed some light on all the overhype, I'd appreciate it.
EDIT...Just saw that the I5's don't have hyperthreading and the I7's do have it, but other problems still exist
I think your missing the big picture here caveman. MOST people here aren't buying the cpu for the igc. They are buying it because at the pricepoint they come in at, for example in the U.S. the 2500k comes in at $220. Ok, at that price range you have two options, AMD 1090T x6 or or i5-760 (which doesn't have HT anyway), or for a few bucks more the i7-870. Well the 2500k smokes these as well as the i7-950 ($299) at stock settings, even without having HT. The 2500k is perfect if you are building a new rig. I don't think anyone would recommend switching over if you already have an i7 1366 setup. Now coupled with the fact, you can OC the hell out of the turbo mode on these sandy bridge chips, for a true quadcore to get over 4.5ghz is friggin awesome for $220. Perfect for mainstream gamers, who lets face it, will have a discreet graphics card anyway...or those who want to upgrade, or building their first system. It is my understanding that most games will take advantage of only 4 cores as of right now, and that a true quadcore will perform better than a 4c/8t cpu when only 4 threads are being used. Now as far as the htpc crowd, the lower end variants of the SB chips will be more than adequate for their home theater needs, without having to spring for a low end discreet graphics solution. So if you're viewing these sandy bridge chips from the top, i7 950/970/980x....then yes, theres really nothing in them for you. But if you're starting a fresh build, you'd be a fool to overlook them.
Iirc the 2600 has HT.
Be aware that putting anything more than 1.4v through the chip will most likely kill it as the 32nm chips simply cannot handle that voltage and the IMC will fry. Numerous reports are beginning to surface of sandys dying because people are treating them like their 45nm counterparts. The new chips do look very nice though but sadly, as stated above, there is little point in switching (note I didn't say upgrading) from i7 to Sandybridge because clock for clock, the performance is still with bloomfield/gulftown. The fact that these can clock to 5ghz is great, however I dare say if you put silly amounts of voltage through most cpu's, they will clock well. How long they will last though is an entirely different question. Nobody knows for sure at present what voltage is deemed safe. Intel say 1.35, overclocking forums suggest 1.4v as an absolute max. I have just read about one of these cpu's dying with 1.4 so in reality, nobody can say for sure!
Also getting 5ghz from a cpu is great (congrats Tom). However, Asus claim (so I have read) that only 10% of the cpu's they have had reached this. 30-40% would do 4.5ghz with the remaining 50 being 4-4.5ghz. All this is presumebly with excessive voltage which as stated above, 32nm archs don't like at all and will die as a result. I dare say the chips you have tom are on their last legs already, maybe dead?
Sorry gents, but I aint getting all excited over a cpu that:
1. Is not as fast as 1366 i7.
2. Suceptable to failure with mild (0.2) voltage increases
3. No HT on the entry level models
Great for someone looking for a new build, upgrade from 1156 perhaps but a sidestep for 3 year old bloomfield. I really hope bulldozer offers more than this. Disappointing.
Be aware that putting anything more than 1.4v through the chip will most likely kill it as the 32nm chips simply cannot handle that voltage and the IMC will fry. Numerous reports are beginning to surface of sandys dying because people are treating them like their 45nm counterparts. The new chips do look very nice though but sadly, as stated above, there is little point in switching (note I didn't say upgrading) from i7 to Sandybridge because clock for clock, the performance is still with bloomfield/gulftown. The fact that these can clock to 5ghz is great, however I dare say if you put silly amounts of voltage through most cpu's, they will clock well. How long they will last though is an entirely different question. Nobody knows for sure at present what voltage is deemed safe. Intel say 1.35, overclocking forums suggest 1.4v as an absolute max. I have just read about one of these cpu's dying with 1.4 so in reality, nobody can say for sure!
Also getting 5ghz from a cpu is great (congrats Tom). However, Asus claim (so I have read) that only 10% of the cpu's they have had reached this. 30-40% would do 4.5ghz with the remaining 50 being 4-4.5ghz. All this is presumebly with excessive voltage which as stated above, 32nm archs don't like at all and will die as a result. I dare say the chips you have tom are on their last legs already, maybe dead?
Sorry gents, but I aint getting all excited over a cpu that:
1. Is not as fast as 1366 i7.
2. Suceptable to failure with mild (0.2) voltage increases
3. No HT on the entry level models
Great for someone looking for a new build, upgrade from 1156 perhaps but a sidestep for 3 year old bloomfield. I really hope bulldozer offers more than this. Disappointing.
I love my 2500k!! Awesome temps and tbh, I know I can overclock it but I can't see a need to yet! None of my games or applications touch it really so will leave as be for as long as I can hold off messing around with it .
.Quote:
|
Originally Posted by w3bbo
Iirc the 2600 has HT. ... Sorry gents, but I aint getting all excited over a cpu that: 1. Is not as fast as 1366 i7. 2. Suceptable to failure with mild (0.2) voltage increases 3. No HT on the entry level models Great for someone looking for a new build, upgrade from 1156 perhaps but a sidestep for 3 year old bloomfield. I really hope bulldozer offers more than this. Disappointing. |
that's the main reason Why im asking for this simple x264 C/assembly code test
make checkasm;./checkasm
checkasm –bench
its the only real life benchmark that will show You if things have changed, plus OC i cant seem to find any SB standard clocked and over clocked pastebin results to date to compare to older CPU's never mind setting a baseline for future products and that's a shame.
Yeah I too would prefer to see benchmarks clock for clock, not just stock and overclocked. This would enable the end user at least to differentiate between which cpu performs best albeit on a clocking level. Thise of you who remember the slower clocked Opteron/x2 prcoessors vs higher clocked Pentiums will know that the Opty was superior in most ways. Clockspeed isn't everything but when we are talking similar archetectures then I think it's a viable comparison.
4 posts earlier w3bbo wrote bloomfield is 3 years old. crysis isn't much more than 3 years old. bloomfield is i7 900's right. ok wiki said it launched in 2008: Core i7, first assembled in Costa Rica, was officially launched on November 17, 2008
What is the problem? lol
i was confused as i read it, crysis was built for Intel Core 2 Duo. then i looked at wiki
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jerome
i was confused as i read it, crysis was built for Intel Core 2 Duo. then i looked at wiki |
sorry for confusion.Great review Tom loved them all. So want...
loved them all. So want...It's refreshing to see that Intel are pricing their processors more sensibly...Bang for buck is of utmost importance to the average Joe, and they are finally seeing sense. Just hope that AMD's cat-out-of-the-bag that is Bulldozer is at least a close contender to this...Forcing both of them to price even more competitively! Mwuha.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by AndrewJohnRegan
It's refreshing to see that Intel are pricing their processors more sensibly...Bang for buck is of utmost importance to the average Joe, and they are finally seeing sense. Just hope that AMD's cat-out-of-the-bag that is Bulldozer is at least a close contender to this...Forcing both of them to price even more competitively! Mwuha. |
Super cheap gaming computers! Now say it three times fast upside-down with a car battery attached to your nipples. 
Ha, but it is very refreshing indeed to see that Intel are thinking more 'customer-freindly' thoughts. Now their pricing issues have been resolved, the only thing stopping them from becoming undisputed champions is to stop their chipsets malfunctioning and murdering your family dog (as well as your DVD drives and what have you 
)
Ha, but it is very refreshing indeed to see that Intel are thinking more 'customer-freindly' thoughts. Now their pricing issues have been resolved, the only thing stopping them from becoming undisputed champions is to stop their chipsets malfunctioning and murdering your family dog (as well as your DVD drives and what have you )
CSS Valid