PowerColor Radeon RX 5600 XT Red Dragon review
GALAX HOF Pro PCIe 4.0 NVMe review
How to: Firmware Update the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT
MSI Radeon RX 5600 XT Gaming Z review
Sapphire Pulse Radeon RX 5600 XT OC review
ASUS STRIX Radeon RX 5600 XT TOP review
Gigabyte Radeon RX 5600 XT Gaming OC review
Arctic Liquid Freezer II 280 liquid cooler review
Promo: Windows 10 Pro licenses for under 10 USD
Team Group MP33 NVMe 512 GB SSD Review
Retro review: Intel Sandy Bridge Core i7 2600K - 2018 review
Posted by: on: 03/22/2018 09:07 AM [
173 comment(s) ]
It was 2011 when Intel released Sandy Bridge, so we grab Core i7 2600K and revisit it in the year 2018, apply Windows 10 and compare that Core i7 2600K towards Ryzen 1800X and Core i7 8700K through our processor and gaming benchmark paces.
Read article
Advertisement
pages 1 2 3 4 > »
fantaskarsef
Senior Member
Posts: 11166
Senior Member
Posts: 11166
Posted on: 03/22/2018 12:27 PM
Here you can see what my 2600K does at 4.7ghz and with 16gb 2133mhz RAM in Aida64:
Would have been fun to see you do the entire benchmarksuite at these settings :p
Did you just volunteer to help HH with your board and those benches?
Here you can see what my 2600K does at 4.7ghz and with 16gb 2133mhz RAM in Aida64:
Would have been fun to see you do the entire benchmarksuite at these settings :p
Did you just volunteer to help HH with your board and those benches?
Ourasi
Senior Member
Posts: 294
Senior Member
Posts: 294
Posted on: 03/22/2018 12:36 PM
Then he would have to spend a few hours uploading benches and games I do not have, easier to send him the motherboard/CPU/RAM mounted and ready to go at 4.7ghz/2133mhz, only thing I would need in return was a Ryzen 1800x setup or something in that ballpark
Anyhow, every site like Guru3D should have a setup like mine ready to go with these settings on the shelf, since so many with SB 2500k/2600K would benefit greatly to se exactly where their old OC'ed CPU/RAM stands vs. current setups.. I suspect most SB user would smile and nod their heads on how good value for money their investment truly was..
Then he would have to spend a few hours uploading benches and games I do not have, easier to send him the motherboard/CPU/RAM mounted and ready to go at 4.7ghz/2133mhz, only thing I would need in return was a Ryzen 1800x setup or something in that ballpark
Anyhow, every site like Guru3D should have a setup like mine ready to go with these settings on the shelf, since so many with SB 2500k/2600K would benefit greatly to se exactly where their old OC'ed CPU/RAM stands vs. current setups.. I suspect most SB user would smile and nod their heads on how good value for money their investment truly was..
Angantyr
Senior Member
Posts: 692
Senior Member
Posts: 692
Posted on: 03/22/2018 01:08 PM
Great article, was a pleasant read. But I swear, the " Time to upgrade? " question comes round in full force with each hardware release. And usually the answers to those questions were always as valid as they were predicable; Stick with what you have and be content or get an upgrade if you need it and can afford it.
At least with the Ryzen and Coffee lake releases, people started to feel a leap in improvement. Just kinda happy the years of Ivy bridge/Haswell/Skylake / quad-core upgrade discussions have started to dull out.
Great article, was a pleasant read. But I swear, the " Time to upgrade? " question comes round in full force with each hardware release. And usually the answers to those questions were always as valid as they were predicable; Stick with what you have and be content or get an upgrade if you need it and can afford it.
At least with the Ryzen and Coffee lake releases, people started to feel a leap in improvement. Just kinda happy the years of Ivy bridge/Haswell/Skylake / quad-core upgrade discussions have started to dull out.
vbetts
Posts: 14764
Posts: 14764
Posted on: 03/22/2018 01:09 PM
Interesting that it doesn't seem that bad still. Would be very interesting to see overclocked results across the board, but this does kind of help paint a picture here.
Also good to see some Bulldozer results still. My little brother is rocking an 8130 at 4.5 ghz, and my girlfriend is rocking a 9590 just using boost clocks. Those should be comparable some to the 2600k at those clocks.
Reviews like this show it's also possible to do some budget building by getting some last gen hardware.
Interesting that it doesn't seem that bad still. Would be very interesting to see overclocked results across the board, but this does kind of help paint a picture here.
Also good to see some Bulldozer results still. My little brother is rocking an 8130 at 4.5 ghz, and my girlfriend is rocking a 9590 just using boost clocks. Those should be comparable some to the 2600k at those clocks.
Reviews like this show it's also possible to do some budget building by getting some last gen hardware.
CoMmAnDrX2
Member
Posts: 73
Member
Posts: 73
Posted on: 03/22/2018 01:14 PM
Still running my 2600K with no need to replace. Heck haven't even OC'd this chip yet as I've had no reason so far to do so. My bottle neck in this system is my HDD and GPU
Still running my 2600K with no need to replace. Heck haven't even OC'd this chip yet as I've had no reason so far to do so. My bottle neck in this system is my HDD and GPU
FranciscoCL
Senior Member
Posts: 207
Senior Member
Posts: 207
Posted on: 03/22/2018 01:25 PM
Great idea and nice review, but is sad that your motherboard (H61) prevents you from doing OC.
I guess that a lot of the users that are askng "Is it time for upgrade?" are using that 2600k with OC.
Great idea and nice review, but is sad that your motherboard (H61) prevents you from doing OC.
I guess that a lot of the users that are askng "Is it time for upgrade?" are using that 2600k with OC.
RzrTrek
Senior Member
Posts: 2358
Senior Member
Posts: 2358
Posted on: 03/22/2018 01:28 PM
Sandy Bridge master race.
Sandy Bridge master race.
Ryu5uzaku
Senior Member
Posts: 6784
Senior Member
Posts: 6784
Posted on: 03/22/2018 01:31 PM
Stocks against stocks fine battle. It's clear that 2600k shows it's age unless you get it oc'd to 4.5 even then it would show it's age.
Stocks against stocks fine battle. It's clear that 2600k shows it's age unless you get it oc'd to 4.5 even then it would show it's age.
Evildead666
Senior Member
Posts: 1273
Senior Member
Posts: 1273
Posted on: 03/22/2018 01:34 PM
I'm still happy with my 3570K @4.2GHz.
Might upgrade to Ryzen+ or Ryzen2. Mostly depends on the memory prices coming back down...
I'm still happy with my 3570K @4.2GHz.
Might upgrade to Ryzen+ or Ryzen2. Mostly depends on the memory prices coming back down...
Ourasi
Senior Member
Posts: 294
Senior Member
Posts: 294
Posted on: 03/22/2018 01:36 PM
Well, 167cb in singlethread in cinebech would atleast put my 2600k@4.7ghz way up in the charts, the 2133mhz ram increases gaming performance significantly, as 2600K is bottlenecked severely by standard DDR3 speeds.
Well, 167cb in singlethread in cinebech would atleast put my 2600k@4.7ghz way up in the charts, the 2133mhz ram increases gaming performance significantly, as 2600K is bottlenecked severely by standard DDR3 speeds.
RealNC
Senior Member
Posts: 3123
Senior Member
Posts: 3123
Posted on: 03/22/2018 01:36 PM
They're fast enough though on SB. Watching videos, reading your email, browsing the web, etc. All of these show no "must have" difference between SB and latest gen. If, for example, opening a web page takes 1.7 seconds on SB but 1.3 seconds on latest gen, nobody is going to care, really. Or that the 1GB RAR archive you've downloaded took 3 minutes instead of 2 to unpack, that's not really important either (it's not like you're compressing/unpacking huge archives every day.) In benchmark terms, these are big differences. In human terms, they're quite small and rather unimportant.
You also get USB 3 and SATA 3 on Sandy Bridge. It's just not integrated into the CPU. But again, that's not important from an "average user" perspective. All you care about is having USB3 and SATA3, not if they're on-CPU or not.
So if you're an average user, and don't need NVMe, Thunderbolt, etc, it's perfectly fine.
And if you intend to go for a 4K gaming rig (those 4K HDR displays that have been announced, or the "BFD" ones announced a while back), you're better off spending the money on those + GPU instead, and you can upgrade the platform later, when more games really start demanding more CPU power.
Overall, the move to QHD and UHD isn't doing Intel any favors, it seems, and I'm fine with that
In a nutshell this is true but bear in mind that general computing tasks (and particularly multitasking) will likely also feel lot better with a modern CPU and platform overall.
They're fast enough though on SB. Watching videos, reading your email, browsing the web, etc. All of these show no "must have" difference between SB and latest gen. If, for example, opening a web page takes 1.7 seconds on SB but 1.3 seconds on latest gen, nobody is going to care, really. Or that the 1GB RAR archive you've downloaded took 3 minutes instead of 2 to unpack, that's not really important either (it's not like you're compressing/unpacking huge archives every day.) In benchmark terms, these are big differences. In human terms, they're quite small and rather unimportant.
You also get USB 3 and SATA 3 on Sandy Bridge. It's just not integrated into the CPU. But again, that's not important from an "average user" perspective. All you care about is having USB3 and SATA3, not if they're on-CPU or not.
So if you're an average user, and don't need NVMe, Thunderbolt, etc, it's perfectly fine.
And if you intend to go for a 4K gaming rig (those 4K HDR displays that have been announced, or the "BFD" ones announced a while back), you're better off spending the money on those + GPU instead, and you can upgrade the platform later, when more games really start demanding more CPU power.
Overall, the move to QHD and UHD isn't doing Intel any favors, it seems, and I'm fine with that
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 9873
Senior Member
Posts: 9873
Posted on: 03/22/2018 02:07 PM
I'll talk for my 2500K, it is dead from performance perspective. Some games show it too. And I do not have Spectre/Meltdown patches yet.
I have seen some results of those patches online for Sandy. SSD IOps go down by around 30%. Compute by 2~10%.
BF1 is most painful. For games I turn off any other application I do not need. My system is no longer Gaming capable PC. It is productivity capable Console.
Seeing 2200G/2400G dancing around 2600K, they would make my 2500K produce magic smoke in attempt to match them. And MS's Spectre patches are behind corner.
I'll talk for my 2500K, it is dead from performance perspective. Some games show it too. And I do not have Spectre/Meltdown patches yet.
I have seen some results of those patches online for Sandy. SSD IOps go down by around 30%. Compute by 2~10%.
BF1 is most painful. For games I turn off any other application I do not need. My system is no longer Gaming capable PC. It is productivity capable Console.
Seeing 2200G/2400G dancing around 2600K, they would make my 2500K produce magic smoke in attempt to match them. And MS's Spectre patches are behind corner.
DeskStar
Senior Member
Posts: 676
Senior Member
Posts: 676
Posted on: 03/22/2018 02:10 PM
Killer review as always.....!
I think I'll wait out my 3930K @ 4.7Ghz and 32Gb of quad channel DDR3 RAM @ 2400mhz! Throughput at these speeds are on par with quad DDR4 with its lame timings/latency of today.
Not to mention the prices.......that's enough for most to stay away from an upgrade.
Killer review as always.....!
I think I'll wait out my 3930K @ 4.7Ghz and 32Gb of quad channel DDR3 RAM @ 2400mhz! Throughput at these speeds are on par with quad DDR4 with its lame timings/latency of today.
Not to mention the prices.......that's enough for most to stay away from an upgrade.
Brasky
Senior Member
Posts: 2145
Senior Member
Posts: 2145
Posted on: 03/22/2018 02:11 PM
great review and a fun comparison with the new processors. Thanks for taking the time to do an "oldy but goody"!
great review and a fun comparison with the new processors. Thanks for taking the time to do an "oldy but goody"!
DeskStar
Senior Member
Posts: 676
Senior Member
Posts: 676
Posted on: 03/22/2018 02:16 PM
To me, and you're not mentioning this at all it seems, it looks like there's no difference at all in QHD (1440p). So if you're on Sandy Bridge and are split between getting a new GPU + a completely new system, vs getting a new GPU + a 1440p g-sync monitor, you're probably well advised to get a GPU and 1440p monitor.
If, on the other hand, you're all about 1080p or lower + highest FPS you can get ("300FPS competitive stuff",) you should opt for new platform instead.
(Of course if you have loads of money to throw, you'll upgrade everything... :p)
Right on!! This is why I love these kind of reveiws!
Us.hardware.info has a great writeup of something very similar, but for some reason they didn't OF the memory as high and or the CPU's, so I'd like to see one of these reviews take them to the max!!
To me, and you're not mentioning this at all it seems, it looks like there's no difference at all in QHD (1440p). So if you're on Sandy Bridge and are split between getting a new GPU + a completely new system, vs getting a new GPU + a 1440p g-sync monitor, you're probably well advised to get a GPU and 1440p monitor.
If, on the other hand, you're all about 1080p or lower + highest FPS you can get ("300FPS competitive stuff",) you should opt for new platform instead.
(Of course if you have loads of money to throw, you'll upgrade everything... :p)
Right on!! This is why I love these kind of reveiws!
Us.hardware.info has a great writeup of something very similar, but for some reason they didn't OF the memory as high and or the CPU's, so I'd like to see one of these reviews take them to the max!!
BlackZero
Senior Member
Posts: 8880
Senior Member
Posts: 8880
Posted on: 03/22/2018 02:18 PM
My water cooled 2600K is running a 30% overclock at the Intel-stated default voltage, with many of the motherboard bits under-volted and the fancy overclock settings all turned off. I do of course have 2133 MHz low latency memory to go with it. So can't see an expensive upgrade being a worthy improvement, in all honesty. But that's just my subjective, gaming-oriented opinion, of course.
I also have a custom OC 290X, which is sufficient for quality 1440p gaming, although it can be a little power hungry at times.
Easily the two best investments I've ever made.
My water cooled 2600K is running a 30% overclock at the Intel-stated default voltage, with many of the motherboard bits under-volted and the fancy overclock settings all turned off. I do of course have 2133 MHz low latency memory to go with it. So can't see an expensive upgrade being a worthy improvement, in all honesty. But that's just my subjective, gaming-oriented opinion, of course.
I also have a custom OC 290X, which is sufficient for quality 1440p gaming, although it can be a little power hungry at times.
Easily the two best investments I've ever made.
liesenberg
Member
Posts: 25
Member
Posts: 25
Posted on: 03/22/2018 02:19 PM
Awesome review! I love retro reviews, since it gives us a nice view of the progress made so far and and also how todays games and applications are performing on these processors!
It's very understadable that at stock speeds these processors are far behind at 1080p or lower but since you combine these generations of processors with a 1070/1060(6GB) or RX 570/580 (8GB) I think for the most people out there it should be more than enough. People outside of the real competitive arena are aiming for 60/75Hz witch is something that these processors still can handle well. (Since I live in Brazil I talk the reality here where any hardware is very expensive... especially monitors.)
Just for the sake of comparison, I use a i7 875k @4.0 16G w/XMP(v1.3) at 1600 and I play a lot of Overwatch nowdays... my FPS averages from 132 to 88 in really heavy fights, my GPU is 95% of the time at 100% since I run the game on Epic settings at 100% rendering scale.
When my GPU its not as 100% it dips to like 95% usage for a brief moment but I dont feel any ingame hiccups or anything that interferes with my gaming experience... the game feels and plays butter smooth.
I know the 1060 that I use is most likely the last GPU that my platform is going to see since a newer mid end tier card would probably be heavely bottlenecked by the CPU and memory bandwith of an older platform.
Later at night i will post my AIDA64 results with my platform just for the sake of comparison.
Thanks again Hilbert for this review.
It made my day!
Best regards to all!
Awesome review! I love retro reviews, since it gives us a nice view of the progress made so far and and also how todays games and applications are performing on these processors!
It's very understadable that at stock speeds these processors are far behind at 1080p or lower but since you combine these generations of processors with a 1070/1060(6GB) or RX 570/580 (8GB) I think for the most people out there it should be more than enough. People outside of the real competitive arena are aiming for 60/75Hz witch is something that these processors still can handle well. (Since I live in Brazil I talk the reality here where any hardware is very expensive... especially monitors.)
Just for the sake of comparison, I use a i7 875k @4.0 16G w/XMP(v1.3) at 1600 and I play a lot of Overwatch nowdays... my FPS averages from 132 to 88 in really heavy fights, my GPU is 95% of the time at 100% since I run the game on Epic settings at 100% rendering scale.
When my GPU its not as 100% it dips to like 95% usage for a brief moment but I dont feel any ingame hiccups or anything that interferes with my gaming experience... the game feels and plays butter smooth.
I know the 1060 that I use is most likely the last GPU that my platform is going to see since a newer mid end tier card would probably be heavely bottlenecked by the CPU and memory bandwith of an older platform.
Later at night i will post my AIDA64 results with my platform just for the sake of comparison.
Thanks again Hilbert for this review.
It made my day!
Best regards to all!
Loophole35
Senior Member
Posts: 9480
Senior Member
Posts: 9480
Posted on: 03/22/2018 02:24 PM
Wish it didn't require a import tax to send you anything. I would send you a Z68 board I have sitting at the house to use.
Yeah, that was what I wanted to do as extra (tweaking), the H67 board, however, did not allow CPU tweaking. Memory wise I had to choose, either faster 8GB or 16GB reference JEDEC - I really wanted 16GB of memory opposed to some faster 8GB I had sitting there (all dusty btw). Also the H67 mobo had issues with faster memory (which was a normal thing in the pre-XMP days 
)
)Wish it didn't require a import tax to send you anything. I would send you a Z68 board I have sitting at the house to use.
liesenberg
Member
Posts: 25
Member
Posts: 25
Posted on: 03/22/2018 02:36 PM
It would be awesome if you do that loophole! A heavely OC'd 2600k would give us a Clock to Clock notion of improvement.
PS: Your picture its from a awesome album! Circa Survive - The Amulet!
Best Regards!
Wish it didn't require a import tax to send you anything. I would send you a Z68 board I have sitting at the house to use.
It would be awesome if you do that loophole! A heavely OC'd 2600k would give us a Clock to Clock notion of improvement.
PS: Your picture its from a awesome album! Circa Survive - The Amulet!
Best Regards!
StewieTech
Chuck Norris
Posts: 2538
Chuck Norris
Posts: 2538
Posted on: 03/22/2018 02:45 PM
Great review boss, neat little idea. The 2600k is still pretty capable so its an all around gangsta product alright.
Great review boss, neat little idea. The 2600k is still pretty capable so its an all around gangsta product alright.
fantaskarsef
Senior Member
Posts: 11166
Senior Member
Posts: 11166
Posted on: 03/22/2018 02:46 PM
If you send it via normal mail he'd still have to pay taxes? I thought he wouldn't have to pay any tax if you sent it to him for free (no invoice)? Just curious.
Wish it didn't require a import tax to send you anything. I would send you a Z68 board I have sitting at the house to use.
If you send it via normal mail he'd still have to pay taxes? I thought he wouldn't have to pay any tax if you sent it to him for free (no invoice)? Just curious.
airbud7
Senior Member
Posts: 7664
Senior Member
Posts: 7664
Posted on: 03/22/2018 02:52 PM
Great thread Boss! (brilliant) ....Thanks!
Great thread Boss! (brilliant) ....Thanks!
Fender178
Senior Member
Posts: 3807
Senior Member
Posts: 3807
Posted on: 03/22/2018 03:00 PM
It's good that the 2600k is still holding strong after 7 years. I feel the users who still own the older i5s might need an upgrade depending on the games they want to play.
It's good that the 2600k is still holding strong after 7 years. I feel the users who still own the older i5s might need an upgrade depending on the games they want to play.
ubercake
Senior Member
Posts: 214
Senior Member
Posts: 214
Posted on: 03/22/2018 03:04 PM
This is a great article.
Someone needed to do this and it provides a great service to all gamers, but I'm thinking Intel, AMD, nor any motherboard producers like to see articles telling people they don't necessarily need to upgrade their architectures after 7 years. What I say to them is give us a reason to want to upgrade. A real reason.
I'm running at 1440p and know there's no illusion that I'm getting just at or close to any gaming benchmark number in 2560x1440 with my good ol' 3930K and GTX 1080. This processor has been out since Q4 of 2011! I'm getting my money's worth out of this bad boy. It's also served a dual-purpose as a DAW this whole time. Sure I could improve my DAW performance with an upgrade, but it's easily acceptable in it's current format.
If I gave a couple of craps about synthetic benchmarks and improving my score therein, I'd have to upgrade pronto. Since I don't, no need to upgrade at this point unless one of my core components dies from old age.
This is a great article.
Someone needed to do this and it provides a great service to all gamers, but I'm thinking Intel, AMD, nor any motherboard producers like to see articles telling people they don't necessarily need to upgrade their architectures after 7 years. What I say to them is give us a reason to want to upgrade. A real reason.
I'm running at 1440p and know there's no illusion that I'm getting just at or close to any gaming benchmark number in 2560x1440 with my good ol' 3930K and GTX 1080. This processor has been out since Q4 of 2011! I'm getting my money's worth out of this bad boy. It's also served a dual-purpose as a DAW this whole time. Sure I could improve my DAW performance with an upgrade, but it's easily acceptable in it's current format.
If I gave a couple of craps about synthetic benchmarks and improving my score therein, I'd have to upgrade pronto. Since I don't, no need to upgrade at this point unless one of my core components dies from old age.
pages 1 2 3 4 > »
Click here to post a comment for this article on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 294
Here you can see what my 2600K does at 4.7ghz and with 16gb 2133mhz RAM in Aida64:
Would have been fun to see you do the entire benchmarksuite at these settings :p