1100t vs i5 2500k

ok i have seen pls say go for i5 2500k over the 1100t

why is that?

heres what u see

and pls don't say the 1100t should go vs i7s not i5s
the reason its i5 vs 1100t is price range

i5 2500k

pros
32 nm
easily overclock to 4.5+
less heat

cons
$30-$40 more the 1100t BE
1 thread per core (4 total)

Phenom II X6 1100T BE

pros
6 cores so 6 threads
cheaper then i5 with more threads

cons
45 nm
can only push to 4.0 to 4.2ghz
makes more heat


there are more cons/ pros for both but cant think of anymore

and correct me if im wrong but

what are threads vs cores mean?

the way i see it 4 core at 3.3 (so 3.3x4 = 13.2ghz total)
is that a right? or am i missing something

and if you want pls add more cons/pros and pls be for 1 side i want netural posts, not the 1100t creams i5 or i5 eats 1100t for breakfast

The i5 2500K is better because it out performs the 1100T is the majority of applications when they both are at stock 3.3GHz (AnandTech Bench comparison). Then take into account the i5 2500K can clock higher, then the i5 2500K is close to or better than the 1100T in the tests where the 1100T wins when both CPUs are at stock. The applications that can take advantage of 5 or 6 cores may show benefit with the 1100T, but it may not since the i5 2500K is faster clock for clock and it can OC higher (if you take OCing into account). If the application can only take advange of 4 or less cores, then the i5 2500K wins out without question. The i5 2500K also does all of this while using less power.

Each core runs at 3.3 GHz, adding them up doesn't work since it's a frequency.

I5-2500K is the way I went. Still waiting on it though.

I went Phenom II x6 1090T vs i5 2500K because there is little or no difference in real world performance, and in my case the i5 2500K was and still is £170, and the x6 1090T was £130.

Considering that and the fact that i'm comfortable with AMD and don't know Intel as well the choice was obvious.