Is it worth the switch from OC Q9550 3.83ghz to i7 2600k ?

Thinking about switching out my board,memory and processor for a 2600k build. I couldn't find Core2Quad comparisons in benchmarks with the i7 2600k. Im wondering if its worth it? I encode Blu Rays all the time and I game. Is the i7 2600k that much better than a Q9550 running at 3.83ghz?

Current rig info is in my signature below

It should pretty handily beat it, especially with the hyper threading and I believe SB has better efficiency for encoding as well than past chips. Beside the fact that it wiill easily OC far past the 3.8 to a simple 4.5 with a cheap aftermarket cooler.

Really 4.5 on a cheap fan? So I can scrap the water cooling and not worry about heat issues with a 2600K @4.5 and a good cooler ? Cause if it will run that fast without water I would rather not deal with the water cooling set up


I was also hoping on someone that can link me to a graph comparison between Core2 and i7 2600k.

can anyone confirm my above questions?

you will easily be able to run 24/7 @ 4.5ghz on a fan that costs about ~$30-35 which I would consider middle of the road in terms of air cooling.

I don't have any graphs to show you, but I'm sure you can google around for it.

i just looked at many graphs, what janus said is exactally what i saw.
there is not a lot of direct compare between the 2 you mentioned, unless you go to the performance bench place, where they compare everything with that one benchmark
and those are a MESS, because it has peoples highs and lows and cheats in it.

If you think in 2 steps though, and compare the 9950 to the I7 9?? then compare the I7 to the 2600. then try and analise the clock for clock and how overclocking would help.
there is a slight increase in games
some increase in benchmarks
and Huge increase in encoding speed with specific programs that use the features of the chip, but nobody said how WELL the encodes turned out, we all know how that goes.

the gamers specifically are mentioning the usual, depending on the game, and ITS dependance on the cpu, anyone with lower end GPU , would still advantage more from better GPU.
Is it worth it? Got Money?

I think he really said it better

so try that, 9550 (or 9650) VS I7??
then I7 VS sandy bridge

It really doesn't take much heatsink to manage 4-4.5ghz on a 2600k. They run amazingly cool.
Better yet, that 2600k at 4.5ghz will encode at something like the speed of your current CPU at 6ghz.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/50?vs=287

yes, it would worth it

Thanks for the comparison chart Spirch. One last questions for everyone. What are considered safe, high and dangerous temperatures for the i7 2600k so i know when I do my overclocking, cause it is a 35nm cpu. It should have lower temp guidelines than the Core2 I would believe.

Both the Q9550 and i7 2600K has same max core temp per intel specs, tjmax of 100C. So whatever you were comfortable with your current cpu temp wise, would apply for 2600 K.

I would have no problem with stress testing in 80's, especially since the other 364 days of year, temps will be much lower. If I were folding 24/7 and overclocking I would prefer temps in 70's.

Wow I had forgotten about that Anandtech comparison page. Thanks! The only down side is it lists the CPU's benchmarks at stock speeds, so while you can get a pretty good picture of x cpu vs y cpu, it can be a bit off if you've overclocked your CPU. For example, a 4.0Ghz Core i7 940 will perform better than at its stock speed of 2.93Ghz, so you just have to keep that in mind. But wow, I didn't think the Sandybridge CPUs were *that* much better than the 1366 Chips or o/c'ed as easily.

RaV3N said:

Thanks for the comparison chart Spirch. One last questions for everyone. What are considered safe, high and dangerous temperatures for the i7 2600k so i know when I do my overclocking, cause it is a 35nm cpu. It should have lower temp guidelines than the Core2 I would believe.

Click to expand...

Keep the voltage under 1.4 (1.35 ideally) for 24/7 use and under 80C at 100% load and you should be a happy camper

Well I'm hoping not go to 1.35v while on my 45nm Q9550 w/ C1 stepping i managed to get it @3.82ghz %100 stable w/ 1.31v. The 2600K is 35nm so I would think @4.0Ghz I should only need about 1.32v or less (just guesstimate)

@4.0 you shouldnt need to up the volts at all for a 200mhz increase, the chips OC so easily I don't see any reason to stop at 4.0, 4.5 is a nice sweet spot for volts imo.