The old 2600K vs Newest CPU question

[Majorpayne]

Hey all, 

 

So I have been following the new Coffee Lake processor launch and "release" I was thinking FINALLY a CPU I can actually justify upgrading my 2600k. So i just finished watching a Youtube channel where they compare the 2600k and the 8700K. To my Surprise for gaming (what i mostly do) the Coffee lake still doesn't really improve anything. OK it did help with the 1 percent for a more stable FPS avg but running the 1070 with the 2600K avg only about 5-10 FPS at 1080P. Are we just at a point where the gaming devs need to start coding for multi thread to actually get any better performance via the CPU? Is his numbers off? This is the age old question. To Upgrade or not to Upgrade!

 

My rig

i7-2600k 

Asus P8P67 Deluxe

EVGA 1070 FTW

Noctua DH15

32 GB Ram (DDR3)

Samsung 840 Pro

2 TB HDD

 

[genexis_x]

the 2600k is still capable IMO, upgrade isn't that necessary but the choice is yours

[3 Lions]

Big game developers just keep putting it off but they'll have to start writing code for higher than 4C 8T CPU's otherwise the PC gaming industry will not move forward. 

[79wjd]

2 minutes ago, LinusTechTipsFanFromDarlo said:

Big game developers just keep putting it off but they'll have to start writing code for higher than 4C 8T CPU's otherwise the PC gaming industry will not move forward. 

Or start to take advantage of new instruction sets. There is a finite amount of parallelization that can be made to a highly serial task like gaming. 

[Eduard the weeb]

You'd have to upgrade alot including ram, Mobo, and  cpu which is pricey I would stick with your 2600K till Ice Lake.

[showerhandle]

 

Form most videos on youtube they show same results of very minimal performance gain with the gpu you have. the bottle neck just isnt there. Not a lot of game right now are optimized for more that 4c 8 thread processors. so you really wont see much of a gain as of right now.

[Majorpayne]

Well, I know i don't need m.2, RGB (meh), USB 3 I have USB just not C or 3.1 but nothing in the house uses it yet. I guess my 6 Year old Processor and Mobo are just going to kick back and enjoy more of the ride. I can't see any other reason then

 

[i_build_nanosuits]

42 minutes ago, Majorpayne said:

Hey all, 

 

So I have been following the new Coffee Lake processor launch and "release" I was thinking FINALLY a CPU I can actually justify upgrading my 2600k. So i just finished watching a Youtube channel where they compare the 2600k and the 8700K. To my Surprise for gaming (what i mostly do) the Coffee lake still doesn't really improve anything. OK it did help with the 1 percent for a more stable FPS avg but running the 1070 with the 2600K avg only about 5-10 FPS at 1080P. Are we just at a point where the gaming devs need to start coding for multi thread to actually get any better performance via the CPU? Is his numbers off? This is the age old question. To Upgrade or not to Upgrade!

 

My rig

i7-2600k 

Asus P8P67 Deluxe

EVGA 1070 FTW

Noctua DH15

32 GB Ram (DDR3)

Samsung 840 Pro

2 TB HDD

 

it's because games are graphically demanding and until you use a very unbalanced config like for example a GTX 1080ti for 1080p gaming (which is stupid BTW' don't do that) there is not much those intel cpu's can't handle in modern titles...a good fast quad-core is still what you need for gaming, and intel has increased IPC over the years but only slightly, and even with a sandy-bridge CPU most games are still GPU bound, meaning that a faster CPU will only ever so slightly bump up performance.

 

I would stick to your CPU for another gen...coffee lake is a response to ryzen FOR NOW all intel could do is add a couple cores for free...but i bet they are now hard on the drawing boards and next gen IPC increase will probably be substantial and you'll regret your purchase...i think. it only make sense.

[3 Lions]

2 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

Or start to take advantage of new instruction sets. There is a finite amount of parallelization that can be made to a highly serial task like gaming. 

Yep I agree, I think the only game developer to implement proper optimizations for more than 4C 8T CPU's is BeamNG GmbH (the developers of BeamNG.Drive)

[Majorpayne]

Thanks all for the information. It was the way I was leaning once I began seeing the numbers but i wanted to make sure the test i saw was accurate.

[Input_Name_Here]

44 minutes ago, Majorpayne said:

Hey all, 

 

So I have been following the new Coffee Lake processor launch and "release" I was thinking FINALLY a CPU I can actually justify upgrading my 2600k. So i just finished watching a Youtube channel where they compare the 2600k and the 8700K. To my Surprise for gaming (what i mostly do) the Coffee lake still doesn't really improve anything. OK it did help with the 1 percent for a more stable FPS avg but running the 1070 with the 2600K avg only about 5-10 FPS at 1080P. Are we just at a point where the gaming devs need to start coding for multi thread to actually get any better performance via the CPU? Is his numbers off? This is the age old question. To Upgrade or not to Upgrade!

 

My rig

i7-2600k 

Asus P8P67 Deluxe

EVGA 1070 FTW

Noctua DH15

32 GB Ram (DDR3)

Samsung 840 Pro

2 TB HDD

 

I'm still rocking an i7-3930k more than enough for everything I need.

[dizmo]

Eh, depends how you look at it. If you're doing production based stuff, then there's been a huge increase from the 2600k to the 8700k. It's also very game dependent. If you look at the tests some games that aren't that CPU intensive were fine, whereas GTA lost 15fps. If you already own it I wouldn't bother upgrading, but that's usually the case when you've purchased a top tier Intel CPU; they last ages.

 

 

EDIT: I'd also take a look at this video. The 8700k destroys the 3770k in some titles, showing even more the title dependence of testing results.

3 hours ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

it's because games are graphically demanding and until you use a very unbalanced config like for example a GTX 1080ti for 1080p gaming (which is stupid BTW' don't do that) there is not much those intel cpu's can't handle in modern titles...a good fast quad-core is still what you need for gaming, and intel has increased IPC over the years but only slightly, and even with a sandy-bridge CPU most games are still GPU bound, meaning that a faster CPU will only ever so slightly bump up performance.

 

I would stick to your CPU for another gen...coffee lake is a response to ryzen FOR NOW all intel could do is add a couple cores for free...but i bet they are now hard on the drawing boards and next get IPC increase will probably be substantial and you'll regret your purchase...i think. it only make sense.

I disagree with it just being a response to Ryzen. You don't just slap together a new CPU, it's likely been in development for years. Also, a 1080Ti does make sense on some 1080p builds; for example, wanting to make the most of your high refresh rate monitor.

[FWP!]

I was actually going to post almost this same exact question as I have a 2600k and want to upgrade to something more recent for a couple reasons.

 

I do a lot of photography work in Lightroom, and Lightroom does actually like to use all CPU cores, all 8 threads on my 2600 get slammed every time I move to a new photo.  Also, the 2600k is only capable of PCIe 2.0 which means the 960 Pro I bought is only going to run at about half its bandwidth until I upgrade.  Also cannot boot from the NVME (z77 chipset).

 

The point of getting the NVME was to help Lightroom, but now I am seeing that the bottle neck really is my CPU.  I'm also running two 27" 2560x1440 Dell displays.

 

So I started looking at CPUs a few weeks ago, landed on the 7700k, but now I am hearing a lot of good things about the 8700k, namely that it has 6 cores with HT which might really help me in my situation.  It would also future-proof me a little bit since I'd have to upgrade to the 3-series motherboard.

 

If the 8700k will come out in December, that's better than expected (was figuring it would be next spring at the earliest), but right now it's quite a bit more expensive than what I can get a 7700k for and I'm not sure what the difference will be in Lightroom (and some occasional video editing and gaming) and if it'll be justifiable.

[gbergeron]

On 10/18/2017 at 12:11 PM, Majorpayne said:

Hey all, 

 

So I have been following the new Coffee Lake processor launch and "release" I was thinking FINALLY a CPU I can actually justify upgrading my 2600k. So i just finished watching a Youtube channel where they compare the 2600k and the 8700K. To my Surprise for gaming (what i mostly do) the Coffee lake still doesn't really improve anything. OK it did help with the 1 percent for a more stable FPS avg but running the 1070 with the 2600K avg only about 5-10 FPS at 1080P. Are we just at a point where the gaming devs need to start coding for multi thread to actually get any better performance via the CPU? Is his numbers off? This is the age old question. To Upgrade or not to Upgrade!

 

My rig

i7-2600k 

Asus P8P67 Deluxe

EVGA 1070 FTW

Noctua DH15

32 GB Ram (DDR3)

Samsung 840 Pro

2 TB HDD

 

Not sure why people expect to have way more FPS with a new CPU ?

 

It's the GPU that deliver video/graphics performance. not the cpu...

 

All you need is a cpu "strong" enough for the gpu you are using as soon as you hit that spot, getting a better cpu is useless

 

 

That being said, yes of course you can sometimes get couple more fps but heh...

 

 

A 2600K is still decent I don't think I would upgrade if I was you unless you are using a 144 hz display in 1080p 

[MyName13]

On 10/18/2017 at 6:18 PM, LinusTechTipsFanFromDarlo said:

Big game developers just keep putting it off but they'll have to start writing code for higher than 4C 8T CPU's otherwise the PC gaming industry will not move forward. 

Blame consoles/AMD/Sony & MS for choosing AMD's APUs not developers.

[Cookybiscuit]

I did a similar upgrade to the one you're contemplating, 3570K to 8700K. I went in not sure how much difference it would make. In CPU dependent games the difference is huge (though still not as much as 5 years of progression should be), easily 50% higher minimum FPS in some games. I was surprised also how big a difference it made in older games that have shit multi-threading (Skyrim, Fallout games, CSGO etc) where you'd expect a 3570K would be more than enough, but minimum framerates still made a big jump. The Cinebench score is also up from around 550-600, I forget exactly, to 1670, but that's not really fair as the i5 doesn't have HT.

 

8700K is good, but it + Z370 + adequate cooling is expensive. It's also a housefire, you'll need to delid if you want to overclock it by any meaningful amount.

[Majorpayne]

4 hours ago, gbergeron said:

A 2600K is still decent I don't think I would upgrade if I was you unless you are using a 144 hz display in 1080p 

Yes, I have a Benq 27' monitor that does 144 hz

[Theguywhobea]

I don't think anyone else has posted it in this thread yet, but Hardware Canucks literally just made this video.

 

 

[Majorpayne]

18 minutes ago, Theguywhobea said:

I don't think anyone else has posted it in this thread yet, but Hardware Canucks literally just made this video.

 

 

This was the video i watched that made me wonder.

[Theguywhobea]

1 minute ago, Majorpayne said:

This was the video i watched that made me wonder.

Oh lol I'm sorry, I didn't read your full post haha

[gbergeron]

45 minutes ago, Majorpayne said:

This was the video i watched that made me wonder.

For gaming, not a huge difference....

 

You will benefit from it since you are running 144 hz..

 

But it really depends if you care about the money spent. if not, go for it.

 

It sure is an upgrade, the question is do you need it ? do you need like the extra 10 fps ?  

[Princess Luna]

Personally speaking I would upgrade only at Ice Lake 10nm, as already stated above Coffee Lake was just Kaby Lake with free cores to tame Ryzen's market growth, this paper launch is disgusting as well...

[79wjd]

5 hours ago, MyName13 said:

Blame consoles/AMD/Sony & MS for choosing AMD's APUs not developers.

That awkward moment when it was consoles that likely drove developers to optimize for more cores. 

[MyName13]

6 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

That awkward moment when it was consoles that likely drove developers to optimize for more cores. 

And i7 8700k still doesn't perform better than i7 7700k even though consoles have 6-7 cores, I wonder why.Maybe because these jaguar CPUs are too weak and any multi core optimisation is pointless for PC gamers that have at least a quad core nehalem (a 2008 architecture)?

[Simon771]

2600k should be still soldered, so temps must be fine on your CPU.

If you don't see a ned to upgrade, wait for Ice or Tiger lake.

 

And if I'm not mistaken you can OC with your motherboard ... so if you ever need slight improvements you can always OC it to it's max and push it for another 2 years before upgrading.