Stefan G. Weichinger wrote: > Am 16.11.2011 19:05, schrieb masterprometheus: > >> Oh I would definitly do that (overclock it I mean). But if there >> isn't someone with the same name, you've said : >> >>> I ask myself if I need the K-version at all, I don't want to >>> overclock ... >> >> Change of heart ? Understandable as these CPUs are easy to overclock. > > Yes, I know. I meant before: "I don't want to overclock if it's risky > and unstable ..." :-)
There is always a slight risk. But with a good HSF you will be ok. >> If you don't need the hyperthreading just get the 2500K and a good >> HSF. You can easily run it @4.5GHz 7/24 and safely. > > phew, that sounds fast, yes .... > > I assume the HT will do something to compiling stuff (read: > gentoo-emerging everyday)? > >>> Yep. So Intel noticed "wow, we get a few of them which run stable >>> even at 100MHz more, let's sell them for some more money" ;-) >> >> True but Intel's MSRP was just $10-15 more than a 2600K. Vendors >> decided to up the price a bit. Not uncommon with new products. > > I'd be ready to just spend a little more and get the faster CPU as I > change my work-pcs only every few years. I still use a C2D E6600 for > everyday purposes ... but maybe I just go for the 2600k, it will be more > than enough to make things fly in comparison. Then a 2600K is a good investment for you. But maybe you should wait for the Ivy Bridge CPUs (probably @March). Or maybe : http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116492 (note that no stock cooler included <g>) With a matching mobo like one of these : http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131803 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131801 Seriously too much money for a small performance difference. But 6 cores (with HT of course), 4 channel memory architecture (up to 64 GB), support for PCI-e v3.0, 12MB L3 cache, all those sound good. No integrated video, though.
