The Nature Roy said:
Thanks, I really appreciate it. I'm pretty lost and leaning heavily on everyone's advice. I'm just looking to build a gaming rig that will smoke my consoles. I will say the price keeps ballooning, which wasn't the original intention, but I'll spend a little more if it helps that much.
So if I go with the 2500K, can you suggest a good bang-for-the-buck 1155 board from the following?:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...er=BESTMATCH&Description=1155+board&x=15&y=36
The 2500K, especially when overclocked, is so far ahead of the competition right now that it really doesn't make sense going with anything else, unless you really need to keep that budget low. I'm not exaggerating when I say that CPU will last you for 5+ years at the very least. That's not to say some people won't upgrade (because some of us like to upgrade even if we don't need to) though.
Just to give a quick comparison. A last generation i5/i7 is about 20% faster clock-for-clock than a Q6600. A 2500K is about 20% faster clock-for-clock than a last generation i5/i7.
Therefore, let's compare a 2500K at stock, and at 4.6GHz (moderate overclock), to a 3.0GHz Q6600 (because this is probably the most common overclock, and the baseline for many people's gaming rigs).
So, we have:
(3.3GHz / 3GHz) * 1.2 (Q6600 -> i5/i7) * 1.2 (i5/i7 -> Sandy Bridge) = 1.58
(4.6GHz / 3GHz) * 1.2 (Q6600 -> i5/i7) * 1.2 (i5/i7 -> Sandy Bridge) = 2.21
That means a 3.3GHz is 58% faster than a 3GHz quad-core, and a 4.6GHz is 121% faster than a 3GHz quad-core. That 3GHz quad core is already pretty much able to run just about anything today, but that extra headroom is well worth the $100-$150 premium.