Support NeoGAF

[EatChildren]

Is it worth trying to hunt down an i7 2600K as an incremental upgrade over my i5 2500K? A new MBO/CPU/RAM combo would be idea, but I can't see that happening right now.

 

[lordfuzzybutt]

Is it worth trying to hunt down an i7 2600K as an incremental upgrade over my i5 2500K? A new MBO/CPU/RAM combo would be idea, but I can't see that happening right now.

It depends on how much you can get it for and how much you can flip the 2500k for I guess.

It looks like it will be worth something, the way i7s are pulling ahead of i5s in recent games.

 

[ABK]

It depends on how much you can get it for and how much you can flip the 2500k for I guess.

It looks like it will be worth something, the way i7s are pulling ahead of i5s in recent games.

I've been thinking of doing the same thing. This may be a stupid question but would the 2600k work on any motherboard that supports the 2500k?

 

[lordfuzzybutt]

I've been thinking of doing the same thing. This may be a stupid question but would the 2600k work on any motherboard that supports the 2500k?

Yes, it would.

 

[Kezen]

Is it worth trying to hunt down an i7 2600K as an incremental upgrade over my i5 2500K? A new MBO/CPU/RAM combo would be idea, but I can't see that happening right now.

Frankly it not worth it. Better to contemplate upgrading your whole platform, your GPU is ready for the fight but the 2500K is showing its limits in the latest games.
DX12 might give it a new life for all I know but really I think moving to a Skylake build would be a phenomenal upgrade for you.

 

[EatChildren]

It depends on how much you can get it for and how much you can flip the 2500k for I guess.

It looks like it will be worth something, the way i7s are pulling ahead of i5s in recent games.

Frankly it not worth it. Better to contemplate upgrading your whole platform, your GPU is ready for the fight but the 2500K is showing its limits in the latest games.
DX12 might give it a new life for all I know but really I think moving to a Skylake build would be a phenomenal upgrade for you.

Cheers gents. I'm not holding out for much of an improvement with DX12, so I guess I'm really only thinking of stopgaps. Ultimately though my CPU, RAM, and MBO would be the next things on the list to totally overhaul. Not that the i5 is a slouch (best bang-for-buck CPU ever), but my RAM is pretty slow all things considered, and I think moving up the CPU/RAM food chain will prove more and more valuable as this generation goes on. Looking at games from last year there really isn't much evidence to suggest faster CPU/RAM combo has a big impact, most games GPU heavy. But Fallout 4 and Battlefront seem to make good use of faster stuff all across the (mother)board, and I figure that bodes well for higher end hardware on future games.

I'll see how I go. Every so often I see someone hocking one off for ~AU$100, which isn't bad. But then others go for much more.

 

[Spikematic]

It depends on how much you can get it for and how much you can flip the 2500k for I guess.

It looks like it will be worth something, the way i7s are pulling ahead of i5s in recent games.

Uh oh. Does this mean I shouldn't get a 6600k and opt for a 6700k? I sure hope not, because there's a $200 difference between the two...

 

[Finaika]

Uh oh. Does this mean I shouldn't get a 6600k and opt for a 6700k? I sure hope not, because there's a $200 difference between the two...

6600K is fine, you can even overclock it to reach 6700K levels.

 

[isamu]

A 2TB SSD seems like big overkill, especially since they are evolving pretty quickly. Are you only buying from Newegg?

Might be easier to compare if you used PC part picker.

I'd buy from anywhere but I kinda favor newegg or amazon since they're in Los Angeles where I am. I'll check out PC part picker.

 

[isamu]

With a good CPU liquid cooler like the NZXT Kraken X61 RL-KRX61-01, how high of an overclock can i expect to reach with a Devil's Canyon 4790K? 4.7Ghz? 4.8Ghz? 5.0Ghz? How easy will it be to get to those levels?

 

[Relix]

So Radeon R9 390 or GeForce 970?

I am dying here. ATI has burned me before but the price is lower and performance is supposedly up there or better, plus sweet 8GB RAM. Issue is ATI drivers have generally sucked at least for me and NVIDIA always seems to perform better.

I will be connecting this to a 4K UHD TV so I'll probably be playing at 1440p at least.

 

[Kezen]

So Radeon R9 390 or GeForce 970?

I am dying here. ATI has burned me before but the price is lower and performance is supposedly up there or better, plus sweet 8GB RAM. Issue is ATI drivers have generally sucked at least for me and NVIDIA always seems to perform better.

I will be connecting this to a 4K UHD TV so I'll probably be playing at 1440p at least.

AMD DX11 drivers are still lagging behind Nvidia's, this is particularly true when games are heavily CPU limited. Otherwise the 390 is great value and you can't have too much VRAM.

 

[Brockxz]

Frankly it not worth it. Better to contemplate upgrading your whole platform, your GPU is ready for the fight but the 2500K is showing its limits in the latest games.
DX12 might give it a new life for all I know but really I think moving to a Skylake build would be a phenomenal upgrade for you.

I would not say that 2500K is showing it's limits. I recently upgraded from 2500K to 4790K and there is almost no performance improvements in games. 2500K combo with GTX970 is getting almost the same results as 4790K with GTX970. There are few games that has better multicore/thread support and are heavier on CPU but those are really few exceptions. I would say 2500K will be still good for gaming at least for next 2-3 years. Where I got improvement was some editing applications I use on daily bases. There 4790K shines better than 2500K.

 

[lordfuzzybutt]

Uh oh. Does this mean I shouldn't get a 6600k and opt for a 6700k? I sure hope not, because there's a $200 difference between the two...

6600K is fine, you can even overclock it to reach 6700K levels.

The clock speed is not everything though, the i7 has hyperthreading which will help tremendously in applications and games which support it.

With a good CPU liquid cooler like the NZXT Kraken X61 RL-KRX61-01, how high of an overclock can i expect to reach with a Devil's Canyon 4790K? 4.7Ghz? 4.8Ghz? 5.0Ghz? How easy will it be to get to those levels?

Hard to say, no CPU overclocks the same, you may be lucky or you may be not when it comes to the chip capability.

But let's say you got a good chip, I expect you can get it to 4.7 quite easily as even a cheap cooler like the evo 212 already can manage 4.5. Can't say any more specific than that though.

 

[UnrealEck]

Didn't know where else to ask this.

I'm upgrading my ancient monitor. It's a Samsung 1080p 60Hz from around 2005.

I am currently thinking of getting the 24" AOC 1080p 144Hz 1ms TN Gsync monitor.
However, I've also had thoughts of getting the 27" Acer 1440p 144Hz 4ms ISP Gsync monitor.

Thing is, the Acer is a LOT more expensive. It's about £260 more. The AOC being £273 and the Acer around £540.
I'm wondering if the ISP will be hugely superior in image quality. I keep reading that ISP is a good bit better, but how much better than the AOC can it really be? I'm sure TN panels have come a long way.
One other thing holding me back a bit besides the price difference is the resolution. Is 1440p going to be that much better than 1080p? Is my 1080p content (movies, PS4 etc) going to look like crap on the 1440p panel?

Anyway, my specs are:

Core i7 920 @3.8
GTX 980 Ti.

I was going to upgrade to Skylake with the 6700K and an MSI Krait or Asus Z170 board, but I decided the monitor would give me the best gaming improvement for my money. Games like AC Syndicate with framerate uncapped peg my CPU and the GPU is being held back a bit, but not hugely so, with it typically about 85% or higher when the CPU is fully pegged. This means I'd still get a benefit from over 60Hz even in games where my CPU is being fully utilised on every single thread.

Advice?
Also, what do you think is more desireable? 1440p at ~75 FPS 4ms (Gsync) or 1080p ~110 FPS 1ms (Gsync)

I would not say that 2500K is showing it's limits. I recently upgraded from 2500K to 4790K and there is almost no performance improvements in games. 2500K combo with GTX970 is getting almost the same results as 4790K with GTX970.

If you have a faster GPU or two or more GPUs and have an uncapped (or very high cap) framerate, you will notice the difference between CPUs much more easily.

 

[Brockxz]

If you have a faster GPU or two or more GPUs and have an uncapped (or very high cap) framerate, you will notice the difference between CPUs much more easily.

There is no single GPU who can cap 2500K. Maybe I'm wrong. I agree about multi-gpu solutions. That's where skylake comes with 16 PCI Express 3.0 lanes from CPU and 20 PCI Express 3.0 lanes from PCH. That will help get better results for multi-gpu systems. At least in theory.

 

[opticalmace]

There is no single GPU who can cap 2500K. Maybe I'm wrong. I agree about multi-gpu solutions. That's where skylake comes with 16 PCI Express 3.0 lanes from CPU and 20 PCI Express 3.0 lanes from PCH. That will help get better results for multi-gpu systems. At least in theory.

What do you mean by cap? The 2500K is still a fast CPU but you will same a framerate increase by going to something newer.

 

[Brockxz]

Here is my tests in 3DMark comparision. http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/5538905/fs/6490442
As you can see, there is maybe 1 fps increase in graphics fps score between 2500k and 4790k. Where is benefits of faster/newer cpu is physics calculations and I would say that's where also in real games you will see some benefits. Physics/AI calculations. But when you look at all those games out there, there is really not so many who do that.

But what I wanted to say, those who think they need to upgrade his/her 2500K now, I would say maybe not. Let's wait a little bit more. Wait for next intel/amd cpu and see what games will do in next year and maybe then there will be better upgrade options and more reason behind those upgrades.

 

[lordfuzzybutt]

Didn't know where else to ask this.

I'm upgrading my ancient monitor. It's a Samsung 1080p 60Hz from around 2005.

I am currently thinking of getting the 24" AOC 1080p 144Hz 1ms TN Gsync monitor.
However, I've also had thoughts of getting the 27" Acer 1440p 144Hz 4ms ISP Gsync monitor.

Thing is, the Acer is a LOT more expensive. It's about £260 more. The AOC being £273 and the Acer around £540.
I'm wondering if the ISP will be hugely superior in image quality. I keep reading that ISP is a good bit better, but how much better than the AOC can it really be? I'm sure TN panels have come a long way.
One other thing holding me back a bit besides the price difference is the resolution. Is 1440p going to be that much better than 1080p? Is my 1080p content (movies, PS4 etc) going to look like crap on the 1440p panel?

Anyway, my specs are:

Core i7 920 @3.8
GTX 980 Ti.

I was going to upgrade to Skylake with the 6700K and an MSI Krait or Asus Z170 board, but I decided the monitor would give me the best gaming improvement for my money. Games like AC Syndicate with framerate uncapped peg my CPU and the GPU is being held back a bit, but not hugely so, with it typically about 85% or higher when the CPU is fully pegged. This means I'd still get a benefit from over 60Hz even in games where my CPU is being fully utilised on every single thread.

Advice?
Also, what do you think is more desireable? 1440p at ~75 FPS 4ms (Gsync) or 1080p ~110 FPS 1ms (Gsync)

I were you 2 months ago, and I chose the AOC 2460 one. Reasons are somewhat similar:

• Significantly cheaper than the Acer one.
• Faster response time.
• Most of my contents are in 1080. (amazon videos, etc), the quality will be worse upscaled to 1440p.
• You can always downsample from higher res to 1080 and enjoy better IQ in games that you have extra headroom as well.

Obviously, the color is not as good but not worth it I guess for the price. More in my case though because I caught the AOC on sale and so the Acer is almost 2.5 times more expensive.

One downside for me is that I am feeling a little bit cramped in screen estate with the 24''. Not sure about you.

My choice is still the AOC though.

 

[UnrealEck]

Thanks for the input.
I'm leaning more towards the G2460PG by AOC. I think 1080p is fine for now. I think 1440p would suit me better if it were 32 inches or something.

I really wish I could see both in person, especially running a game. I've never in my life seen a screen over 1080p though in person. In fact I don't even think I've seen IPS side-by-side with a TN.

 

[Kezen]

I would not say that 2500K is showing it's limits. I recently upgraded from 2500K to 4790K and there is almost no performance improvements in games. 2500K combo with GTX970 is getting almost the same results as 4790K with GTX970. There are few games that has better multicore/thread support and are heavier on CPU but those are really few exceptions. I would say 2500K will be still good for gaming at least for next 2-3 years. Where I got improvement was some editing applications I use on daily bases. There 4790K shines better than 2500K.

I said "in the latest" games.

 

[PumpkinSpice]

Is it a good time to buy a new GPU, or should I wait a little longer?

I currently have a Radeon 6950 and have been waiting for a solid jump in performance in the $200-$300 (CAD, preferably) range but it just never seems to materialize.

I'm starting to see some serious limits in recent games, first having to bump some games down to 720p to stay at 60 (Ground Zeroes) and now settling in for 30 in some newer stuff. Everything still runs but I can't imagine going more than another year, I bought this thing early 2011....

 

[Finaika]

Didn't know where else to ask this.

I'm upgrading my ancient monitor. It's a Samsung 1080p 60Hz from around 2005.

I am currently thinking of getting the 24" AOC 1080p 144Hz 1ms TN Gsync monitor.
However, I've also had thoughts of getting the 27" Acer 1440p 144Hz 4ms ISP Gsync monitor.

Thing is, the Acer is a LOT more expensive. It's about £260 more. The AOC being £273 and the Acer around £540.
I'm wondering if the ISP will be hugely superior in image quality. I keep reading that ISP is a good bit better, but how much better than the AOC can it really be? I'm sure TN panels have come a long way.
One other thing holding me back a bit besides the price difference is the resolution. Is 1440p going to be that much better than 1080p? Is my 1080p content (movies, PS4 etc) going to look like crap on the 1440p panel?

Anyway, my specs are:

Core i7 920 @3.8
GTX 980 Ti.

I was going to upgrade to Skylake with the 6700K and an MSI Krait or Asus Z170 board, but I decided the monitor would give me the best gaming improvement for my money. Games like AC Syndicate with framerate uncapped peg my CPU and the GPU is being held back a bit, but not hugely so, with it typically about 85% or higher when the CPU is fully pegged. This means I'd still get a benefit from over 60Hz even in games where my CPU is being fully utilised on every single thread.

Advice?
Also, what do you think is more desireable? 1440p at ~75 FPS 4ms (Gsync) or 1080p ~110 FPS 1ms (Gsync)

I have the same Acer monitor after exchanging it from a BenQ 1080p 24" 144Hz monitor when building my new PC. Bought it primarily for G-Sync, but the IPS panel's colors are so vibrant and the increased resolution and screen size is nice too (I have to increase the text size in Windows 10 to 125% though because everything was so small lol).

However, the Acer only has 1 DisplayPort input, so I don't think you could plug your PS4 into it, unless you're talking about the newer 165Hz model.

 

[Spikematic]

The clock speed is not everything though, the i7 has hyperthreading which will help tremendously in applications and games which support it.



Hard to say, no CPU overclocks the same, you may be lucky or you may be not when it comes to the chip capability.

But let's say you got a good chip, I expect you can get it to 4.7 quite easily as even a cheap cooler like the evo 212 already can manage 4.5. Can't say any more specific than that though.

Which games support hyperthreading at the moment? I kinda wanna futureproof for at least the next 3 years with this rig. But $200 extra is quite nasty... =[

 

[wowzors]

I have the same Acer monitor after exchanging it from a BenQ 1080p 24" 144Hz monitor when building my new PC. Bought it primarily for G-Sync, but the IPS panel's colors are so vibrant and the increased resolution and screen size is nice too (I have to increase the text size in Windows 10 to 125% though because everything was so small lol).

However, the Acer only has 1 DisplayPort input, so I don't think you could plug your PS4 into it, unless you're talking about the newer 165Hz model.

I have the Acer also and it does not have HDMI like you said he would have to get the 271hu (the new one). Which also has speakers built in.

 

[UnrealEck]

However, the Acer only has 1 DisplayPort input, so I don't think you could plug your PS4 into it, unless you're talking about the newer 165Hz model.

I didn't know that about the Acer, however the AOC also only has one display port and nothing else. I could just buy a DP to HDMI cable anyway.

Was the IPS versus TN and 1440p versus 1080p worth the much larger investment?

I have the Acer also and it does not have HDMI like you said he would have to get the 271hu (the new one). Which also has speakers built in.

The XB270HU apparently only has DP too.

 

[Spikematic]

I were you 2 months ago, and I chose the AOC 2460 one. Reasons are somewhat similar:

• Significantly cheaper than the Acer one.
• Faster response time.
• Most of my contents are in 1080. (amazon videos, etc), the quality will be worse upscaled to 1440p.
• You can always downsample from higher res to 1080 and enjoy better IQ in games that you have extra headroom as well.

Obviously, the color is not as good but not worth it I guess for the price. More in my case though because I caught the AOC on sale and so the Acer is almost 2.5 times more expensive.

One downside for me is that I am feeling a little bit cramped in screen estate with the 24''. Not sure about you.

My choice is still the AOC though.

Ah, this is very interesting to me too, as I also need to decide what new monitor I want soon. The high end 144hz 1440p ones by Acer and Asus seem to have series QA issues so I was contemplating a 144hz 1ms BenQ one. Was not aware of this AOC one at all, looks interesting for sure. Does it have any notable issues/flaws that stand out?

 

[j-wood]

I'm looking for a decent PC headset that won't break the bank. The ones in the OP seems are a bit too much.

I just want comfort and decent quality. Any suggestions? Are the logitech gaming ones good? I think it's G430

 

[UnrealEck]

Ah, this is very interesting to me too, as I also need to decide what new monitor I want soon. The high end 144hz 1440p ones by Acer and Asus seem to have series QA issues so I was contemplating a 144hz 1ms BenQ one. Was not aware of this AOC one at all, looks interesting for sure. Does it have any notable issues/flaws that stand out?

From what I've read, the BenQ seems to have slightly better picture quality in terms of colours/greys/contrasts and so on than the AOC. But it is a good bit more expensive.

 

[lordfuzzybutt]

Which games support hyperthreading at the moment? I kinda wanna futureproof for at least the next 3 years with this rig. But $200 extra is quite nasty... =[

I said "in the latest" games.

.

Ah, this is very interesting to me too, as I also need to decide what new monitor I want soon. The high end 144hz 1440p ones by Acer and Asus seem to have series QA issues so I was contemplating a 144hz 1ms BenQ one. Was not aware of this AOC one at all, looks interesting for sure. Does it have any notable issues/flaws that stand out?

Not that I can tell.

Solid build.
Good enough picture quality, especially for the price.

I am satisfied.

 

[opticalmace]

Didn't know where else to ask this.

I'm upgrading my ancient monitor. It's a Samsung 1080p 60Hz from around 2005.

I am currently thinking of getting the 24" AOC 1080p 144Hz 1ms TN Gsync monitor.
However, I've also had thoughts of getting the 27" Acer 1440p 144Hz 4ms ISP Gsync monitor.

Thing is, the Acer is a LOT more expensive. It's about £260 more. The AOC being £273 and the Acer around £540.
I'm wondering if the ISP will be hugely superior in image quality. I keep reading that ISP is a good bit better, but how much better than the AOC can it really be? I'm sure TN panels have come a long way.
One other thing holding me back a bit besides the price difference is the resolution. Is 1440p going to be that much better than 1080p? Is my 1080p content (movies, PS4 etc) going to look like crap on the 1440p panel?

Anyway, my specs are:

Core i7 920 @3.8
GTX 980 Ti.

I was going to upgrade to Skylake with the 6700K and an MSI Krait or Asus Z170 board, but I decided the monitor would give me the best gaming improvement for my money. Games like AC Syndicate with framerate uncapped peg my CPU and the GPU is being held back a bit, but not hugely so, with it typically about 85% or higher when the CPU is fully pegged. This means I'd still get a benefit from over 60Hz even in games where my CPU is being fully utilised on every single thread.

Advice?
Also, what do you think is more desireable? 1440p at ~75 FPS 4ms (Gsync) or 1080p ~110 FPS 1ms (Gsync)



If you have a faster GPU or two or more GPUs and have an uncapped (or very high cap) framerate, you will notice the difference between CPUs much more easily.

I would go 1440p 144Hz IPS personally, especially with a 980 Ti. QA is a problem though, so try to buy from a retailer that makes exchanges easy.

I tend to keep my monitors for a long time, so I find it easy to justify spending more on a nice one.

 

[UnrealEck]

AC Syndicate has some of the heaviest multithread use I've seen in a game. It can put every single one of the 8 threads I have to over 90%.
I rarely notice games doing that.

 

[Brockxz]

I said "in the latest" games.

And I said single GPU. Those results are SLI but I see your point and I already said there will be benefits if you will use more than one gpu with newer/better cpu and those graphs show exactly what i said.

 

[shadow2810]

Not even sure if this is the right place to ask but does USB-C extension cable (M to F) exist? I'm planning to get a USB-C hub to attach to my desktop but pretty much all the hubs in the market have fixed cable and the cable is way too short.

 

[Kezen]

And I said single GPU. Those results are SLI but I see your point and I already said there will be benefits if you will use more than one gpu with newer/better cpu and those graphs show exactly what i said.

The Battlefront example used a single 980ti.

Big difference between the 2500k and the I7.

The 2500k is not outdated just yet but an upgrade is absolutely justified.

 

[TerryLee81]

I plan to do a clean install of Win 10 in the next few days.

I remember with older Windows version, you had to install some chipset drivers and stuff that came on a CD with the mainboard.

Is this still necessary? Or can I skip that as long as Windows doesn't complain?

 

[Darkstorne]

This page makes me happy I bought a 2600k way back when. I upgraded my GPU to a GTX 970 last year, and hoping to make the combo last me until 2018.

 

[lordfuzzybutt]

I plan to do a clean install of Win 10 in the next few days.

I remember with older Windows version, you had to install some chipset drivers and stuff that came on a CD with the mainboard.

Is this still necessary? Or can I skip that as long as Windows doesn't complain?

You can skip those.

 

[Athreous]

Guys, is an i5 4670k enough for PS2 heavy emulation? (such as Valkyrie Profile 2).
Also, any good Mobo for this core with a good price?
Ohh, and are those hybrid HD+SSD any good for gaming?

 

[Spikematic]

A dude on the overclock.net forums recommended the Dell S2716DG to me. He just bought one for his rig that has pretty much the same specs as mine. Anyone here have any insight/thoughts on this? I didn't even know Dell had a competitor to Asus and Acer's stuff.

 

[opticalmace]

A dude on the overclock.net forums recommended the Dell S2716DG to me. He just bought one for his rig that has pretty much the same specs as mine. Anyone here have any insight/thoughts on this? I didn't even know Dell had a competitor to Asus and Acer's stuff.

Just looked it up. Keep in mind it has a TN panel.

 

[j-wood]

Pretty sure I'm doing an upgrade next month. Opinions?

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/kW2m99

Current rig:
i7 2600k
8GB DDR3
AsRock p67 Extreme4
GTX 970
120GB SSD (OS)
500GB HDD (Data)
1TB Raid0 (Games)

Keeping the video card and hard drives. Also still need headset rec from my last post!

 

[Spikematic]

Just looked it up. Keep in mind it has a TN panel.

I noticed, but it's a Dell so I'm expecting QA to be much better than both Asus and Acer. I noticed even the previous Asus model has a lot of issues despite being a TN panel. Just trying to figure out a way to get the best of both 1440p and 144hz worlds in the safest possible manner. If it were just a little backlight bleeding issues I wouldn't have cared, I hardly notice that stuff anyway. But the stuff I've been reading is nightmare fuel, considering how damn costly they are.

 

[opticalmace]

I noticed, but it's a Dell so I'm expecting QA to be much better than both Asus and Acer. I noticed even the previous Asus model has a lot of issues despite being a TN panel. Just trying to figure out a way to get the best of both 1440p and 144hz worlds in the safest possible manner. If it were just a little backlight bleeding issues I wouldn't have cared, I hardly notice that stuff anyway. But the stuff I've been reading is nightmare fuel, considering how damn costly they are.

The ideal way to buy a monitor would be buying it from a local B&M store with a generous exchange/return policy, so you can swap them out until you have one without any issues. Having to ship a monitor sucks ass.

 

[Blitzhex]

I said "in the latest" games.

I've always wondered where my 4690k @ 4.6ghz would land on a chart like this. Would love to see GameGPU bench OC'd CPUs.

 

[Spikematic]

The ideal way to buy a monitor would be buying it from a local B&M store with a generous exchange/return policy, so you can swap them out until you have one without any issues. Having to ship a monitor sucks ass.

I know, unfortunately I live in a place where I lack such luxuries. My only way of getting a decent monitor is through a friend or colleague flying in from the US or Canada. So the best thing I can do now is pick one with a solid reputation and hope for the best.

 

[Csr]

I said "in the latest" games.

This test shows less than 10% difference between 2500k and cpus with more threads but in ultra quality on battlefront.

I suspect that with the cpu's oc'ed and non sli results the differences would be even smaller.
Syndicate does seem to benefit from having more threads available but personally i want to see more benchmarks from different sites to be certain of what the actual difference is.

 

[Heysoos]

Thinking of upgrading from my 2500k too. Just waiting to see what intel retail edge puts up.

 

[opticalmace]

This test shows less than 10% difference between 2500k and cpus with more threads but in ultra quality on battlefront.

I suspect that with the cpu's oc'ed and non sli results the differences would be even smaller.
Syndicate does seem to benefit from having more threads available but personally i want to see more benchmarks from different sites to be certain of what the actual difference is.

It's clearly GPU limited here.

 

[Csr]

It's clearly GPU limited here.

Yes ofcourse but if i wanted to see if an upgrade would make sence for me i would watch the benchmark with the settings i would play games in. Battlefront and cod show a ~10% difference with a 980 ti at 1080p, probably less at higher resolutions, aa and with oc'd cpu's like i said before, i don't think many people would consider that worthy of an upgrade.