Jump to content


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.

Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.


Should I have bought the i7-2600k?

  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic

#1 Chillie


  • Members
  • 32 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Missouri
  • Local time:01:43 AM

Posted 11 April 2011 - 05:43 PM

I recently bought a new custom built pc. My specs are on my profile. My question is should I have bought the i7-2600k instead of the i7-2600?
I wasn't planning on buying the cpu that day but was talked into buying a new one, including a whole new rig pretty much with $ from a friend.
I didn't do any research on the 2600k but did read tons of reviews on the 2600. I heard mostly all great things so I went with it. After I picked up my pc a few days later (they had to build it) I did some research online and found out that my i7-2600 was locked and wasn't overclockable. I also found out the i7-2600k was overclockable. Did I make a mistake in buying the 2600? How much faster is the 2600k. I will not use liquid cooling. How long will this cpu be in the top 20 in benchmarks? 2 years or more I hope. So, should I try to return the 2600 for the 2600k or just be happy with what I have and quit being power hungry? Thanks.

BC AdBot (Login to Remove)


#2 the_patriot11


    High Tech Redneck

  • BC Advisor
  • 6,763 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Wyoming USA
  • Local time:12:43 AM

Posted 11 April 2011 - 07:10 PM

In theory, unless you plan on overclocking (intel fanboys please correct me if Im wrong) but I don't believe there would be any performance difference between the two. The only reason you would want the k would be to overclock.



Primary system: Motherboard: ASUS M4A89GTD PRO/USB3, Processor: AMD Phenom II x4 945, Memory: 16 gigs of Patriot G2 DDR3 1600, Video: AMD Sapphire Nitro R9 380, Storage: 1 WD 500 gig HD, 1 Hitachi 500 gig HD, and Power supply: Coolermaster 750 watt, OS: Windows 10 64 bit. 

Media Center: Motherboard: Gigabyte mp61p-S3, Processor: AMD Athlon 64 x2 6000+, Memory: 6 gigs Patriot DDR2 800, Video: Gigabyte GeForce GT730, Storage: 500 gig Hitachi, PSU: Seasonic M1211 620W full modular, OS: Windows 10.

If I don't reply within 24 hours of your reply, feel free to send me a pm.

#3 killerx525


    Bleepin' Aussie

  • Members
  • 7,220 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Melbourne, Australia
  • Local time:05:43 PM

Posted 11 April 2011 - 07:19 PM

The difference between them is the 2600 does not have Embedded Options Available, Intel Virtualization Technology for Directed I/O (VT-d) and Intel Trusted Execution Technology. The 2600K is more expensive then the 2600.

System1: CPU- Intel Core i7-5820K @ 4.4GHz, CPU Cooler- Noctua NH-D14, RAM- G.Skill Ripjaws 16GB Kit(4Gx4) DDR3 2133MHz, SSD/HDD- Samsung 850 EVO 250GB/Western Digital Caviar Black 1TB/Seagate Barracuada 3TB, GPU- 2x EVGA GTX980 Superclocked @1360/MHz1900MHz, Motherboard- Asus X99 Deluxe, Case- Custom Mac G5, PSU- EVGA P2-1000W, Soundcard- Realtek High Definition Audio, OS- Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit
Games: APB: Reloaded, Hours played: 3100+  System2: Late 2011 Macbook Pro 15inch   OFw63FY.png

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users