Should I get a 2500K or 3570K? - Page 15

Originally Posted by 2thAche 

2600K at this point.

Originally Posted by SeanPoe 

A lot of people in this thread are making a key mistake. Heat and temperature ARE NOT the same thing. They're closely related to each other, but completely different. Heat is the total energy of molecular motion in a substance while temperature is a measure of the average energy of molecular motion in a substance. Heat energy depends on the speed of the particles, the number of particles (the size or mass), and the type of particles in an object. Temperature does not depend on the size or type of object. For example, the temperature of a small cup of water might be the same as the temperature of a large tub of water, but the tub of water has more heat because it has more water and thus more total thermal energy.
So, just because Ivy Bridge runs hotter at the core level doesn't mean it's putting out more heat. In fact, it's the opposite. Ivy Bridge actually puts off less total heat than Sandy Bridge even though it runs at a higher temperature. So IB actually does not heat up the chipset and GPU more than SB, this is a major misconception. IB also does not require better cooling than SB (and it does not require higher fan RPMs), as the heatsink is seeing the same temperature for both CPU's when they're at comparable overclocks (ie, 4.6 on IB and 4.8 on SB). The IB will still run at a higher temperature than the SB, but the heat output will be the same. The only reason people think the IB requires improved cooling is because they're trying to get the core temps to be the same as SB, when 90c on the IB is perfectly fine.
If the only reason you're worried about going IB is because you think it puts off more heat than SB, than you should reconsider
Edit: Here's a more thorough explanation of heat vs temperature if anyone cares to read it. It's a fairly simplistic article, so it should be pretty palatable.

Originally Posted by MrTOOSHORT 

3570k. Built a rig for a friend with one and it's a beast, even when ran at stock settings. The memory OC'd very easy to 2133MHz, pretty much plug and play.
Couple it with an Asus Maximus V Gene and you'll have a winning set up!

Originally Posted by SeanPoe 

A lot of people in this thread are making a key mistake. Heat and temperature ARE NOT the same thing. They're closely related to each other, but completely different. Heat is the total energy of molecular motion in a substance while temperature is a measure of the average energy of molecular motion in a substance. Heat energy depends on the speed of the particles, the number of particles (the size or mass), and the type of particles in an object. Temperature does not depend on the size or type of object. For example, the temperature of a small cup of water might be the same as the temperature of a large tub of water, but the tub of water has more heat because it has more water and thus more total thermal energy.
So, just because Ivy Bridge runs hotter at the core level doesn't mean it's putting out more heat. In fact, it's the opposite. Ivy Bridge actually puts off less total heat than Sandy Bridge even though it runs at a higher temperature. So IB actually does not heat up the chipset and GPU more than SB, this is a major misconception. IB also does not require better cooling than SB (and it does not require higher fan RPMs), as the heatsink is seeing the same temperature for both CPU's when they're at comparable overclocks (ie, 4.6 on IB and 4.8 on SB). The IB will still run at a higher temperature than the SB, but the heat output will be the same. The only reason people think the IB requires improved cooling is because they're trying to get the core temps to be the same as SB, when 90c on the IB is perfectly fine.
If the only reason you're worried about going IB is because you think it puts off more heat than SB, than you should reconsider
Edit: Here's a more thorough explanation of heat vs temperature if anyone cares to read it. It's a fairly simplistic article, so it should be pretty palatable.

Originally Posted by Hambone07si 

I just build 2 systems over the past week both with Asus Pro boards, z68 2500k and z77 3570k. Both with hyper 212's, SB reached 5ghz stable and encoded a movie at 47min, Ivy reached 4.4ghz with same temps 80c max and encoded the same movie 56min. SuperPi was 1sec faster with SB. I'm sure Cine would have been faster also with SB but didn't test.
The thing is this, with the SAME COOLER, you will not reach even close to the same clocks with Ivy as you will with SB? With a Hyper 212 you will be about 500mhz slower with Ivy and hitting same or higher temps. Now if you were going to compare SB with a hyper212 and Ivy with a H100, THAT'S NOT COMPARING. THAT'S FAKING