facebook rss twitter

Review: Intel vs. Intel - four Core i5 2500 chips go head-to-head

by Tarinder Sandhu on 2 August 2011, 08:40

Tags: Intel (NASDAQ:INTC)

Quick Link: HEXUS.net/qa6sj

Add to My Vault: x

Final thoughts

Understanding that Intel has a wide range of CPUs in its arsenal, we set out to examine the overall proposition presented by four presently-available Core i5 2500 chips that are all priced at around the £150 mark.

Enthusiasts should be familiar with the Core i5 2500K, rated at 95W TDP. This four-core, four-threaded processor can be multiplier-overclocked and features the best integrated graphics produced by Intel. Able to run close to 5GHz with moderate air-cooling, providing an impressive overclock, it's our recommended CPU for any mid-range self-build.

But you can save a few pennies and opt for a Core i5 2500 (non-K). This chip has the same CPU specifications as the K-suffixed model but, knowing that it's multiplier-locked upwards, cannot be easily overclocked, due to how the various parts of the processor work together. Get past that and the 2500 offers inferior graphics, thus making it very difficult to recommend for the build-it-yourself enthusiast.

Final

Rounding out the 2500-series line are the S- and T-suffixed parts. Harder to purchase from a retail channel, their main claim to fame is lower power-draw. The 2500S gives up CPU frequency in order to achieve a 65W TDP rating. Benchmarking a little below 2500 and 2500K, our power-draw measurements show that there's not a whole heap to be gained by switching down to 65W.

Whereas Core i5 2500K focuses on speed, Core i5 2500T goes for a different tack and puts power-draw ahead of straight-line performance. Specified with a super-low 45W TDP, which isn't reflected in our power-draw figures, CPU performance is appreciably lower. Interestingly, however, Intel boosts the graphics speed to 2500(S)-beating levels.

Look at the broader picture and Intel's significantly cheaper Core i3 provides adequate CPU performance and Core i5-matching GPU performance. AMD's A8 3850, available for £100, is easily beaten in CPU-centric tasks but then hands out a whipping of its own when it comes to IGP-based 3D.

After seeing four £150-ish Intel Core i5 chips in action, we'd recommend the 2500K for the enthusiast, for the reasons discussed above. The 2500 'regular' chip makes little sense for our readers, while the 2500S is neither fast nor particularly power-frugal in real-world usage. Users looking for an ultra-quiet PC that has most of the bases covered may want to give the Core i5 2500T a look, though we'd be inclined to save the money and go for a Core i3 chip instead.

HEXUS Awards


Intel Core i5 2500K

HEXUS Where2Buy

A range of second-generation Intel Core i5 processors are available at Scan.co.uk.

HEXUS Right2Reply

At HEXUS, we invite the companies whose products we test to comment on our articles. If any company representatives for the products reviewed choose to respond, we'll publish their commentary here verbatim.



HEXUS Forums :: 16 Comments

Login with Forum Account

Don't have an account? Register today!
Intel with their very annoying and confusing model numbers of CPU's and motherboards is all too much…..

Can't be bothered
Great review, more of this type of thing please :)

On another note, good to see Intel pushing ahead with Operation Mystical Names
If it's getting to the point where a 4 digit number isn't enough to identify your product, then you know that they just have too many products.

i3, i5 i7
K suffix
T suffix
S suffix

series prefix of 2 to indicate 2nd generation….

Just how do you explain to Gran how this will help her do her online banking quicker than using a new AMD based system, or her existing pc…. I really do think that someone needs to come up with a simpler strategy for the mere mortals out there, otherwise we're back in the realms of DX2-66 vs K6 nonsensical naming conventions….
Used to be that the low voltage version of a chip had the same clock speed, if it runs at 2.3GHz then its clearly not a 2500 and should be named accordingly, damn you Intel.
Platinum
Used to be that the low voltage version of a chip had the same clock speed, if it runs at 2.3GHz then its clearly not a 2500 and should be named accordingly, damn you Intel.

It does under typical load - the turbo speed is the same, it just throttles back more under heavy all core load to provide a lower TDP.

Which is vital when you are designing a system to specifically cope with up to a certain amount of wattage heat - the extra cost in coping with a higher heat dissipation might well not be worth the small increase in performance under very heavy load, while for most of the time you have a chip that's just as fast.