often reviewed as best value/speed, low power potential
Jason G., Amazon
26 Mars 2012
Sommaire: Almost one month away from Ivy Bridge release - SO, the question is, if buying a year old processor now, which of the three - i3, i5, or i7. Many, many tech reviews (tomshardware, etc) comment that the i5 2500k is the better value compared to the i7. The i3 is only dual core. i7 has hyper threading and possibly faster. i5/i7 are quad core and have the hd3000. Only certain users will be able to see the difference between the i5/i7.
Sommaire: I must start off by saying that I have run nothing but AMD processors for the last 10 years in each one of my setups. This processor had high reviews from all of my peers while I recieved nothing but negative reviews from the AMD counterparts. I decided to give it a try and spend the extra money to go with this processor. I am glad I did. While the base setup of this processor is nice and runs everything smoothly, I decided to overclock it a tad bit.
Sommaire: Great CPU, super fast and the i7 doesn't seem £100 more worth it. But each to their own. It's a "k"/unlocked cpu so overclocking is easy, almost too easy. Water cooling would be essential but one could get 4.2GHz apparently from this little beast. Hackintosh capable, gives me a Geekbench score of ~9000 with my configuration so judge that for yourselves. Easily installed and a great CPU.
Sommaire: wanted to upgrade my computer, done some research and found that the intel i5 and intel i7 processors have very little different in them, apart from the huge price. very please and very easy to fit.
Sommaire: I use for vmware mainly and it works perfectly. my gaming is a bit suckish with the intel hd 2000 graphics though. i have yet to use all 4 cores running google chrome, Microsoft security essentials av scan set to 50 percent max, jdownloader, and portal.