0

I would like to know if the Core i5 "S" processors are slower for games, mainly for the fact that their base clocks is lower than the non S processors.

For example, the Core i5 2300 has a base clock of 2.8ghz while the Core i5 2400S has a base clock of 2.5ghz. Normally one would say that the 2300 is fairly better than the 2400S. Now here where it gets difficult: The 2400S has a turbo clock speed of 3.3ghz, while the 2300 turbo clock speed goes up to 3.1 ghz.

Are the i5 S processors still slower due to the base clock or should I consider the turbo clock speed due to the fact that most games would put the processor under full load?

1

You're not going to notice too much of a difference unless you're doing some multitasking. According to the comparison on CPU World the performance differences are pretty much negligible with the 2400S using MUCH less power. You could easily overclock the 2400S to perform at the same base clock as the 2300. It basically comes down to the price difference between the two. Technically the 2400S will be cheaper in the long run (65W power consumption on the 2400S vs 95W power consumption on the 2300) provided you don't overclock it. Personally, I'd save up the extra money to buy the i7 2600K which has yet to be trumped as far as I know.

  • I prefer the 2600K as well hehe, but I'm on a budget right now, plus the CPU is for someone else who wants to get rid of her Q6600 which is bottlenecking a HD6870. No multitask will be done, just gaming and some browsing. Anyway, thanks for the info. – TonySniper Jul 17 '14 at 15:23
  • Now I don't want to create another question for this, but let's say all one does is play some games, then does the HT features of 2600K worth it over the lower price of a, for example, 2500K? No future proofing in mind. – TonySniper Jul 17 '14 at 15:26
  • 1
    For an extra $50, absolutely. It might seem like a lot of money, but its pretty much nothing in the CPU world. If a CPU is less than $100 more than the one I'm looking at and has much better features and performance I'll typically go with that one (after a good amount of research of course). – slow_excellence Jul 17 '14 at 15:30
1

The difference is negligible. There are benchmarks that reflect this (albeit not game benchmarks in that article).

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.