can i5 2500 play games in 2019

[M A K I-]

i just checked it in the chinese market
sells around 40$
so is it still able to play games

[vadim]

Can you use Ryzen 1200 in gaming rig? Or do you need to upgrade? i5-2500 is slightly faster.
And it has hardware AVX support that some games like Crew2 started to use.

[ShadowLID]

Yes it will...... but it is already showing it's age a true quad core ie a CPU with only 4 cores and 4 threads will be maxed out in most modern games. My father uses a I5 2400 and has a Gtx 970 and can play most games at playable frame rates like far cry 5, Doom 2016 etc. But I did over clock it to 3.8ghz for him. It's still a solid CPU but with the new gen consoles coming out 8 threads will soon be the minimum you will need. So if you are building a new build get at Mobo that will support the I7s tdp and you can always upgrade later but I recommend getting a I7 now or a AMD FX 8350 or better or the AMD Ryzen 1500x or higher.

[hawkeye]

If you have the correct mobo already, get an i7-2xxx. It wil play everything at 1080p. I still use one, currently with an rtx2070.

[[☥] - CJ -]

as a 2500k user and overclocker i recommend not going for less than an i7 2600 or similar
a 2500k when overclocked does "Well", but thats only because its overclockable.
Age however IS catching up to it, so a NonK 2500 would be worse off.

It can play games fine, but youd be better off with an i7 as it will make a difference compared to an i5

[Snow]

Originally posted by hawkeye:

If you have the correct mobo already, get an i7-2xxx. It wil play everything at 1080p

CPU has nothing to do with resolution. Don't mislead please.
i7 Sandy Bridge tho is a nice advice. And if u overclock it - u can get 60 FPS at pretty much any modern game.

[vadim]

Originally posted by Snow:

CPU has nothing to do with resolution. Don't mislead please.

Thie isn't true, but we have already discussed this in another thread and I see no reason to repeat the same arguments again.

[Snow]

Originally posted by vadim:

Originally posted by Snow:

CPU has nothing to do with resolution. Don't mislead please.

Thie isn't true, but we have already discussed this in another thread and I see no reason to repeat the same arguments again.

Oh, you mean this[imgur.com] 15 times difference in pixel count that didn't affect CPU by a bit? Yeah, I remember u mumbling something about ROPs being an illuminati conspiracy to make us think GPU is responsible for rasterization. God save us.

[_I_]

there is awlays some form of bottleneck
cpu/gpu/vsync/game engine, else you will get an infinite fps

i5 2500 is an older non overclockable cpu, will hold back a high end gpu depending on the game
older games at 4k120 will be held back by the gpu
newer games at 1080p60 will be held back by the cpu

even at that price, you can get a new pentium g that will match the old i5
no real benefit from the old i5 vs a new budget cpu

[M A K I-]

Originally posted by _I_:

there is awlays some form of bottleneck
cpu/gpu/vsync/game engine, else you will get an infinite fps

i5 2500 is an older non overclockable cpu, will hold back a high end gpu depending on the game
older games at 4k120 will be held back by the gpu
newer games at 1080p60 will be held back by the cpu

even at that price, you can get a new pentium g that will match the old i5
no real benefit from the old i5 vs a new budget cpu

new pentium g here is like a 90$ :(

[Snow]

Originally posted by _I_:

even at that price, you can get a new pentium g that will match the old i5
no real benefit from the old i5 vs a new budget cpu

I tried to find a cheap Pentium and ended up with 50 bucks Pentium III, lol.
But no, u can't find a new pentium G for 40 bucks. The cheapest almost-gaming thing u can get is 200GE for $55, but DDR4 is more expensive, so are the new mobos, and even then i5 2500 beats it in performance. Sandy Bridge is definitely an awesome budget choice these days.

[_I_]

g4400 = $49, 3.3ghz dual
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/YV7CmG/intel-cpu-bx80662g4400

i3 8100 is the quad, $120, 3.6 quad
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/YqKhP6/intel-core-i3-8100-36ghz-4-core-processor-bx80684i38100

or the a6 9500 is $50, but that sets way behind the i5 2500
https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i5-2500-vs-AMD-A6-9500-APU-2016-DBR/m517vsm302063

[vadim]

Originally posted by Snow:

Oh, you mean this[imgur.com] 15 times difference in pixel count that didn't affect CPU by a bit? Yeah, I remember u mumbling something about ROPs being an illuminati conspiracy to make us think GPU is responsible for rasterization. God save us.

Sorry, that doesn't sound very clever. You made one screenshot and decided that you proved anything. You are not. You could figure it out yourself. You ssid firdt image has 800:600 resolution, while second 3360:2100. But these two resolution have different aspect ratios. 4:3 first and 16:10 second. So, you should be able to see different number of objects on these two screenshots. Hence, if you claim that CPU load doesn't depene on resolution, it should be also independent on number of objects that is obviously nonsense.
But both screenshots have exactly the same FOV what is impossible. More that that, your "high resolution" screenshot uses textures with the same size as low resolution. Didn't this seem strange to you?
The explanation is simple: it is not real 4k resolution. Sorry, but your single screenshot proves nothing.

[Snow]

Originally posted by _I_:

g4400 = $49, 3.3ghz dual
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/YV7CmG/intel-cpu-bx80662g4400

It's not even 2/4, it's 2/2 man. The thread is about playing games in 2019. Not funny.

Originally posted by _I_:

i3 8100 is the quad, $120, 3.6 quad
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/YqKhP6/intel-core-i3-8100-36ghz-4-core-processor-bx80684i38100

R3 1200 is cheaper and overclockable so can beat it. Then again - DDR4, man's on a budget here.

Originally posted by _I_:

or the a6 9500 is $50, but that sets way behind the i5 2500
https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i5-2500-vs-AMD-A6-9500-APU-2016-DBR/m517vsm302063

Joke of the year, considering 200GE is 55 bucks and almost twice the performance.

Originally posted by vadim:

Sorry, that doesn't sound very clever. You made one screenshot and decided that you proved anything. You are not.

Well I'm clever enough to count to two, u know? Two screenshots? Not one or three? :D

Originally posted by vadim:

You ssid firdt image has 800:600 resolution, while second 3360:2100. But these two resolution have different aspect ratios. 4:3 first and 16:10 second.

A genius. Guys, fast, give him a medal or something!

Originally posted by vadim:

But both screenshots have exactly the same FOV what is impossible.

Wait, no, give the medal to me for achieving the impossible. That being choosing the desirable aspect ratio in game settings. Damn I'm good.

Originally posted by vadim:

So, you should be able to see different number of objects on these two screenshots.

Objects are easy, I can see dead people. And no, with the same FOV and same aspect ratio the number of objects on screen remains the same.

Originally posted by vadim:

More that that, your "high resolution" screenshot uses textures with the same size as low resolution. Didn't this seem strange to you?
The explanation is simple: it is not real 4k resolution. Sorry, but your single screenshot proves nothing.

Wait, let me get this straight. Changing the resolution of rasterization will just magically make textures higher resolution aswell? So if I watch like old Sony Ericsson 3gp movie on 4k screen with 4k resolution it will make the video itself 4k too? Damn man u've like zero knowledge about computers and related stuff, I'm not sure how u ended up here at all.
I'm definitely not the smartest PC guy here, I think Omega and tacoshy got way more experience than me in a lot of HW/SW things, but if I say something dumb - I can just admit it and move on. Can u?

[vadim]

It would be much better for you to admit your mistake instead of starting to write nonsense again.

[Snow]

Originally posted by vadim:

It would be much better for you to admit your mistake instead of starting to write nonsense again.

Soooo saying that the GPU is coloring the pixels and CPU is not coloring the pixels is dumb. Sure alright. Oh, just remind me, what's the pixel fillrate of R5 2600? Sorry, can't hear u.