Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 39

Thread: Reviews - Intel Pentium Anniversary Edition G3258 (22nm Haswell)

  1. #1
    HEXUS.admin
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    26,550
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1,642 times in 569 posts

    Reviews - Intel Pentium Anniversary Edition G3258 (22nm Haswell)

    Meet the new budget champion.
    Read more.

  2. #2
    Not a good person scaryjim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    14,470
    Thanks
    1,132
    Thanked
    2,115 times in 1,752 posts
    • scaryjim's system
      • Motherboard:
      • HP Pavilion
      • CPU:
      • A10 4600M
      • Memory:
      • 2x 4GB DDR3-1600 SODIMM
      • Storage:
      • 1TB HDD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon HD7660G (IGP)
      • PSU:
      • Battery/HP 19v brick
      • Case:
      • HP Pavilion G6
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • 15" 1366x768 laptop panel

    Re: Reviews - Intel Pentium Anniversary Edition G3258 (22nm Haswell)

    No Athlon X4 760k in the results? Disappoint, since that's actually the nearest genuine rival from a general purpose PC point of view (and also has an unlocked multi for ease of overclocking). I see no reason you'd run an overclocked Pentium Anniversary edition without a discrete GPU, which makes the 760k the perfect comparison.

    But based on the other results, it looks like even a heavily overclocked Pentium would only just keep up with a stock 760k. It's a decent chip, sure, but I'd still rather have seen an unlocked i3 personally

  3. #3
    King of the Juice Platinum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Chesterfield
    Posts
    3,702
    Thanks
    666
    Thanked
    78 times in 65 posts
    • Platinum's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X99 Deluxue
      • CPU:
      • Core i7 5930k @ 4GHz
      • Memory:
      • 32gb Crucial 2400MHz
      • Storage:
      • 256gb Samsung SP941, 1tb MX500 Crucial SSD, 240gb Intel 730 SSD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire R9 Fury OC
      • PSU:
      • 750 Watt Corsair HX
      • Case:
      • Corsiar 750D
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell 2408WFP
      • Internet:
      • 18Mb

    Re: Reviews - Intel Pentium Anniversary Edition G3258 (22nm Haswell)

    Amazed that a dual core chip does that well in gaming, shame on the devs for not implementing proper multithreading.

    I saw scan did some BF4 benchmarks and the dual core pentium chip performand the same as a 4770k, Makes me wonder what the other 6 threads that get hammered when I play BF4 are actually doing.
    Salazaar : <Touching wood as I write this...>


  4. #4
    Not a good person scaryjim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    14,470
    Thanks
    1,132
    Thanked
    2,115 times in 1,752 posts
    • scaryjim's system
      • Motherboard:
      • HP Pavilion
      • CPU:
      • A10 4600M
      • Memory:
      • 2x 4GB DDR3-1600 SODIMM
      • Storage:
      • 1TB HDD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon HD7660G (IGP)
      • PSU:
      • Battery/HP 19v brick
      • Case:
      • HP Pavilion G6
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • 15" 1366x768 laptop panel

    Re: Reviews - Intel Pentium Anniversary Edition G3258 (22nm Haswell)

    Two possibilities:

    One is a DX11 issue - it does a lot of rendering and drawing work in a single thread, which essentially bottlenecks the rest of the render. So you need a certain level of single thread performance to push a certain framerate.

    The second, and far more likely scenario given the lack of performance increase from overclocking the Pentium, is that hexus' game settings are making the 750 Ti the bottleneck. Seriously, a 35% overclock garners a 1% - 3% frame rate increase? I'm sorry, but your bottleneck is in another component Mario Just goes to show that your CPU doesn't matter that much if you're running your GPU on the ragged edge... which again makes me question the lack of the 760k in the benchmarks (or indeed a dual-core APU: an A6-6400k would've been interesting...)

  5. Received thanks from:

    Platinum (11-06-2014)

  6. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    344
    Thanks
    42
    Thanked
    67 times in 57 posts
    • Firejack's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z97X-Gaming 3
      • CPU:
      • Intel i5-4690k @ 4.5GHz
      • Memory:
      • Samsung Green 1600Mhz 2x4GB @ 2133Mhz
      • Storage:
      • 1x Crucial 250GB SSD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire R9 380 4GB Nitro @ 1080/1575Mhz
      • PSU:
      • SeaSonic G-450
      • Case:
      • Fractal Design Define S
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • AOC Q3279VWF
      • Internet:
      • BT Infinity 2

    Re: Reviews - Intel Pentium Anniversary Edition G3258 (22nm Haswell)

    Going to agree with scaryjim here. Those GTX750Ti results clearly indicate the GPU is the bottleneck, not the CPU in those particularly tests.
    My 2018 Mission: To post a launch day CPU or GPU review on the forums before CAT-THE-FIFTH !!

  7. #6
    Not a good person scaryjim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    14,470
    Thanks
    1,132
    Thanked
    2,115 times in 1,752 posts
    • scaryjim's system
      • Motherboard:
      • HP Pavilion
      • CPU:
      • A10 4600M
      • Memory:
      • 2x 4GB DDR3-1600 SODIMM
      • Storage:
      • 1TB HDD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon HD7660G (IGP)
      • PSU:
      • Battery/HP 19v brick
      • Case:
      • HP Pavilion G6
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • 15" 1366x768 laptop panel

    Re: Reviews - Intel Pentium Anniversary Edition G3258 (22nm Haswell)

    Quote Originally Posted by Firejack View Post
    Going to agree with scaryjim here. Those GTX750Ti results clearly indicate the GPU is the bottleneck, not the CPU in those particularly tests.
    That may well be the point the Hexus team are trying to make, of course - if you want to game at 1080p on a £100 graphics card you don't need a £150 CPU, a £50 one will do just as well. But if that *is* the point, then it would've been nice to see the two closest competitors from AMD (the slightly cheaper A6-6400k and slightly more expensive Athlon x4 760k) tested with the same GPU, games, and settings, both at stock and overclocked (since both those AMD chips have unlocked multipliers). I understand time is limited for testing and writing reviews, but this one seems to raise more questions than it answers....!

    Of course, if time is the issue I'll happily accept a shipment of suitable components to test them myself...

  8. #7
    boop, got your nose stevie lee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    southport
    Posts
    2,456
    Thanks
    386
    Thanked
    361 times in 275 posts
    • stevie lee's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte GA-870A-USB3
      • CPU:
      • Phenom II X6 1090T 6core 3.2ghz
      • Memory:
      • 8GB Corsair DDR3 1600 MHZ
      • Storage:
      • Hitachi 500, 640GB + 1TB. WDblue 2TB, Crucial M500 240GB
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Nvidia Palit 750 Ti
      • PSU:
      • Enermax Naxn 350 W
      • Case:
      • Xigmatech Midgard
      • Operating System:
      • Win 10 Home
      • Monitor(s):
      • 22" Samsung SM2233BW
      • Internet:
      • 20mb plusnet unlimited!

    Re: Reviews - Intel Pentium Anniversary Edition G3258 (22nm Haswell)

    just to add to the 'is it the CPU or GPU bottlenecking?' discussion.

    heres some results from a 2.8GHZ Phenom II x4 920, a 5 year old chip.

    fire strike 3973 http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3048268? using default settings.

    more stuff tested via link in my signature


    so if a £250 intel chip only gets 149 more marks than my old, well used AMD, then yeah I agree that the GPU is the bottleneck.


    but I also say, if you want to get a mid range graphics card, like the 750ti or the AMD equivalent and you've got an old PC, then there is no point upgrading anything else in your computer. (except SSD of course.)

  9. Received thanks from:

    scaryjim (11-06-2014)

  10. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2,567
    Thanks
    39
    Thanked
    179 times in 134 posts

    Re: Reviews - Intel Pentium Anniversary Edition G3258 (22nm Haswell)

    would have liked to see BF4 MP gaming tbh - the dual core would have cried ...


    oh and an offer of an AMD FX 9590 + board if it was needed as well still stands

  11. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,061
    Thanks
    10
    Thanked
    39 times in 38 posts

    Re: Reviews - Intel Pentium Anniversary Edition G3258 (22nm Haswell)

    I'm frustrated with the chip and review. Why do Intel insist on selling everyone a cruddy GPU that is no use to man nor beast on every single CPU?

    Why didn't Hexus pair the Pentium with a range of graphics cards. A low,mid and high end set of benchmarks would have suited the people looking to buy this, as it's major attraction has to be budget gaming. It was never going to be a cheap computing powerhouse with only 2 cores. Why such a cruddy GPU Intel? just why.....

  12. #10
    Not a good person scaryjim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    14,470
    Thanks
    1,132
    Thanked
    2,115 times in 1,752 posts
    • scaryjim's system
      • Motherboard:
      • HP Pavilion
      • CPU:
      • A10 4600M
      • Memory:
      • 2x 4GB DDR3-1600 SODIMM
      • Storage:
      • 1TB HDD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon HD7660G (IGP)
      • PSU:
      • Battery/HP 19v brick
      • Case:
      • HP Pavilion G6
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • 15" 1366x768 laptop panel

    Re: Reviews - Intel Pentium Anniversary Edition G3258 (22nm Haswell)

    Quote Originally Posted by HalloweenJack View Post
    would have liked to see BF4 MP gaming tbh - the dual core would have cried ...
    Sadly, it's almost impossible to generate repeatable benchmark results from multiplayer gaming. Someone needs to try to work out a way to do it though (locally hosted bot match or something?) because it's a big part of game experience that current reviews can tell you nothing about....

    Quote Originally Posted by jigger View Post
    ... Why didn't Hexus pair the Pentium with a range of graphics cards ...
    Because it's a CPU review, not a graphics review. There's a hard limit to how much time Hexus have to benchmark systems, after all. If they ran all the tests that every reader wanted to see, they'd be benchmarking every chip for a month

    Quote Originally Posted by jigger View Post
    Why such a cruddy GPU Intel? just why.....
    I don't know if you mean intel GPUs in general or the one in this specific chip? As far as the Pentium goes, it's because they've literally taken a Pentium die and unlocked the multiplier in software. As such it's stuck with the cut price silicon that goes into every Pentium, and that means it gets the suckiest implementation of HD graphics outside of an Atom. I suppose the reason you get the GPU at all is that it costs Intel nothing to leave it enabled, so why not....

  13. Received thanks from:

    Pleiades (11-06-2014)

  14. #11
    HEXUS.social member Agent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Internet
    Posts
    19,158
    Thanks
    732
    Thanked
    1,604 times in 1,043 posts

    Re: Reviews - Intel Pentium Anniversary Edition G3258 (22nm Haswell)

    Quote Originally Posted by Platinum View Post
    Amazed that a dual core chip does that well in gaming, shame on the devs for not implementing proper multithreading.
    Gah!
    It's not an issue with the devs and 'proper multithreading' Most games do simply not lend themselves well to a large number of threads. In most situations a smaller number of threads with more power is a better solution. This isn't an issue that can easily be solved either, as it's just due to the nature of what you're trying to calculate. See, thread synchronization: https://wiki.cc.gatech.edu/multicore...ynchronization (and that's one of many issues).

    If you want to see 'perfect' utilization of your threads / cores, then you need data that is delinked and not dependent on each other. For example, encoding audio / data streams on each core.

    Quote Originally Posted by scaryjim View Post
    Sadly, it's almost impossible to generate repeatable benchmark results from multiplayer gaming. Someone needs to try to work out a way to do it though (locally hosted bot match or something?) because it's a big part of game experience that current reviews can tell you nothing about....
    It can be done, Unreal can do it, but the work required for just bench-marking is disproportionate for the most part when you implement it. Devs just don't have that kinda free time normally.
    It's all about result replication, which is quite difficult (impossible) if you give players freedom. The only way of doing it is to have pre-scripted events on the clients (with no control at all), and a server which starts all the clients events when needed. I actually coded something like it back in the UE2 days, but there are slightly better ways to go about it now.
    Quote Originally Posted by Saracen View Post
    And by trying to force me to like small pants, they've alienated me.

  15. #12
    Comrade Moose CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Moosetopia
    Posts
    26,662
    Thanks
    2,913
    Thanked
    4,052 times in 3,141 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: Reviews - Intel Pentium Anniversary Edition G3258 (22nm Haswell)

    The problem is there are recent games which don't play well on a dual core.

    Watch Dogs



    http://static.techspot.com/articles-...nch/CPU_01.png

    Thief

    Test on a forum:

    http://oi58.tinypic.com/2igf90z.jpg



    Chap said the Pentium dual core was the least smoothest of all the CPUs.

    Test from a website:

    http://pclab.pl/zdjecia/artykuly/cha..._cpu_g3420.png



    http://pclab.pl/zdjecia/artykuly/cha...pu_i3_4330.png



    Even with a huge overclock,I am not sure if the Pentium dual core can hit the same framerates as the Haswell Core i3 CPUs in some of the newer titles,and that is not taking minimums or frametimes into account too.

    In fact one of the reasons I changed from a Core i3 to a Core i5,was actually for Crysis3. Some parts of the game can be punishing(as is the MP component).

    I might have to see what people find when more testing is done of the Pentium G3258.

    Edit!!

    This would be an awesome PC for the budding WoT player,but I think with some of the newer games,you will see a Core i3 or FX6300 pulling ahead.
    Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 11-06-2014 at 10:56 PM.


    Those despicable Elk,stealing the pond weed!

  16. #13
    HEXUS.social member Agent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Internet
    Posts
    19,158
    Thanks
    732
    Thanked
    1,604 times in 1,043 posts

    Re: Reviews - Intel Pentium Anniversary Edition G3258 (22nm Haswell)

    Quote Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH View Post
    The problem is there are recent games which don't play well on a dual core.
    ...
    you will see a Core i3 or FX6300 pulling ahead.
    Yeah...but none of that is really going against what I've said. Some games are going to benefit from more cores, sure, but to blame lazy devs when this doesn't happen isn't usually fair. There is a heck of a lot more to it than that.

    Although in that first Thief benchmark....almost level with an i7 there. Not bad for a 2 core cheaper chip

    The last 2.... well it's not just about cores. Different architecture, cache, core speeds, threads (2 v 4), chip extensions, memory bandwidth, hyper threading.....

    It's less about cores and more about chip quality.
    Quote Originally Posted by Saracen View Post
    And by trying to force me to like small pants, they've alienated me.

  17. #14
    Comrade Moose CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Moosetopia
    Posts
    26,662
    Thanks
    2,913
    Thanked
    4,052 times in 3,141 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: Reviews - Intel Pentium Anniversary Edition G3258 (22nm Haswell)

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent View Post
    Yeah...but none of that is really going against what I've said. Some games are going to benefit from more cores, sure, but to blame lazy devs when this doesn't happen isn't usually fair. There is a heck of a lot more to it than that.

    Although in that first Thief benchmark....almost level with an i7 there. Not bad for a 2 core cheaper chip


    Yes,but it seems HT is making more and more of a difference now.

    The chap running Thief said the Pentium dual core was nowhere as smooth as the other CPUs,and that is a UE3 based game with Mantle enabled.

    Thief is not like earlier UE3 based games which did not use HT very well:

    http://gamegpu.ru/images/remote/http...test-intel.jpg



    Quote Originally Posted by Agent View Post
    The last 2.... well it's not just about cores. Different architecture, cache, core speeds, threads (2 v 4), chip extensions, memory bandwidth, hyper threading.....

    It's less about cores and more about chip quality.
    The G3420 and Core i3 4330 are both Haswell based chips.

    Unless you are really buying a rig to play WoT,or need a stop gap CPU,I am not sure how well a dual core is going to fair in the next 6 to 18 months time.

    ATM,most console games are with the XBox360 and PS3 as leads,but this is starting to move towards the newer ones with the multi-threaded X86 chips.

    Then you have things like Mantle and DX12,and all of the latest engines moving towards multi-threading.

    Even taken all that out of the equation,look how much better something like a Q6600 or Q9550 has fared when compared to a E8400?? Or Core i3 530 or Phenom II X4 when compared to a Pentium G6950??

    It just makes me wonder whether Intel is enticing people onto socket 1150 and making a calculated move(hence no Core i3 K series),so eventually when the Pentium dual core performance starts falling apart they can sell shiny new Core i5s and Core i7s as drop in upgrades and make people spend more money with them. Its not a bad way of locking people into a platform I suppose,as it appears Broadwell will probably be on socket 1150 for the K series CPUs.
    Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 11-06-2014 at 11:44 PM.


    Those despicable Elk,stealing the pond weed!

  18. #15
    HEXUS.social member Agent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Internet
    Posts
    19,158
    Thanks
    732
    Thanked
    1,604 times in 1,043 posts

    Re: Reviews - Intel Pentium Anniversary Edition G3258 (22nm Haswell)

    Quote Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH View Post
    Yes,but it seems HT is making more and more of a difference now.

    The chap running Thief said the Pentium dual core was nowhere as smooth as the other CPUs,and that is a UE3 based game with Mantle enabled.

    Thief is not like earlier UE3 based games which did not use HT very well:
    Yeah, HT works well when the issue of parallel calculations comes up. It's working 'better' these days due to HT being more mature and different (compared to the older P4 gaming days) types of calculations being done.

    Quote Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH View Post
    The G3420 and Core i3 4330 are both Haswell based chips.
    Yep, but the micro-architecture only defines it's makeup at the silicon level and the tech it uses within. Its perfectly possible to have something based on Haswell and yet be pretty different in terms of performance based on it's makeup. Take laptop / desktop chips for example, same micro-architecture , sometimes almost the same specs, but quite a bit in performance difference.

    Quote Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH View Post
    Unless you are really buying a rig to play WoT,or need a stop gap CPU,I am not sure how well a dual core is going to fair in the next 6 to 18 months time.
    Yeah, no disagreement there. But let's just keep price differences in mind.
    The main issue I'm trying to highlight here though is that the 2 core parts are usually low spec to start with. Comparing them to more core counterparts, that are often much more powerful per core anyway....well, it's often not fair to then go and blame the devs.

    Quote Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH View Post
    Then you have things like Mantle and DX12,and all of the latest engines moving towards multi-threading.
    AFAIK, all modern engines are muti-threaded. Certainly the ones I use are anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH View Post
    Even taken all that out of the equation,look how much better something like a Q6600 or Q9550 has fared when compared to a E8400?? Or Core i3 530 or Phenom II X4 when compared to a Pentium G6950??

    It just makes me wonder whether Intel is enticing people onto socket 1150 and making a calculated move(hence no Core i3 K series),so eventually when the Pentium dual core performance starts falling apart they can sell shiny new Core i5s and Core i7s as drop in upgrades and make people spend more money with them. Its not a bad way of locking people into a platform I suppose,as it appears Broadwell will probably be on socket 1150 for the K series CPUs.
    To be honest, Intel has had way too many SKUs for a while. Maybe it is calculated, but the number of choices when buying an Intel CPU at the moment is a little stupid IMO.
    Quote Originally Posted by Saracen View Post
    And by trying to force me to like small pants, they've alienated me.

  19. #16
    Comrade Moose CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Moosetopia
    Posts
    26,662
    Thanks
    2,913
    Thanked
    4,052 times in 3,141 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: Reviews - Intel Pentium Anniversary Edition G3258 (22nm Haswell)

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent View Post
    Yeah, HT works well when the issue of parallel calculations comes up. It's working 'better' these days due to HT being more mature and different (compared to the older P4 gaming days) types of calculations being done.



    Yep, but the micro-architecture only defines it's makeup at the silicon level and the tech it uses within. Its perfectly possible to have something based on Haswell and yet be pretty different in terms of performance based on it's makeup. Take laptop / desktop chips for example, same micro-architecture , sometimes almost the same specs, but quite a bit in performance difference.
    The Pentium G3420 and Core i3 4130 are nearly identical outside HT and a 200MHZ clockspeed difference:

    http://ark.intel.com/products/77775/...Cache-3_20-GHz
    http://ark.intel.com/products/77480/...Cache-3_40-GHz

    They have the same amount of cache and support the same amount of RAM speeds. Even extension support is the same outside of AES support on the Pentium. The IGP is better on the Core i3 but that does nothing for CPU performance.

    Regarding the G3258 I did notice it has worse memory support than the G3420 too,as it only supports 1333MHZ RAM though.

    The HT is making the difference here and in a number of games is making a massive difference.


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent View Post
    Yeah, no disagreement there. But let's just keep price differences in mind.
    The main issue I'm trying to highlight here though is that the 2 core parts are usually low spec to start with. Comparing them to more core counterparts, that are often much more powerful per core anyway....well, it's often not fair to then go and blame the devs.
    The Core i3 4130 is not really more powerful per core when compared to the G3240,outside a meaningless 5% clockspeed bump.

    The price difference is not huge:

    http://www.amazon.co.uk/Intel-Extend...ywords=i3+4130
    http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_sb_...s%2Ck%3Afx6300

    The FX6300 has even dipped down to close to £70 at times.

    The problem is all these stock cooler overclocks are fine and dandy,but what are the temperatures like in the first place??

    Will these be viable longterm?

    Once you start adding the cost of a better cooler(even a cheap £15) and find a compatible motherboard(some of the B85 can supposedly still overclock though which does help I suppose),the price difference is not massive IMHO OFC.

    The problem is highlighted again by games like Watch Dogs and Thief.

    Add something like the more intense parts of games like Crysis3 which are very multi-threaded,you can see what is starting to happen.

    Plus the other problem,is the whole maximum overclocks argument.

    What if you get a dog of an overclocker??

    My Q6600 was a crap overclocker. My mates E5300 was crap too,despite the fact they were both meant to be great. My mate an Athlon II X3 which was lucky to go from 3.2GHZ to 3.6GHZ,yet another mate had a 4GHZ one,and that was a very high overclock for such a chip.

    I had a fantastic E4300 too.

    Even seen it with some of the IB and Haswell chips - people do get crap samples,but luckily the K series Core i5 and Core i7 CPUs perform great at stock anyway.


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent View Post
    AFAIK, all modern engines are muti-threaded. Certainly the ones I use are anyway.
    Yes,but we can see with things like Watch Dogs not really playing well with dual cores,or at least parts of Thief where even Mantle cannot really save the day(which is not surprising TBH).


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent View Post
    To be honest, Intel has had way too many SKUs for a while. Maybe it is calculated, but the number of choices when buying an Intel CPU at the moment is a little stupid IMO.
    This is not about SKUs. Its about history.

    People have had this dual vs quad core/4 thread CPU arguments for years now.

    The E8400 did not last anywhere as long as the Q6600. Despite the fact former had higher IPC,and could overclock more:
    http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/..._e8400_3.0ghz/
    http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/..._q6600_2.4ghz/

    The same was seen with the G6950 against the Core i3 530 and Phenom II X4 and Athlon II X3.

    The dual cores never really had any legs,and these arguments have been had for years.

    I rarely ever advocated the use of the E8400 or G6950 over the competitors.

    Pentium dual cores have their uses for games like WoT and the like which are very lightly threaded and would performance as good as an overclocked Core i5 with a Pentium dual core. Maybe even SC2 for example.

    I see instances where it can displace much more expensive CPUs.

    Some people might think of this of a stop gap CPU until then can afford a Core i5,which is another use.

    Or something fun to play with.

    However,I would be pushing people to spend that much more towards a Core i3 or FX6300,if they are looking at a broader range of games,especially the kind of builds people won't change the CPU out,which is quite common.
    Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 12-06-2014 at 10:41 AM.


    Those despicable Elk,stealing the pond weed!

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •