Garacesh Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 (edited) Looking at benchmarks for the Pentium Anniversary Edition That the Pentium K Anniversary one that's basically built for overclocking? Mentioned that earlier. Built a rig for a friend with one with a bit of a low budget and it's come out fantastic. Would definitely recommend it paired with a Z97 board, an aftermarket cooler and a beefy GPU if you're looking to build on budget. Edited January 7, 2015 by Garacesh
tmcd35 Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 (edited) If the PC will be used almost exclusively for gaming, an i3 is fine. Multi tasking is what will suffer, but that's not really an issue if you're just gaming (at the moment, no game AFAIK uses more than 2 cores). My personal opinion, which is why I'd champion the AMD FX series, would be to look at cores over reported speed/performance of the CPU. It might not help with some 2 core CPU heavy games around at the moment and performance might suffer against an i3 or i5, but think long term. I'd take my que from the console designers. Both X1 and PS4 use a lower powered CPU with a lot more cores and higher powered GPU. I think the consoles will have an influence on PC games so more CPU cores and GPGPU will become the norm. Likewise I think 2Gb graphics RAM will become restricting since the both consoles use unified RAM and thus can allocate a lot more to graphics. For my money a cheaper AMD CPU with more cores married with a mid to high range GPU with as much graphics RAM as you can afford would be the best option. Edited January 7, 2015 by tmcd35
LosOjos Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 You've obviously never played an Arma game.. or DayZ! *shudders* I have, though my machine has an i5 in it admittedly. On a side note, I hate games based on the ARMA engine, the controls feel so unnatural and movement is so weird - I really don't understand how they've done so well! 1
JRowley Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 An i3 really isn't suitable for gaming, you might get away with it for some games which aren't CPU heavy, but there are an awful lot of games which are very dependant on the CPU, so regardless of the GPU you put in it you won't get decent performance. And lets not forget this is meant to be a gaming PC, you should have a midrange i5 as an absolute minimum.
3s-gtech Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 (edited) I would agree with using an ADM CPU in a gaming PC for budget/reasonable performance reasons, if it wasn't for that fact that it looks like AM3+ will be a dead/stagnant socket with no upgrade path. Hell, I know Intel is absolutely awful for swapping sockets all the time, while AMD has had the run from AM2/AM2+/AM3/AM3+ but sadly that looks likely to be at an end. Otherwise, you're looking at FM2/FM2+ which is an APU socket so doesn't make as much sense if you're using discrete graphics. An i3 really isn't suitable for gaming, you might get away with it for some games which aren't CPU heavy, but there are an awful lot of games which are very dependant on the CPU, so regardless of the GPU you put in it you won't get decent performance. And lets not forget this is meant to be a gaming PC, you should have a midrange i5 as an absolute minimum. Do you have any benchmarks/stats to back that up? I've not seen anything compelling gaming wise to choose between an i3 and an i7, budget considered. Even the Pentium Anniversary edition is close in most circumstances. Edited January 7, 2015 by 3s-gtech
sonofsanta Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 That the Pentium K Anniversary one that's basically built for overclocking? Mentioned that earlier. Built a rig for a friend with one with a bit of a low budget and it's come out fantastic. Would definitely recommend it paired with a Z97 board, an aftermarket cooler and a beefy GPU if you're looking to build on budget. Yeah, it looks a beaut doesn't it? I'm sure there were more articles run about pairing it with a discrete GPU at the time that showed how GPU dependent everything is these days. If your budget is limited (i.e. your name isn't @Sunnyknight) then max the GPU first before bumping the CPU up. The only unknown is future proofing - as @tmcd35 says, consoles have lots of cores now, albeit stupid low power AMD Jaguar cores, but game engines should start to take advantage of that soon and only two cores/two threads could get limiting. An i5 is the minimum for future proofing IMHO - one i5 CPU core can easily keep up with two Xbone/PS4 cores.
DMcGuigan Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 I just upgraded my old rig to the one now in my sig, total price for the upgrade - ~£550 From 40 on ultra BF4 to 120 ultra BF4. All of the frames!
Arthur Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 10% more performance on the CPU, which would probably net you about a 1% increase in games. Depends on the game, although on average there isn't much of a difference. i5-2500K vs i7-4790K (+ GeForce Titan) 1
Arreks Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 (edited) This thread is turning into an CPU war! that being said, the difference between an i3 and i5 is obvious - you WILL notice a difference. That is because most people do not use their computers PURELY for gaming, they will be using browsers, players, listening to music, a lot of the times multiple things at once. I know I run Chrome and Spotify at the same time while playing a game. In addition, everyone's missing the fact that you can get an i5 that's less powerful than an i3 and vice versa. There are hundreds of variations when it comes to Intel processing. You could get a top of the line i3 or a bottom of the line i5 for varying prices. You could get an i5 with a similar core clock speed to an i3 at a similar price range but you've got the added bonus of 2 extra cores.* *Prices obviously vary, I'm using PassMark for reference. Edited January 7, 2015 by Arreks typos 1
localzuk Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 (edited) An i5 is plenty for a pure gaming machine. For games, my i5-2550k hasn't missed a beat. The main thing that is now letting me down is my GPU. Upgrading my machine is only on my mind because of the other stuff I do and want to do with it. Virtual machines, video processing etc... In addition, everyone's missing the fact that you can get an i7 that's less powerful than an i3 and vice versa. There are hundreds of variations when it comes to Intel processing. You could get a top of the line i3 or a bottom of the line i7 for varying prices. You could get an i7 with a similar core clock speed to an i3 at a similar price range but you've got the added bonus of 2 extra cores.* *Prices obviously vary, I'm using a PassMark for reference. Only if you are looking at different generations of i3/i7 (or look at "low power" or laptop models) etc... A new current top of the range i3 will be better than a first edition low end i5. The same thing is always true. But then, I'd not be advising people to buy last generation CPUs. Edited January 7, 2015 by localzuk
tmcd35 Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 albeit stupid low power AMD Jaguar cores, See everyone says that but I don't buy in to it. I think I might have been brainwashed by Mark Cerney's keynote when the PS4 was launched. Games haven't really, or indeed shouldn't really, need to push the CPU that hard. As @sonofsanta pointed out, the difference between i3 and i7 for most games isn't really that great, it's all benchmarks and ideal world statistics. It's the combination of multi-cores and GPGPU compute that's important. And since both consoles are x86 based and have gone down the exact same route in that regard, I'd expect (for ease of porting between platforms if nothing else) PC games to do the same. It's quite a canny design when you think about it.
JRowley Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 Do you have any benchmarks/stats to back that up? I've not seen anything compelling gaming wise to choose between an i3 and an i7, budget considered. Even the Pentium Anniversary edition is close in most circumstances. It really depends on what the game entails, the i3 isn't very good with physics, that is its main downfall compared to the i5 and i7 chips. Here is a benchmark that compares various intel chips from August, it's clear which games are GPU locked rather than CPU locked and it shows that while the i3 is close in most games there are some games that are heavily CPU locked and it more or less falls apart (Crysis 3). The Tech Buyer's Guru - The Best Gaming CPUs - Pentium vs. Core i3, i5, and i7 1
Zoom7000 Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 If the PC will be used almost exclusively for gaming, an i3 is fine. Multi tasking is what will suffer, but that's not really an issue if you're just gaming (at the moment, no game AFAIK uses more than 2 cores) Yeah, my "gaming" PC was more a multi function device. As in, a bit of gaming, but also a lot of general work, so multi-tasking is essential for me.
Garacesh Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 I just upgraded my old rig to the one now in my sig, total price for the upgrade - ~£550 Oooft, that's niiiice
localzuk Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 Oh, also, if you want to play Minecraft, ignore everything said and buy the fastest processor you can... It only uses a single core too, so clock speed is important too. I've seen i7s struggle with large mod-packs. 2
Sunnyknight Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 Yeah, it looks a beaut doesn't it? I'm sure there were more articles run about pairing it with a discrete GPU at the time that showed how GPU dependent everything is these days. If your budget is limited (i.e. your name isn't @Sunnyknight) then max the GPU first before bumping the CPU up. The only unknown is future proofing - as @tmcd35 says, consoles have lots of cores now, albeit stupid low power AMD Jaguar cores, but game engines should start to take advantage of that soon and only two cores/two threads could get limiting. An i5 is the minimum for future proofing IMHO - one i5 CPU core can easily keep up with two Xbone/PS4 cores. I spend ££££ once every 3-5 years. It eliminates the need to continuously upgrade my PC, which is how i think most people would like their systems to be. Spend once, and then worry free after that. If it were up to me, i'd say, give me £2000 (for GAMING only), and i'll throw a tri / quad sli 980 or a single titan z with a nice i7. That'd keep anyone happy for a good.... a good..... 5+ years. Now if you argued a high end I5 cpu vs a high end i7 cpu, that's a different ball game and i wouldn't have much of a say in that, per the earlier recommendations to @edutech4schools. I3 is just a shocking. Expect to want an upgrade 6 months down the line. My own pc isn't just for gaming, i just call it a gaming pc because that's what it's used for 80% of the time. The other 20% will be hosting / VM / slight video editing (from fps recordings).
Sunnyknight Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 Oh, also, if you want to play Minecraft, ignore everything said and buy the fastest processor you can... It only uses a single core too, so clock speed is important too. I've seen i7s struggle with large mod-packs. My i7 @ 4.5ghz struggles at times.... That game is bloody insane.
LosOjos Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 Oh, also, if you want to play Minecraft, ignore everything said and buy the fastest processor you can... It only uses a single core too, so clock speed is important too. I've seen i7s struggle with large mod-packs. As much RAM as you can possibly throw at it helps too!
Zoom7000 Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 (edited) I spend ££££ once every 3-5 years. It eliminates the need to continuously upgrade my PC, which is how i think most people would like their systems to be. Spend once, and then worry free after that. If it were up to me, i'd say, give me £2000 (for GAMING only), and i'll throw a tri / quad sli 980 or a single titan z with a nice i7. That'd keep anyone happy for a good.... a good..... 5+ years. Now if you argued a high end I5 cpu vs a high end i7 cpu, that's a different ball game and i wouldn't have much of a say in that, per the earlier recommendations to @edutech4schools. I3 is just a shocking. Expect to want an upgrade 6 months down the line. My own pc isn't just for gaming, i just call it a gaming pc because that's what it's used for 80% of the time. The other 20% will be hosting / VM / slight video editing (from fps recordings). Still doesn't make sense why you think I need a £1000 upgrade on my rig. It'll handle the new GTA V just fine according to Game Debate. And I'm still running everything on stock too! Edited January 7, 2015 by Zoom7000
Garacesh Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 If it were up to me, i'd say, give me £2000 (for GAMING only), and i'll throw a tri / quad sli 980 or a single titan z with a nice i7. That'd keep anyone happy for a good.... a good..... 5+ years. Yeah, a'ight, you wanna give me the money to do that? That's just shy of 2 months salary, for me. £6-£800 is the max I can spend WITH saving for months. Got bills an' stuff that eats most of my dosh.
DMcGuigan Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 Oh, also, if you want to play Minecraft, ignore everything said and buy the fastest processor you can... It only uses a single core too, so clock speed is important too. I've seen i7s struggle with large mod-packs. My old CPU had a BSOD when trying to run a mod pack in FTB (turns out one of my cores had shorted, hence the need for the build) my new one STILL has problems, runs everything fine, but has the odd frozen frame every 2/3 minutes that gets irritating. The Phenom in that state gave me 30-40 FPS on medium on BF4 and would stutter to a halt after 5 minutes. This i7 gives 120 at 1920x1080 or 80 at 2715x1527 (Nvidia DSR) on Ultra.
Sunnyknight Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 Still doesn't make sense why you think I need a £1000 upgrade on my rig. It'll handle the new GTA V just fine according to Game Debate. And I'm still running everything on stock too! Throws mouse in the air as well as keyboard. Go. Go get an i3. :censored::censored:
localzuk Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 As much RAM as you can possibly throw at it helps too! Yup! For the largest packs, 8GB of usable memory just for Minecraft is a good idea.
tmcd35 Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 Oh, also, if you want to play Minecraft, ignore everything said and buy the fastest processor you can... It only uses a single core too, so clock speed is important too. I've seen i7s struggle with large mod-packs. My i7 @ 4.5ghz struggles at times.... That game is bloody insane. As much RAM as you can possibly throw at it helps too! Yup! For the largest packs, 8GB of usable memory just for Minecraft is a good idea. Java... 3
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now