Captain_TomAnd with that I now fully drop all recommendations for the i5.

Most games are showing a need for more CPU power, and they all support 8-threads - so get an i7!


If you want to save money, the i3 has just as many threads as the i5, and will likely clock slightly higher. As such the difference between them will be minimal.

That's disingenuous for real workloads, though. Non-CPU dependant games won't see much of a gain, but you're el screwdo with one that is and uses more than 2 threads.

TheGuruStudThat's disingenuous for real workloads, though. Non-CPU dependant games won't see much of a gain, but you're el screwdo with one that is and uses more than 2 threads.

Why?

The i3 has 4 threads. Just like the i5.


WCCFTech actually did an i3 overclocking article where they proved that an overclocked i3 @ 4.5 GHz usually beats a stock i5. Overclock both and the i5 is stronger for sure, but nowhere near 50% stronger (And it costs 50% more). If your gaming at 60 FPS, that $70 - $80 would be better spent on a stronger graphics card.

Captain_TomWhy?
The i3 has 4 threads. Just like the i5.

I'm sorry, but you are completely wrong.
HT threads are not the same as cores. HT just means a single core can switch between two threads then one is stalled, to utilize idle CPU cycles. It does not execute them simultaneously. HT threads are usually listed as "cores" to the operating system, but they are definitely not. The OS scheduler is also aware which ones are real cores and which ones are virtual ones.

A dual core with HT is in no way comparable to a quad core(without HT). If you see games which perform roughly the same on a dual core it's because rendering performance is only dependent on the thread with rendering context. Games may utilize many threads, but the other ones are not affecting rendering performance given the render thread is working undisturbed.

efikkanI'm sorry, but you are completely wrong.
HT threads are not the same as cores. HT just means a single core can switch between two threads then one is stalled, to utilize idle CPU cycles. It does not execute them simultaneously. HT threads are usually listed as "cores" to the operating system, but they are definitely not. The OS scheduler is also aware which ones are real cores and which ones are virtual ones.

A dual core with HT is in no way comparable to a quad core(without HT). If you see games which perform roughly the same on a dual core it's because rendering performance is only dependent on the thread with rendering context. Games may utilize many threads, but the other ones are not affecting rendering performance given the render thread is working undisturbed.

Errrrr.....actually if you had used an i3, you'd know that these things use HT more effectively than anything else in the Intel family.

Captain_TomWhy?

The i3 has 4 threads. Just like the i5.


WCCFTech actually did an i3 overclocking article where they proved that an overclocked i3 @ 4.5 GHz usually beats a stock i5. Overclock both and the i5 is stronger for sure, but nowhere near 50% stronger (And it costs 50% more). If your gaming at 60 FPS, that $70 - $80 would be better spent on a stronger graphics card.

Go encode something and see how pitiful the i3 is.

TheGuruStudGo encode something and see how pitiful the i3 is.

Now you're being silly. o_O That isn't what they are for. They are extremely useful for media (such as in an htpc) and gaming.

rtwjunkieNow you're being silly. o_O That isn't what they are for. They are extremely useful for media (such as in an htpc) and gaming.

I wasn't the one claiming they're as fast as an i5, so don't bother with a quad.

And seems to be lots of noobs recording gameplay, nowadays. Good luck with that i3.

KursahWhich is good because the cost of a good mobo to support that CPU could run up to $150+ for a USED board that's worthy of that CPU. Hopefully in your situation, you'll have better luck! :toast:

Well to be honest I got the i7 2600, a H77 Mobo, 8GB RAM, 128 Samsung SSD, and a Thermaltake Chaser case for $110 (Faulty 7970 and 850W PSU as well) and sold the case for $100. so the rest only cost me $10 lol

Dj-ElectriCMember when all CPUs could overclock? i member

i member it too.. LOL my first try at OCing was with a pentium 4 (b), shitty CPU but it was the only available to me at that point. back then ocing was the fringe, now it has become a bit of a cringe situation imo with all the bs marketing and buzzwords, let alone the special price we have to pay for having the "luxury" of being able to overclock. we the customers made overclocking mainstream and intel repayed us with limiting it to special models with a jacked up price. good move from a companies viewpoint, shitty move from the customers perspective. oh i so hope that zen is at least close to the X variants, intel needs a bloody nose right now.

ps. south park <3
ps2. that price is ridiculous and that TDP. its a budget CPU ffs

$177.00 for a dual core CPU?

rtwjunkieEverything a corporation decides like this is centered on emotionless business decisions.

This is tangential, but I highly doubt this is true. Yes, they have a responsibility towards shareholders and all that but show me any human making any kind of desicion without involving emotions and I will show you ... no one, because they do not exist. It'd why first impressions matter and good sales people are so important.

TheGuruStudI wasn't the one claiming they're as fast as an i5, so don't bother with a quad.

And seems to be lots of noobs recording gameplay, nowadays. Good luck with that i3.

LOL sounds like one of those guys that said "i3's SUCK for gaming", and then proceeded to cry when they saw an i3 beating their FX-8150.


All I stated was I know how to read benchmarks. It isn't an opinion lol, look it up.

FrickThis is tangential, but I highly doubt this is true. Yes, they have a responsibility towards shareholders and all that but show me any human making any kind of desicion without involving emotions and I will show you ... no one, because they do not exist. It'd why first impressions matter and good sales people are so important.

Having good sales people to make a good impression on clients is a whole different matter. I've been part of Fortune 500 company higher levels of management. These decisions really do boil down to: can we make money doing "x", and what will the fallout/benefit be to us for doing it?

Big nope from me. People needed these 4-5 years ago when Sandy Bridge i3's were around (a.k.a *cough* when Intel locked down OC's. Remember when we could OC almost any CPU? Pepperidge farm remembers.). Maybe they will sell like hot cakes in the end anyway just because it's an unlocked part. The price is ridiculous, maybe it's the swan song for the 2C 4T design, Intel did promise 6 consumer cores for i5's at some point didn't they? Doesn't that mean that future i3's will be equipped with all 4 physical cores?

So the "K" i3 is a enthusiast part in the budget segment. What? lol.

DX12 probably only becomes a thing after 3-5 years to take advantage of lower spec CPU's. But for DX9 (pretty much dead at this point) & DX11 it's four real cores or bust if any gaming future gaming with higher than medium settings is involved.

Sure its single core performance is going to be nothing to scoff at. But I got an i5-2400 for about 50 euros and I can still overclock it somewhat with a "Z" series motherboard. (Which are pretty hard to find in my country) Makes my Sandy Bridge i5 on par with Haswell locked i5's in games, and I payed more than half less for the CPU to get similar performance.

I will admit Sandy Bridge i5 are pretty dated right now for some of this year's triple A titles. Haven't seen a serious bottleneck but they are still very good for budget builds (assuming you can find a good motherboard than can OC without problems). Not sure what benefit they get from DX12 so far though, actually I haven't even seen much benefit for consumers other than preparing some shaders in games, IMO it's having a bad start.