Best CPU for a budget gaming PC: Athlon X4 860K vs. Pentium G3258

[debianxfce]

How much intel did pay for this review? Not a word what fps recorer was used and no mention that they usually drop frame rates 10 or so fps. I you are using fps recorder or recording a game video, quad core is better than dual core. 20 useless tests with os that uses one core more than others. Test with custom linux kernel with symmetric multi prosessing on and then see how you would write about wintel religion.

My son just update intel dualcore 3.0Ghz system to 860k debian xfce system (no viruses and it is faster, easier and snappier than windows). With 750 ti and windows 10 he could not have the same huge fps records that you have similar hardware.

 

[Steve]

How much intel did pay for this review? Not a word what fps recorer was used and no mention that they usually drop frame rates 10 or so fps. I you are using fps recorder or recording a game video, quad core is better than dual core. 20 useless tests with os that uses one core more than others. Test with custom linux kernel with symmetric multi prosessing on and then see how you would write about wintel religion.

My son just update intel dualcore 3.0Ghz system to 860k debian xfce system (no viruses and it is faster, easier and snappier than windows). With 750 ti and windows 10 he could not have the same huge fps records that you have similar hardware.

Wow your grasping at straws.

I am not sure what a 'fps recorer' is but we use FRAPS like everyone else to monitor the frame rate.

FRAPS does not have an impact on frame rate and using it to record does not result in a 10fps hit.

"I you are using fps recorder or recording a game video, quad core is better than dual core."

That statement reeks of ignorance, so I assume you have compared recording game play with a quad-core AMD processor and compared it to a dual-core Intel processor to prove that four inefficient cores are better than two efficient cores.

"20 useless tests with os that uses one core more than others."

Ahh yeah that isn't true.

"Test with custom linux kernel with symmetric multi prosessing on and then see how you would write about wintel religion."

Again, wow your grasping at straws. I am going to leave it at that.

 

[debianxfce]

Again, wow your grasping at straws. I am going to leave it at that.

Plaah plaah, see:
https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterra..._am_starting_to_doubt_cpu_benchmarks_yes_amd/

Do a similar video with your G3258 with windows and software screen recorder;-)

 

[Steve]

Plaah plaah, see:
https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterra..._am_starting_to_doubt_cpu_benchmarks_yes_amd/

Do a similar video with your G3258 with windows and software screen recorder;-)

The reddit.com article which links to the ‘ReviewTechUSA’ video is odd. There is simply no way a Phenom II X6 1045T processor is 10x faster at encoding than an Ivy Bridge Core i7, that’s obviously nonsense.

The only way those results could be remotely accurate is if the AMD system was GPU accelerated and the Intel system wasn’t, short of that it is complete nonsense and even an AMD fanboy should understand that. I have done boat loads of video encoding on AMD and Intel hardware and Intel is always faster, especially when talking Core i7 hardware.

I could believe that a Phenom II X6 might beat a Core i3 is some video editing software but not an i7.

There is no way all the major tech sites got it wrong, especially that wrong.

If you can find information from a reliable trusted source then I am all ears.

I assume you are the YouTube user ‘jod35fan’ as that is a very obscure video you have linked to with almost no views.

If a significant number of gamers often recorded game play then you would see more/any major tech sites including benchmark results featuring recorded gameplay performance.

Finally I leave you with something to ponder… If what you are saying was even remotely true don’t you think AMD would be making it well known? I would think they would contact us and other major tech sites to show their findings and have us replicate them.

It seems very strange to me that AMD would provide us with all the hardware for testing and then accept our results and those from other tech sites without question.

For your information AMD provides us with more support than Intel does. We are lucky to get a single Intel processor from each generation while AMD provides us with all of theirs.

I personally would love nothing more than for AMD to be considerably more competitive than they are now. From the K6-2 to the K8 microarchitecture I only ever ran AMD hardware, that changed around the time the Core 2 Duo range came out and certainly by the time the first gen Core processors arrived.

 

[debianxfce]

even an AMD fanboy should understand that. I have done boat loads of video encoding on AMD and Intel hardware and Intel is always faster, especially when talking Core i7 hardware.
ing recorded gameplay performance.

wintel religious people does even know how windows and some games are optimized for intel processor. In linux world you can use your own compiler setting for the whole system. This happens when you run windows game in vm:
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/16203380383

If you are using serious video encoding, there is no sense to use windows at all. By default it is slower than any default linux distro and you can tune linux at source code level where in windows you can do almost nothing and you controlled by microsoft. Also in windows you use your time for virus protection and using several ours for inspecting windows problems with blue and black screens, in linux not. In linux just type dmesg to see what is the problem.

 

[Steve]

wintel religious people does even know how windows and some games are optimized for intel processor. In linux world you can use your own compiler setting for the whole system. This happens when you run windows game in vm:
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/16203380383

If you are using serious video encoding, there is no sense to use windows at all. By default it is slower than any default linux distro and you can tune linux at source code level where in windows you can do almost nothing and you controlled by microsoft. Also in windows you use your time for virus protection and using several ours for inspecting windows problems with blue and black screens, in linux not. In linux just type dmesg to see what is the problem.

As is the case with recorded gameplay benchmarks, we will provide Linux gaming results when a significant amount of our readership plays on Linux, right now the percentage would be incredibly low, unless you include Angry Birds on Android.

Also as I said earlier continue grab those straws and clutch them tight

Even AMDs own marketing team isn’t as creative as you, forget Vulcan they should get behind Linux gaming, I hear they have a significant advantage there. For now it is opportunity missed.

 

[Valentine]

Um....*record scratching sound* -
How did you guys manage to test a 2-core Intel CPU on Dragon Age Inquisition, a game that does not support Dual-Cores at all?
It says it, right on the box...
Did you actually test Dragon Age Inquisition on the intel rig?

If so, why are you not mentioning the extra steps you have to take to make that game (theoretically) run on that cpu? Don't you think it's important to tell your readers that you have to pull some basic-level hacking tricks in order to get it, (as well as some other games,) to even run on a dual-core system? How about mentioning the trend that more and more games these days require a quad-core or better cpu?

If a person decides to play Dragon Age on a dual-core after modifications: A very, very good air cooler or a water-cooler is required. You have to deal with the extra heat generated by a dual-core under such extreme (and unusual) circumstances. (Where two cores carry the workload designed for four.)

So - why are you neglecting to mention the extra (hacking) steps, the extra price (for the pro cooler,) and the inherent lack of gaming capability that all dual-core systems now possess?
Don't you think that adds value to the AMD X4 - that you *don't* have to hack, just to get it to run some of the most popular games out there?
This review has a curious pro-intel slant to it, and a curious smell.

You can watch on Youtube people playing Dragon Age Inq on the G3258.

 

[Kamizew]

To Steve [or anyone who knows first-hand]: let's say not being so tight on budget... which one is a better choice for gaming: Core i3 with stock cooler or Pentium G3258 [OC'd] with water cooling? In Mexico both options cost around the same; but my doubt comes that I've read that some games like Far Cry 4 only run in quad-core CPUs, which the i3 tricks into believing it's a real quad-core.

If the Pentium can be OC'd with stock cooler without being noisy loud nor throttling, I could consider it for some build recommendations on budget.

You dont need water cooling for the pentium. I have OC the g3258 to 4.2 GHz with just a 42$ motherboard and stock cooler.

 

[Acidburne81]

I use this AMD X4 860k CPU with an Asus ROG Crossblade Ranger Mainboard and Asus GTX 980 GFX Card .. 32 GB G.Skill Trident DDR3 2400mhz and a Cooler Master Saidon 120 V2 CPU Watercoolsystem .Kingston Hyper X 120GB SSD, Xilence 850 watt ATX2.3 EPU scince 12.2014 ... finaly after 18 month with a lot off Overclocking Test .. over 5,175 GHz CPU Clock (105mhz cpu fsb) and more than163,2 Watt fore this CPU and houres of Stress tests this thing Runs and runs and runs with the same preformence just like the first Day .. the right Mainboard, the right Ram with 2133 mhz+ and a Good Power Supply and this CPU will blow intel I3 and slow I5 systems with bad DDR3 1600mhz Rams 500watt noname EPU a way in lots of Benchmarks .. in cinebench 15 up to mobile I7 CPU results, more than 14.150 points in 3DMark Sky Diver, and 60.000+ Points in ROG Real Bench with only 2 DDR3 Rams and 600 Watt EPU .. next time I try to use No2 Cooling and a 1500 watt Powesupply ... I am sure he takes and survive 8Ghz+ and the mainboard .. too.. the real choise for all OC Fans, Beginners or Pro´s ..

 

[Peter Farkas]

Thanks for the article Techspot! It was really helpful.

I'm just planning my nephew's first gaming PC and I am almost certain I will go with the G3258 and a GTX 750 now, in Q2 '16.
Upgradability to an i5 and more to a powerful GPU is a huge win. Config will cost $400 and it is in an eastern European market, where prices are higher that in the US....

 

[HardReset]

Thanks for the article Techspot! I was really helpful.

I'm just planning my nephew's first gaming PC and I am almost certain I will go with the G3258 and a GTX 750 now, in Q2 '16.
Upgradability to an i5 and more to a powerful GPU is a huge win. Config will cost $400 and it is in an eastern European market, where prices are higher that in the US....

Upgrading to i5 makes no sense as i5 prices are not going down so:

Buying i5: you pay i5 price
Buying Pentium and upgrade to i5: you pay Pentium price + i5 price

 

[Peter Farkas]

Upgrading to i5 makes no sense as i5 prices are not going down so:

Buying i5: you pay i5 price
Buying Pentium and upgrade to i5: you pay Pentium price + i5 price

Yeah that is right. But he does not really need an i5. The rig will be used for casual gaming. The upgradability is big win, because if start playing regularly with a game that could benefit from an i5, we can upgrade anytime. This is gonna be his 1st gaming PC, so he doesn't need to start with an enthusiast build.... ;-)
Btw, you forgot to deduct the price of the used g3258 from the total cost when you sell it on the used parts market.

 

[HardReset]

Yeah that is right. But he does not really need an i5. The rig will be used for casual gaming. The upgradability is big win, because if start playing regularly with a game that could benefit from an i5, we can upgrade anytime. This is gonna be his 1st gaming PC, so he doesn't need to start with an enthusiast build.... ;-)
Btw, you forgot to deduct the price of the used g3258 from the total cost when you sell it on the used parts market.

Upgrading still makes no sense as LGA1150 is already old socket. If even thinking about upgrading, LGA1151 or LGA2011-3 are only choices from Intel. And if not overclocking, almost any LGA1151 dual core is equally fast.

 

[Peter Farkas]

Upgrading still makes no sense as LGA1150 is already old socket. If even thinking about upgrading, LGA1151 or LGA2011-3 are only choices from Intel. And if not overclocking, almost any LGA1151 dual core is equally fast.

I think it will make sense, since still many people are using i5-2500 today which is and old but still a very capable gaming cpu. Don't forget that in some cases budget is the main constraint. And if you upgrage to a 2 yrs old i5 is still a considerable upgrade from a g3258 for specific games. You don't always need the latest HW. Just think about how cheap you can buy a 2yrs old used i5. It is a pretty good deal.

 

[HardReset]

I think it will make sense, since still many people are using i5-2500 today which is and old but still a very capable gaming cpu. Don't forget that in some cases budget is the main constraint. And if you upgrage to a 2 yrs old i5 is still a considerable upgrade from a g3258 for specific games. You don't always need the latest HW. Just think about how cheap you can buy a 2yrs old used i5. It is a pretty good deal.

Used quad core LGA1155 CPU's (4-5 year old) are still quite expensive, so I expect that LGA1150 quad cores are not very cheap after two years. So that upgrade still makes not much sense.

 

[Peter Farkas]

Used quad core LGA1155 CPU's (4-5 year old) are still quite expensive, so I expect that LGA1150 quad cores are not very cheap after two years. So that upgrade still makes not much sense.

that is one opinion. I see it rather differently than you. ;-)

Peace mate

 

[HardReset]

that is one opinion. I see it rather differently than you. ;-)

Peace mate

Yeah, what is cheap and what's not is purely opinion.

--

For this article. I know that it's about one year old, but still it talks about "popular AAA titles." Known fact is that some new AAA games (Mirror's Edge Catalyst for example) require at least 4 logical cores (so dual core + HT is minimum). So with (dual core) Pentium it's impossible to play those games.

 

[bitoolean]

Thank you Steve for the hard work making this article available to us. I wish more testers worked as hard (tested more games). The flaming discussion was enjoyable as well and it yielded the minimum frame time tests, so it was fruitful and I for one appreciate those as well.

 

[mlscrow]

Scary... always knew that Intel had AMD beat, but thought that AMD was at least competitive in the budget area... while I'm, thankfully, not a budget buyer, it's kind of sad to see that Intel is the choice no matter what you're doing...

Intel beating AMD is no surprise when it comes to CPU core performance. That's been a given for the last 7+ years.

You say that you thought AMD was at least competitive in the budget area. If you thought they were competitive in CPU performance in the budget area, then you completely forgot that Intel is superior to AMD in CPU performance as stated above. Whether it's low end or high end, Intel CPU cores are much better than AMD cpu cores. So when there is an article comparing "just" CPU core performance, Intel will win, ever time.

The point where AMD shines in the budget area is with their APU's. The X860 is simply a Kaveri APU with the iGPU stripped off of it, so, in that sense, it will lose to Intel, no question. What is also misleading is that the X860 is not a 4 core CPU, it's actually a 2 "module" CPU, which is a big difference. No one should ever expect 4 AMD cores from the Bulldozer architecture to perform like 4 real cores. They aren't 4 full cores, the 2 modules are made up of 2 half cores that share resources, which perform similar to a true dual core system.

However, when you use the entire APU rather than just the 2 modules that are on it, that is where AMD trumps Intel. An AMD APU is cheaper than Intel's, and since their iGPU is much better than Intel, it tends to outperform Intel in games. These APU's were aimed at the mobile market...laptops. You could spend a ton of extra money to purchase a laptop with a discrete GPU, or you could simply buy the AMD APU instead, save a few hundred dollars, and still be able to game (albeit not quite as good as a discrete card, but much better than almost any Intel iGPU).

This article used a discrete GPU to benchmark with. In that scenario, of course Intel will win. Without the discrete GPU, using only the iGPU's (which this particular AMD part doesn't come with, because it's an Athlon X4 and not a Trinity), AMD would dominate.

 

[mlscrow]

Trinity was supposed to be "Kaveri", oops.

 

[mlscrow]

I also, mistook the G3258 for a CPU without discrete GPU. This chip actually has Intel HD graphics integrated into it as well. With that in mind, this Intel part is actually cheaper than AMD's APU, but around the same price as the stripped down Athlon x4 860.

In the end, the Intel chip is the superior choice if you aren't going to use the iGPU. If you were only going to use an iGPU, I'd recommend the AMD APU instead, even if you have to pay $30 more for it.

 

[HardReset]

What is also misleading is that the X860 is not a 4 core CPU, it's actually a 2 "module" CPU, which is a big difference. No one should ever expect 4 AMD cores from the Bulldozer architecture to perform like 4 real cores. They aren't 4 full cores, the 2 modules are made up of 2 half cores that share resources, which perform similar to a true dual core system.

X4 860 is quad core CPU. If it's not, then we have many CPU's with zero cores.

These modules contain two integer units and one combined FPU unit. As about 90% of all code is integer, module is something like "1.8 cores" and two module is something like "3.6 cores". So two module CPU is very far from two cores, no matter you put it.

 

[Squid Surprise]

X4 860 is quad core CPU. If it's not, then we have many CPU's with zero cores.

These modules contain two integer units and one combined FPU unit. As about 90% of all code is integer, module is something like "1.8 cores" and two module is something like "3.6 cores". So two module CPU is very far from two cores, no matter you put it.

So despite this thread being almost half a year old, you just couldn't resist replying... had you bothered to read what mlscrow posted, you'd see that he wasn't claiming that the AMD CPU only had 2 cores, but that it OPERATED as if it had 2 cores... which is why Intel processors thump AMD at every level...

Don't worry, AMD's Zen is coming and will obviously deliver uber performance at budget prices... and it will be future proof I'm sure!

 

[HardReset]

So despite this thread being almost half a year old, you just couldn't resist replying... had you bothered to read what mlscrow posted, you'd see that he wasn't claiming that the AMD CPU only had 2 cores, but that it OPERATED as if it had 2 cores... which is why Intel processors thump AMD at every level..

What

 

[elites2012]

Now that I know how things go at the intel labs and their dev kits. I can no longer agree with any intel results on an AMD vs intel review like this. a lot of software companies choose intel cause of the payout for using their perks and working close with intel on the results. their is now way in hell a dual core can realy out perform a higher clocked quad core. besides this is just gaming and not true multitasking of what the average users does. in real world, the dual core will choke when stressed with true muli tasking. same thing happens when you stress an i5 or a i7.