Best Gaming CPUs For The Money: January 2012 (Archive)

[darkmendez]

This review contradicts itself....you said Intel's Core i3-3240 and AMD FX-6300 has nearly the same performance but in the Gaming CPU Hierarchy Chart, they have AMD FX-6300 below a Phenom II X4 Black Edition 980, 975. None of the AMD Phenom IIs are even close to an I3 processor.....Tom why don't you read before you post.

 

[santanamate]

Are the new intel models (i5-4670K) not relevant for testing?

 

[Raheel Hasan]

So i3 2100 ~ FX9590

 

[vertexx]

What about a Xeon E3 1230 V2. LGA 1155, 3.3Ghz w/3.7 boost, 8MB L3 Cache, 8 threads, 69W, for the price of a 3570K ($225 - or $200 if you're near a Microcenter).

For someone who doesn't overclock, who also does 3D graphics or other CPU intensive productivity work, and for latest titles optimized for higher threads, it seems like this is a great gaming value.

 

[Sakkura]

Are the new intel models (i5-4670K) not relevant for testing?

They have been tested. They've just been found inadequate, at least with current pricing.

 

[vertexx]

I also think the A10-6800K deserves a low-spot mention in this and the GPU article. The low spots of the CPU & GPU hierarchy charts are now occupied by the Athlon II X4 750K (Trinity) and the HD 6670 discrete. The A10-6800K (Richland) part should give you more capability than this combo for the same price.
The A10 seems especially well suited for a budget SFF HTPC / Steam Gamer where simplicity and low cost are desired, especially for Mini-ITX where you would free the single slot for a tuner or audio card.

 

[logainofhades]

I really cannot take this article seriously anymore. The 4130 is not a Vishera part. There is no way I would pick an i3 over an FX 6300. The FX 8320 is a better value than an i5 3350p. I wouldn't consider an Intel chip under an i5 3570k for a gaming rig at this point.

 

[jryder]

You would really buy an old Ivy Bridge CPU instead of one of the new Haswell processors? There must be some advantage to the new chips: faster at stock (most people don't overclock), better integrated graphics (for people who mostly use the machine for productivity, but also do some light gaming like LoL).

 

[logainofhades]

Haswell is hotter, higher TDP, doesn't clock as well, and maybe 10% more performance. For a gaming rig it isn't worth the added cost. This is a gaming cpu article. True gaming rigs use dedicated GPU's.

 

[fykusfire]

I don't agree with that chart at all. There are several FX chips that keep up with Sandy and Ivy Bridge Core i5s.

 

[envy14tpe]

Another worthless hierarchy table. Love what you guys do at tomshardware but this is misleading and questionable about ethics.

 

[logainofhades]

Another worthless hierarchy table. Love what you guys do at tomshardware but this is misleading and questionable about ethics.

At least the GPU one makes some sense. The CPU one is a mess.

 

[jrbell64]

Does this look different from last year, AMD parts look more reasonably placed yet leaves a lot to be desired in many regards but I will leave that out as long as some Intel entrants seemingly very oddly placed.

I would say that the FX8350/8320 possibly should occupy the bottom of tier 1, the FX6300, 4170, 6200 and 1100T top of tier 2 and some Trinity parts need to be buffed up a notch or two as in many instances the 5800K rivaled the 3220 in many gaming metrics discrete performance. that said compared to last years articles this is far more realistic and I wonder why a whole year went to pass before this realization.

I agree with the FX8350/8320 in Tier 1. What gives? Just because they are predicting them to die? I can get a 8320 for $150 and mobo combo for $255.

 

[Onus]

Hmmm, I was hoping Steamroller would come to AM3+. From what I've read, the FX-8320 sounds like a fairly nice jump over a PhII 970BE; maybe that's more in non-gaming though.

 

[ojas]

I also think the A10-6800K deserves a low-spot mention in this and the GPU article. The low spots of the CPU & GPU hierarchy charts are now occupied by the Athlon II X4 750K (Trinity) and the HD 6670 discrete. The A10-6800K (Richland) part should give you more capability than this combo for the same price.
The A10 seems especially well suited for a budget SFF HTPC / Steam Gamer where simplicity and low cost are desired, especially for Mini-ITX where you would free the single slot for a tuner or audio card.

Um, nope, can't agree with that. 6670>A10's GPU, and CPUs are equal, sort of.

You would really buy an old Ivy Bridge CPU instead of one of the new Haswell processors? There must be some advantage to the new chips: faster at stock (most people don't overclock), better integrated graphics (for people who mostly use the machine for productivity, but also do some light gaming like LoL).

I think it's because price to performance is in favour of IVB, so is overclocking...but i personally would prefer Haswell because of Z87.

 

[RedJaron]

Are the new intel models (i5-4670K) not relevant for testing?

Already answered, but no, they're pricier than Ivy Bridge with marginal gains at best. For the money, Ivy Bridge is still the best gaming CPU.

What about a Xeon E3 1230 V2. LGA 1155, 3.3Ghz w/3.7 boost, 8MB L3 Cache, 8 threads, 69W, for the price of a 3570K ($225 - or $200 if you're near a Microcenter).

For someone who doesn't overclock, who also does 3D graphics or other CPU intensive productivity work, and for latest titles optimized for higher threads, it seems like this is a great gaming value.

I've recommended the Xeons on a few builds as they have very interesting properties. But again, this is about gaming CPUs. Games don't utilize the extra L3 or threads. You're paying $50 over the 3350P for no improved gaming performance. Though I agree, for the pro-sumer that more than dabbles in professional apps, that Xeon is tough to beat.

There is no way I would pick an i3 over an FX 6300. The FX 8320 is a better value than an i5 3350p. I wouldn't consider an Intel chip under an i5 3570k for a gaming rig at this point.

Blanket statements like these are extremely ignorant. Both Intel chips have vastly better power and thermal envelopes. If those things are important to you ( say a small form factor build with limited cooling and power, ) Intel wins. They're also much more efficient in lightly-threaded apps, like the vast majority of applications now. These two don't overclock, but they're more than adequate for most anything you throw at them at stock clocks. If you're constantly running more threads, don't care about heat and power, and have OCing room, then the FX chips are a good way to go and save considerable money.

You would really buy an old Ivy Bridge CPU instead of one of the new Haswell processors? There must be some advantage to the new chips: faster at stock (most people don't overclock), better integrated graphics (for people who mostly use the machine for productivity, but also do some light gaming like LoL).

Haswell does have a small IPC improvement and supports some new instruction sets ( IIRC on the latter. ) However, both the chips and mboards are more expensive than their IB counterparts.

The cheapest Haswell right now is still ~$190 whereas you can get a nice casual i3 for $120. Add in a $20 difference between 1155 and 1150 mboards and you can get an IB i3 + 7750 for the same price as a Haswell i5 alone. The former would be a much better casual gaming system.

Now if you're building a higher-end system right now and you're not considering anything below an i5, then Haswell makes a lot more sense since that price difference doesn't mean as much when you're spending extra cash on GPUs and a beefier PSU.

 

[PcMe]

WHY NO 4TH GENERATION PROCESSORS?????

 

[logainofhades]

WHY NO 4TH GENERATION PROCESSORS?????

Because Ivy is a better CPU for the $$$ right now for gaming rigs.

 

[PcMe]

WHY NO 4TH GENERATION PROCESSORS?????

Because Ivy is a better CPU for the $$$ right now for gaming rigs.

U don't think it's worth it to use a 4th generation processor for my new build? I don't mind spending a bit extra.

 

[vertexx]

WHY NO 4TH GENERATION PROCESSORS?????

Because Ivy is a better CPU for the $$$ right now for gaming rigs.

U don't think it's worth it to use a 4th generation processor for my new build? I don't mind spending a bit extra.

I5-4430 (Haswell) is $10 more than the I5-3350P (Ivy Bridge) recommended in this article, and the 4430 has built-in graphics in case your GPU craps out (never happens, I know).

Haswell motherboards run ~$20-30 more for equivalent, and that gives you latest socket and more Sata 6GB and USB 3.0 support. Ultimately it's your call whether that's worth the extra expense. This column is supposed to be strictly gaming CPU for the money. The thinking is that $30 doesn't buy you any more gaming performance with Haswell, but could get you the next level up graphics card for the money - again assuming Gaming is your sole focus.

If I were buying personally, I'd go for the extra $30 for the Haswell CPU and latest tech. But I can understand the position taken with this article.

Plus, there's something to be said for not recommending Haswell in principle because Intel really did nothing for gaming enthusiasts with the latest gen.

 

[logainofhades]

Haswell uses more power, doesn't overclock as well, costs more, and is 10% faster in apps at the very most. This is just a quick comparison. For $40 less you can get the same ivy combo I am running than a Haswell combo of similar/comparable components. I would rather take that $40 saved and use it towards a better GPU which would give you more performance than a 4670k would vs a 3570k.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Productcompare.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100007627%2050001944%20600438202&IsNodeId=1&bop=And&ShowDeactivatedMark=False&CompareItemList=280%7C19-116-504%5E19-116-504-TS%2C19-116-899%5E19-116-899-TS%2C13-157-293%5E13-157-293-TS%2C13-157-369%5E13-157-369-TS&percm=13-157-369%3A%24%24%24%2420%24%24%24

 

[vertexx]

Um, nope, can't agree with that. 6670>A10's GPU, and CPUs are equal, sort of.

I was looking for 6670 vs A10 GPU stats - do you have any for reference?

 

[vertexx]

I've recommended the Xeons on a few builds as they have very interesting properties. But again, this is about gaming CPUs. Games don't utilize the extra L3 or threads. You're paying $50 over the 3350P for no improved gaming performance. Though I agree, for the pro-sumer that more than dabbles in professional apps, that Xeon is tough to beat.

Totally understand that. I'll be interested to see how game titles change multi-threaded optimization with the next gen consoles.

Also, it seems like a lot of questions on this thread come from an "enthusiast" and not just "gaming" perspective. Perhaps it would be interesting to expand the scope of the article to "Best Enthusiast CPUs for the Money", leaving some room for good alternatives based on use cases. Of course, that's probably opening up a whole can of worms.

 

[PcMe]

Haswell uses more power, doesn't overclock as well, costs more, and is 10% faster in apps at the very most. This is just a quick comparison. For $40 less you can get the same ivy combo I am running than a Haswell combo of similar/comparable components. I would rather take that $40 saved and use it towards a better GPU which would give you more performance than a 4670k would vs a 3570k.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Productcompare.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100007627%2050001944%20600438202&IsNodeId=1&bop=And&ShowDeactivatedMark=False&CompareItemList=280%7C19-116-504%5E19-116-504-TS%2C19-116-899%5E19-116-899-TS%2C13-157-293%5E13-157-293-TS%2C13-157-369%5E13-157-369-TS&percm=13-157-369%3A%24%24%24%2420%24%24%24

Like I said, I don't mind spending a few extra dollars towards a newer and better component.

 

[logainofhades]

I don't think you get $40 worth of better though. You could easily make up the difference just by the fact that ivy overclocks better than Haswell.