Intel Pentium G3258 CPU Review: Haswell, Unlocked, For $75

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

depends on intel's whim, really. all they need is to push mobo companies to issue non-z o.c. killing bios update. anyone (save for seasoned p.c. enthusiasts) who has auto update or installs the update unknowingly will lose o.c. capability, same for anyone who buy a new mobo with the "fix" preloaded. z-chipset is much safer bet. ubercheap(for z-chipset) z97 motherboards are good fit for pentium a.e.
 

somebodyspecial

Honorable
Sep 20, 2012
1,459
0
11,310
20


I hope they do this, AND use the retail for at least a few benchmarks to prove how far it should go reliably. A poor person might not have the money for a replacement Heatsink/fan ($20-30 is a lot to some people), and as I discussed before the retail HSF is quite good (not awesome...LOL, but good enough for i7's and 95w, this chip is only 53 and you can turn that 1100mhz gpu off dropping more, so lots of room to run up the heat).

In this review they mention the board makers altering the cheap boards to support OCing of this chip, so it shouldn't be hard to do what you're asking here. C'mon tomshardware, Pentium G3258 review rev2 please :) A review for the truly poor, choosing a chipset below Z97 and using STOCK fan. Nobody I've seen has done it (and I read everyone I could find as noted in my rebuttal of fx6300/8350 before), so it should get some views if you do it. If you can run a small set on a mid range gpu ($200) and another on $100-150 to see if things change vs the card you used in the review here (put them all in the chart). That way people can see if they can get by on $100 card, cheapo board, cheap cpu etc or which part helps/hurts the most for the budget gamers. Is there a massive difference between running $100 & $200 card with this cpu at 1080p? One AMD & one NV card should be run at least. Sometimes the cheap cpus like one brand's architecture over the other in gpus. Many review sites used to run tests showing multiple gpus from each side to show this point, today we usually get just the top card tested (don't know many people buying Titans with a $75 cpu). It would be better to see a few from each side (amd/nv) that a poor person might actually be able to buy with this cpu IMHO. Due to time, just cut the # of games tested if needed, but show more cards so we can see the effect of both sides gpus on this cheap cpu.

Considering most of us run cpus & gpus UNDER $300 it seems a very valid test for your audience. I probably could have said most of us run under $200 on each cpu/gpu - guessing 80% probably based on steam's hardware survey results. IE 97% of us run under 1920x1200 according to steam survey (and a LARGE group is under even 1080p).
 

somebodyspecial

Honorable
Sep 20, 2012
1,459
0
11,310
20


Do people actually set their boards to auto-update bios firmwares? Windows updates are one thing, but hardware's firmware updates pushed behind your back on a mboard? I'm not sure Intel wouldn't end up in a huge lawsuit if a bunch of people ended up with a non-working system after they pushed some update to users without them knowing. They have no idea how you are using Company X's motherboard or your system parts etc. Even if this happened, surely they'd go online, hit a forum and find out how to downgrade (easily done just by flashing an old one in most if not all cases). I really don't believe Intel will want the HATE that is generated from a move like this, as it would likely sell more AMD stuff or ARM stuff IMHO. That would be bad no matter how you slice it when their earnings are already down $3B over the last 3 years and ARM seems set to take more share with 64bit 20nm versions shortly on top of the 21% of notebooks already gone to chromebooks.

I'm sure the hackers will get busy posting bios files if Intel tried something fishy anyway...LOL. Flashing today is simple, so the end users won't do the work to hack it (pro's will much like an xbox360 firmware etc for each dvd drive model), they'll just be required to do the flash at most. We've been through this before with mainboard makers releasing stuff Intel hated. If the top 3 or 4 brands do it (who sell most of the boards anyway) intel can't really threaten much here as long as they aren't breaking agreements or laws with mainboard makers hacking their own firmwares ;) It seems pretty clear they have a right to do this (Asus/Gigabyte/Asrock/MSI etc), or they'd be worried about getting sued correct? Intel certainly has the lawyers to sue, so I don't think they'd do it if there was some line in their agreements with Intel that says "don't OC 3258 on cheapo boards". I think the most Intel could do is issue a press release saying "it's unsupported and your chip could explode and blow up your house" or some such FUD statement...ROFL. I think they'll only hurt themselves doing much else. Bad PR is well, BAD in cases like this :)
 


Yeah, but exactly that is what has been a problem on AMD boards for some time now, people overclock on low cost boards and expect results that just are not consistent with review sites.
 

somebodyspecial

Honorable
Sep 20, 2012
1,459
0
11,310
20


I don't think the boards will fry. You're only messing with the multiplier and voltage of the cpu, not overclocking the whole board. Don't forget these same boards will take a i7-4790 that runs up to 4.4ghz. You're basically overclocking a dual core to around 4790 levels of heat/watts with a little more v maybe. Even a quick look at Asus site for the H97 boards show they have OCing built in (up to 140% power hike for total power. They're not going to allow you to do things that will blow their boards massively.
http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/LGA1150/H97M-PLUS/E9011_H97M-PLUS.pdf
page 2-16, hike cpu current to 140%. They don't sell something like that without some testing behind it first.
"Choose a higher value when overclocking, or under a high CPU loading for extra power support."

I don't see a warning "BTW you'll blow your board if you run here for more than a day.." :) The only warning is in 2-18 about the EXTREME OVERVOLT setting which may fry your cpu, again no warning about the board. I shipped many cheap boards with cpus OCed (that was my main business for 8yrs, not stock sells, I sold OC stuff), and never had problems though I was never reaching for the stars with them, just taking the easy OC without the last 10% or so you get from a NON-retail HSF etc by really pushing the limits. A page later they say you can go to 1.9v. So I doubt the 1.3v (max probably) most would put through this chip will blow the board. I was kind of surprised you could even do that amount on an H97 board (1.9v on h97? What the heck for?). Then again you can get an Z97 board for $100 anyway (same price as this h97 plus board pretty much, actually asrock/msi have z97 going for $85 right now...WOW). I don't really see problems if you're buying a 97 based chipset (H or Z). The boards are built pretty good just due to better tech today than years ago regarding power issues/regulation etc. Not really any point in having this discussion with pricing like that on Z97 :)
 

somebodyspecial

Honorable
Sep 20, 2012
1,459
0
11,310
20
BTW, that's not a comment on if this board can change G3258 multiplier or not (I didn't look), just picked a H97 as an example to show it won't blow. It's the users job to find which boards can do this multiplier change :) I'm a Z97 only buyer at this point. I never plan to use more than one gpu, and don't mind paying $130-150 for a good Z97 as I always do for boards (no need for $180+ boards for me, just need a few features and a few extra sata's etc).
 

somebodyspecial

Honorable
Sep 20, 2012
1,459
0
11,310
20


http://www.coolaler.com/showthread.php/305670
10 seconds on google :) 4.8ghz 1.3v on h87.

I'm sure you can find others with a google of h87 OC just like I just did and ASUS has officially unlocked all K chips and G3258 now on many boards:
http://www.techpowerup.com/202196/asus-enables-overclocking-on-h97-h87-b85-and-h81-series-motherboards.html

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/gigabyte-biostar-overclocking-h87-b85,23435.html
Gigabyte and Biostar too (asrock also in other posts).

It goes without saying you should keep a copy of the "good bios" some place safe, and lock it from modification. Intel can't do anything if you don't let them. There is no way for them to force a mandatory board update. On older boards bios work is done, and you don't need new drivers at this point for them to function great, as that is all about as optimized as it's going to get on 87 chipsets.
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2013/07/25/intel-overclocking-block/1
AS they say above :"As a result, we'd recommend that anyone enjoying the benefits of a K-series processor on B85 or H87 chipset motherboard treat any BIOS update from their manufacturer with suspicion from this point on."
You can always fix it if you update on accident anyway. Nothing stopping you from downgrading the bios.

Note sure what voltage you mean. I would not go over 1.3v on any current Intel's unless I was trying to set records or something and on a junker board I'd probably just see what stock got me with possibly a nudge above that if stock is low for your chip (though I think all boards should handle 1.2v fine for ages). I'd always recommend stock volts and seeing what you get first, then once you think it's slow in the future and are ready to replace it, go for more since at that point you don't care what happens. Most chips get a decent OC out of the box at stock if unlocked. Having said that 1.3v is not pushing any board to it's limits unless it's complete crap (the top 5 brands will do fine here for years, they are designed to). Really I'd say 1.2v if you're not putting on a good HSF and going over 1.25 usually doesn't get much but more heat for a few more mhz (even 1.1-1.2v might be too hot for stock hsf, depends on luck of the draw with the chip). That last 10% just isn't worth what you get in return with heat, watts, lifetime etc. For clarity, I mean ACTUAL volts, not what you set at manually. IE what the board actually says it's getting (under stress, like prime95 etc), not what you set it at.

Anandtech said this in the 4770k review:
"In terms of overclocking success on standard air cooling you should expect anywhere from 4.3GHz - 4.7GHz at somewhere in the 1.2 - 1.35V range."
Which is why I say 1.3 or less. Most hit 4.3+ before 1.3v anyway, so for most people I say why push it? I'm not talking water people here, or extreme cooling as those people should know what they're doing anyway.

But why would someone be interested in any of the old boards now? The cheapest board I'd actually touch of those old ones on newegg is $55 or so. Below that you should expect problems if doing anything but running stock or a mild OC and people are buying this chip to OC the heck out of it (at least 4ghz or what's the point?). You can only go so low and you're just buying junk at that point (even if not OCing IMHO). Out of 355 S1150 boards on newegg (sold by then not counting the market), I really don't want to be in the bottom 20 boards...LOL. There are basically no reviews on any of them for a reason. ;) I don't like MSI, so you have to get to Asus's H81M-K before I'd even buy and I wouldn't anyway, I just mean my lowest recommendation to the poorest on earth :) Even then I'd be arguing against it, and I wouldn't sell anything under $80 if I was still running a pc business based on today's boards and what's on them. I just used to tell you to go away below what I considered not worth building. But I wasn't big enough to be fixing crap all day, and preferred to build stuff that just didn't come back 99% of the time.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100007627&IsNodeId=1&Description=H97&name=Intel%20Motherboards&Order=PRICE&Pagesize=50&isdeptsrh=1
H97 $80, and just checked the Z97 today with $15 off is also $80 for asrock. MSI Z97 is $85 right now. It would be different if these weren't available for a few months or something, but there are tons of models of both 97 chipsets out, so every other chipset is dead to me.

I get that you're saying the same as me basically, I'm really saying this stuff for other people's benefit ;) I hope people realize you shouldn't be buying a $40 board and expecting it to run well with this chip at 4.8ghz or something...ROFL. That's just plain crazy. The voltage regulation etc on those just isn't built for this kind of torture. For $80 people, you should just make the move to Z97 and be done with it as many have said. Why guess and end up disappointed over $25? If Z97 was $130+ maybe you'd have an argument, but at $80?
 

mapesdhs

Distinguished
Jan 22, 2007
2,507
0
21,160
111


Perhaps if it had HT, but as others have so extensively covered already, it's a bit too locked up
in many ways to be a real budget oc performer.

Having said that, I bought one this week (42 UKP from Scan UK). I'm building an HTPC but am
not yet sure which CPU to use (mbd is an ASUS Z97I-Plus), so I figured a G3258 would be a
cheap way of getting it up & running, doing some performance experiments, etc., and if I do
change the chip later for a 4690K or something then I can still use the G3258 for testing any
other mbds I might obtain in the future & suchlike.

Btw, couldn't help giggle at how small the box is for the above mbd. I've gotten too used to EATX. :D

Ian.

 

mapesdhs

Distinguished
Jan 22, 2007
2,507
0
21,160
111


Which aspects inparticular? CPU performance, gaming, etc.? Note that I won't be testing anything
audio-related, not my field.

Ian.

 

Onus

Titan
Moderator
I'd be interested in overall CPU performance, especially things like the hit a game takes if your system kicks off a virus scan or other task that might eat a core. Would it be possible, for example, to play a game while keeping a reference site open? Or play while streaming alternate music?
How about Skype while reading email, or while researching something online?
 

ingtar33

Illustrious


well, from my own experiences with i3s... i'm pretty sure there will be a pretty hard hit the more stuff he's trying to do. heck i can get a hit doing this stuff with i5s... that i wouldn't notice with an i7 or fx8 core.
 

mapesdhs

Distinguished
Jan 22, 2007
2,507
0
21,160
111


(I don't use Skype, etc.)

I'll be running the usual tests shown on my site, but I guess I could try something like some of the
usual 3D benchmarks while having something else running, though what do you mean by keeping a
reference site open? You mean just an open browser? Not sure that would affect it much.

Ian.



 

MightyBoyGaming

Reputable
Jul 10, 2014
106
0
4,710
20
Everyone is forgetting that the Asrock b85M mobo has the ability to OC this chip ;)

What, that mobo is like 70-80 bucks? Wisest man of all combines the asrock with the Pent Up G Banger and goes to town... all for the same price as a moderate Z board :D

Pair it with just the right GPU and you'll be 1080P gaming for years for roughly the cost of a PS4

Wise men indeed.
 

mapesdhs

Distinguished
Jan 22, 2007
2,507
0
21,160
111
Hmm, not so sure. Might be ok for 1080p, but newer titles do increasingly make use of more than 2 cores.
In the medium term one could just end up with a GPU that's not being properly utilised. For gaming, I'd
want a stronger GPU than what would be appropriate for a G3258 to support 1080p for 'years', in which
case a better CPU would be more sensible anyway. Btw, a used i7 950 costs about the same as a G3258. :D

Ian.

 

Onus

Titan
Moderator
One would think, BUT, I know FF does some background stuff, and it seems to me I read recently that Chrome has a bug (doesn't matter whether intended or not, if something is an issue) that causes it to munch resources also.
Other possibilities would be a simultaneous download, or media sharing in the other direction (e.g. "if I use a G3258 in my media server, can I also game on it?") It would be great if it doesn't matter though, "Can the G3258 handle common scenarios without choking" is the point.
 

mapesdhs

Distinguished
Jan 22, 2007
2,507
0
21,160
111
Maybe what I could do is try the gaming benchmarks I use while simultaneously streaming a movie file or something.
I probably won't be able to try such a thing for a while though, need to source a suitable TV first.

Ian.

 

randyHaswell

Reputable
Aug 18, 2014
2
0
4,510
0
FWIW:

$100, Micro Center, G3258 and MSI "Z97 PC Mate" bundle special. Board is recently released, comes with OC software & BIOS. 38x multiplier/3800MHz, stock fan, ~60 degrees running BF4.

Battlefield 4:
Above G3258, 8MB Balistix Sport RAM, Corsair CXM750, XFX R290x (bought used from neighbor), new HDD and fresh install of Win8.1

Battlefield 4 "Test Range": 80-120 FPS, as per BF4 fps meter
Battlefield 4 any "Multiplayer": 15-50 fps, **UNPLAYABLE**

The CPU is pegged. As soon as you start BF4, CPU utilization is maxed. The GPU hums along nicely as expected. It's a fresh install, I had virus scanner turned off, and checked Task Manager for any "extra" apps that should not be running. I eventually had CPUZ, TM, MSI, and AMD apps running, but only after careful troubleshooting along the way. I turned down the video settings as I went, having no effect, (of course, if CPU is at 100%.)

I will go back and try to ensure it is not something in the system causing added issues. I did initially "unpark" the cores, as per online suggestions, but that did not hurt or help play. I don't see how OC to ~4.5 MHz will help game play. The recommended config is "6 core AMD, 4 core Intel". This game depends upon client-side computing power.

BF4 isn't about "Test Range", "Campaigns", or benchmark scenes; people play it for the multi-player capability. I think this HARDWARE review focused too much on "methodology".
 

logainofhades

Titan
Moderator
Turning down video settings typically puts more strain on the CPU, if it is bottlenecking the GPU to begin with. Turning up some things might actually improve performance, as it will shift more of the load to the GPU. Hence why many CPU gaming comparisons tend to go low res and settings.
 

randyHaswell

Reputable
Aug 18, 2014
2
0
4,510
0


Thanks for the update. Setting everything "Ultra" did seem to give better fps, same server, map, and ~user #s. Still unplayable. Using MSI Cmd Center tool, CPU at 42 x, and 100% rpm on stock fan during gameplay. Crashes MSI Cmd Center when set to 43 multiplier (??)

Sorry to turn this thread into P&T session, but what site can provide a "clean" copy of Core Temp? I went through C-Net, and got an adware virus. Many "Core Temp" sites out there, all with advertisements attached to the download. CPU-Z was infected from another site, but anti-virus caught and cleaned it. I will try to amuse myself by "juicing" this $40 CPU while I wait for an i7.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY