What Do You Think Of This Rig? [Revised]

[Pedroc1999]

The i5 isnt going to happen anytime soon - it is way over my starting budget. Listen to me here... I am currently running a Pentium D 925 which as you know is the definition of ancient, it will go under full load just from loading up chrome. I think that might be the reason I am looking for more threads than I actually need... Could it be that my low end computer history is telling me to get more threads instead of single thread performance? But on the other hand i wanted to try some overclocking as i have been missing out on all the fun... Is it true the i3 will OC to about 200-300MHz more than stock? Am i being really stupid for not getting an i3 instead?

[lehtv]

The i3 will not OC, at all. It is locked to its 3.3Ghz setting. On your budget I think it's a decent choice, it'll be a huge improvement and a good match for a midrange GPU.

Can you list all the parts you're currently considering?

[Pedroc1999]

CPU - i3 3225
Mobo - $90 mobo
RAM - 8gb 1600 DDR3
PSU - XFX Pro Series Core Edition P1-550S
Case - CiT Jupiter Gaming Case
GFX - MSI R7770 OC Edition

[lehtv]

No need for the i3-3225, you'll do just as well with the i3-3220. The integrated GPU is the only difference and it simply doesn't matter when you have a discrete GPU.

The PSU is pretty overpowered for this rig but it does carry 5 year warranty and has enough power for a overclocked i5 + high end GPU rig, should you decide to buy something like that in the future.

[Pedroc1999]

Yes sorry kinda typing error i guess, well i just saw this guy with a 2120 go upto 3.55 ish with a bclk adjustment. Can i ask what are the cons of upping the bclk and what can get damaged etc

[lehtv]

First off, BCLK overclocking doesn't work with non-overclocker chipsets like B75 or H77. Only Z77.

The performance increase possible is rather minimal since you can only increase BCLK from 100 to 104 or so before you risk running into problems. In addition to CPU frequency, BCLK affects SATA, USB, PCIe and perhaps others, not sure. In short it's not worth it.

[Sleepingforest]

Originally Posted by Pedroc1999

The i5 isnt going to happen anytime soon - it is way over my starting budget. Listen to me here... I am currently running a Pentium D 925 which as you know is the definition of ancient, it will go under full load just from loading up chrome. I think that might be the reason I am looking for more threads than I actually need... Could it be that my low end computer history is telling me to get more threads instead of single thread performance? But on the other hand i wanted to try some overclocking as i have been missing out on all the fun... Is it true the i3 will OC to about 200-300MHz more than stock? Am i being really stupid for not getting an i3 instead?

I think you fundamentally don't understand a key point about computers: higher clockspeed, more GHz, and more cores does not always mean more power. For example, take this comparison between the Pentium 4 660 (3.6 GHz) against the Pentium G850 (at 2.9 GHz). If you look at the Anandtech Bench, you see that the lower clocked but more modern Pentium G850 is superior on every way by 2 or 3 times.

How could this be? Well, computer chips are improving in more ways than one. In the world right now, the biggest thing improvement in CPU power is found in "instructions per clock" (or IPC, for short). Modern CPUs can execute many more instructions per clock (GHz) than old ones.

Similarly, core count cannot guarantee more power. Most programs can only take advantage of one core, maybe two. The other cores basically sit there and uselessly idle. This is why Intel is generally a better choice for CPU needs: they provide far more IPC than AMD. An i5-2700k clocked at 3.5 GHz will beat an FX-6300 at 3.5 GHz.

Buying more intelligently will yield more power for you than going on a wild goose chase after core count or overclocks.

[Pedroc1999]

Yes, I know... This is not my first hardware forum, I got unfairly banned from SevenForums, I had earned the Supporter and Power User badge. But yes all you have said is right

[Pedroc1999]

What about a used 3570k, what kind of stuff is on eBay?

[lehtv]

Sure, if you can find a used Ivy Bridge i5 for only a little more than an i3, it's worth it. To take full advantage of the K version you would need a Z77 motherboard, however.

[Pedroc1999]

They are going at £60 + postage on eBay riht now

[lehtv]

The winning bid will be much higher. You can estimate the typical winning bid by searching for completed listings: the 3570K seems to go for about £140-150.

[Pedroc1999]

Yes I know, lets not go into ebay tactics and/or ebay techmiques shall we...

[lehtv]

I was just helping you out, it seemed you thought you could actually get a 3570K for £60 + postage.

[Pedroc1999]

Yes i didnt really make myself clear enough. Thx

[Sleepingforest]

If it's on Ebay, I would go with the non-K i5s simply because who knows what kind of torturous overclocking it's been through if it's on ebay.

[mfenn]

Originally Posted by Sleepingforest

If it's on Ebay, I would go with the non-K i5s simply because who knows what kind of torturous overclocking it's been through if it's on ebay.

Agree. Plenty of people knowingly dump CPUs that have had huge voltages fed through them on Ebay. Even more sell CPUs that they've unknowingly fed too much voltage due to auto-overclocking software.

[Torn Mind]

GTA IV apparently does like 3 cores, but any more does not have much effect. However, it is not worth buying aftermarket cooling just to overclock it. The FX-6300 is 95.99 pounds at overclockers.co.uk and aftermarket cooling is about 25 pounds for the Hyper 212 EVO. That's about 177 pounds for the CPU, mobo, and cooling. Extra fans will add further cost.

The MSI B75A-G43 and Intel Core i5-3470 can be had together for about 201 total with no need for extra cooling. A 24 pound difference.

[Torn Mind]

Originally Posted by Pedroc1999

The i5 isnt going to happen anytime soon - it is way over my starting budget. Listen to me here... I am currently running a Pentium D 925 which as you know is the definition of ancient, it will go under full load just from loading up chrome. I think that might be the reason I am looking for more threads than I actually need... Could it be that my low end computer history is telling me to get more threads instead of single thread performance? But on the other hand i wanted to try some overclocking as i have been missing out on all the fun... Is it true the i3 will OC to about 200-300MHz more than stock? Am i being really stupid for not getting an i3 instead?

In the simplest terms, a processor's performance is based on how fast it executes code.
For one single core, the speed at executing code is measured in IPS(instructions per second), which is the product of clockspeed and instructions per cycle(IPC). In equation form, IPS=IPC*clockspeed. Clockspeed is arbitrarily set and varies little. A whole host of factors affects the instructions per cycle, both hardware and software affect IPC.

When another core are added to a processor, the total IPS of the whole processor is no longer the equation above. Now, I'm not sure about the precise details, so the following explanation is not 100% accurate. IPS(total)= one single core IPS + proportion of the second core*(one single core IPS)

However, utilizing multiple cores is dependent on the developer specifically writing code that takes advantage of multiple cores. If the programmer does not do so, the 2nd core contributes almost nothing* for the application itself. Now, if a program does take advantage of more than one thread, that does not necessarily mean that it will scale perfectly and take full advantage of the other core. It might, like with video encoding, but other programs will might only partially take advantage of extra cores.

Obviously, adding another core can increase IPS for the whole processor, but the total IPS can be improved by increasing the IPS of each single core. Clockspeed is one component on a single core's IPS.

So, when overclocking a CPU, what you are doing is increasing the IPS of each single core on the processor. http://www.overclockersclub.com/revi...d_fx8350/7.htm
The overclock in that link had the FX-8350 overclocked to a crazy 5.2 Ghz with water cooling. At that clockspeed, its overclocked FX-8350's Cinebench Single Core result is similar to a 3960X at stock.

Increasing IPC can improve IPS of a single core. Hence, even a Sandy Bridge Celeron G530 outright crushes a CPU like your Pentium D, even if one core on the Celeron is disabled.

Interestingly, as I look at Anand's Bench results between the i3-3220 and FX-6300, the benchmarks like Cinebench clearly show the i3 has superior single core performance. However, lightly threaded benchmarks like the Windows Media 9 encoder or the x264 1st pass benchmark, the gap is barely existent. This might be Turbo Core, CPU cache size, platform differences, and/or something else.


* almost nothing because a single core can be "stalled" at times. This is why my computing experience on a Prescott Pentium 4 is smoother when I enable HyperThreading on it. This is because sometimes multiple separate programs are waiting for threads to be executed and the OS task scheduler can distribute threads from different apps to different threads/cores. If there were only one program not coded for multiple cores running, the the 2nd core contributes totally nothing.

[Pedroc1999]

Thanks Torn, that is a very good explanation!