AMD competition for Core i3 (Gamers thread)

[cbn]

besides i5 7xxx probably can OC to like 80% of i5 6xxx's clock potential making it practically wipe out any HT advantage.

If Core i3s comfortable overclock (similar to a Core i5 750 @ 3.8) ends up being 4.5 Ghz then I think it will be a close call on which is better for *most* current quad threaded games.

 

[MrK6]

If Core i3s comfortable overclock (similar to a Core i5 750 @ 3.8) ends up being 4.5 Ghz then I think it will be a close call on which is better for *most* current quad threaded games.

There's a reason Intel didn't use hyperthreading for years. But you go ahead and wait for those benchmarks.

 

[Markfw]

There's a reason Intel didn't use hyperthreading for years. But you go ahead and wait for those benchmarks.

Yes, it actually performs worse in many things. Thats why there is always a BIOS option to disable it. Do you have links on HT on and off for games ? I can't find one right now.

 

[toyota]

Yes, it actually performs worse in many things. Thats why there is always a BIOS option to disable it. Do you have links on HT on and off for games ? I can't find one right now.

in Vista/XP there were just a few games where HT did hurt but it was usually like 5% or so. in Windows 7, HT supposedly never hurts performance in games.

 

[MrK6]

Yes, it actually performs worse in many things. Thats why there is always a BIOS option to disable it. Do you have links on HT on and off for games ? I can't find one right now.

Exactly what I was recalling, especially from the P4 era. I'll take a looksie around later today and see what I can find.

in Vista/XP there were just a few games where HT did hurt but it was usually like 5% or so. in Windows 7, HT supposedly never hurts performance in games.

If this is true, good, it's nice to see some improvement. The simple fact is that logical cores still aren't even close to physical cores performance-wise, and while it's a cheap boost in speed for dual cores, it is in no way a replacement of quad+ cores.

 

[Markfw]

Exactly what I was recalling, especially from the P4 era. I'll take a looksie around later today and see what I can find.
If this is true, good, it's nice to see some improvement. The simple fact is that logical cores still aren't even close to physical cores performance-wise, and while it's a cheap boost in speed for dual cores, it is in no way a replacement of quad+ cores.

My thoughts exactly, but computerbottleneck, seems to think the I3 is the second coming of processors, and will equal a quad, but use less power. See his sig.

WRONG !!!!!!

 

[cbn]

My thoughts exactly, but computerbottleneck, seems to think the I3 is the second coming of processors, and will equal a quad, but use less power. See his sig.

WRONG !!!!!!

I am not entirely sure it will be comparable to Core i5 750 in quad threaded games (but I think it could be close in some titles).

What is more interesting will be how Core i3 stacks up against Phenom II x4.

 

[toyota]

I am not entirely sure it will be comparable to Core i5 750 in quad threaded games (but I think it could be close in some titles).

What is more interesting will be how Core i3 stacks up against Phenom II x4.

I just dont understand why you are so obsessed with this i3 though. personally I am going to see what happens with the 32nm quads. I just cant justify going with another dual core even with HT but at the same time I dont want to go with a 45nm quad. my E8500 is still getting the job done so I need a very good reason to upgrade.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Yes, it actually performs worse in many things. Thats why there is always a BIOS option to disable it. Do you have links on HT on and off for games ? I can't find one right now.

When people say "many things lose performance" regarding Hyperthreading I assume in a lot of cases they are referring to games.

If not, Core i7's Hyperthreading is far better than Pentium 4:
http://www.solidmuse.com/2008/12/core-i7-to-hyperthread-or-not.html

"In days past, with the old Intel Pentium 4 cpu architecture, the conventional wisdom for the best core SolidWorks performance was to disable hyper-threading in the system BIOS."

"It looks like Intel has done a very nice job in this new implementation of hyper-threading in the Core i7's.

I plan to keep hyper-threading enabled on my system."

Nowadays the biggest contributor to performance loss in Hyperthreading is when there's resource contention in a program that doesn't support all the threads, ie 4 threaded program running on 8-thread i7.

I just dont understand why you are so obsessed with this i3 though. personally I am going to see what happens with the 32nm quads.

The problem there is there are no Intel 32nm shrunk quad cores in the roadmap until Sandy Bridge in 2011.

 

[Markfw]

I am not entirely sure it will be comparable to Core i5 750 in quad threaded games (but I think it could be close in some titles).

What is more interesting will be how Core i3 stacks up against Phenom II x4.

Instead of being so adamant about it, why don't you wait until some benchmarks are out before arguing. Right now you have nothing to back up your claims, and it makes you look "______" (I can't fill in the blank, but you get the idea)

 

[toyota]

The problem there is there are no Intel 32nm shrunk quad cores in the roadmap until Sandy Bridge in 2011.

well supposedly there are people with 32nm quads in their hands so I know they are coming. it will likely be 1356 only though which might make it a deal beaker depending on overall price. $350-$400 for a cpu, mobo, and memory is the max I will spend for those parts.

 

[SolMiester]

I would rather buy a cheaper CPU that is actually faster in two cores.

Lynnfield has more TDP spread out over four cores so I wonder if Core i3 will actually beat it in dual threaded games. Besides 32nm > 45nm.

AFAIK, Lynnfireld is also the fastest Dual Core on the market!

 

[toyota]

sorry if this is a silly question but will all the i3 cpus have graphics built in?

 

[Markfw]

BTW, it is a know fact that even in I7, there is some software that runs better with it off. I don't have a link handy, but maybe someone else knows where it is. The anandtech (Regular site) search function bites....

 

[Markfw]

BTW, it is a know fact that even in I7, there is some software that runs better with it off. I don't have a link handy, but maybe someone else knows where it is. The anandtech (Regular site) search function bites....

This is not the one I was thinking of, but here is a 2.7 and a couple ithers that are worse:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/Intel-Core-i7-Nehalem,2057-12.html

 

[cbn]

sorry if this is a silly question but will all the i3 cpus have graphics built in?

Yes. All Core i3s will have a IGP under the heatspreader.

 

[cbn]

I just dont understand why you are so obsessed with this i3 though.

1. I would rather have a cheap and fast 32nm quad core.

2. Since 32nm quad cores are not available this topic makes for interesting discussion IMO.

3. I am starting to get interested in small form factor (Sugo sg05 only comes with a 300 watt SFX PSU. Silverstone 450 watt SFX PSU made by FSP can be purchased separately in the near future though)

4. All the fun games (I like) at the moment only use two cores (but Core i3s faster speed and hyperthreading covers me "just in case" something new launches in the future)

 

[cbn]

Another thing to consider:

Will Core i3 cause Phenom II x4 prices to drop?

If this happens I am sure we will see some spectacular AMD CPU/mobo deals.

Hopefully AMD decides to release a 32nm Phenom II for AM3 before launching Bulldozer.

Core i3/Core i5 vs 32nm Phenom II might be a harder call to make especially if AMD adds more L3 cache to the die shrink CPU.

 

[IntelUser2000]

well supposedly there are people with 32nm quads in their hands so I know they are coming. it will likely be 1356 only though which might make it a deal beaker depending on overall price. $350-$400 for a cpu, mobo, and memory is the max I will spend for those parts.

Where did you get this info? Is it clear? If they don't release quad core 32nm before march/april(rumored Gulftown release), then it'll have way too short of a lifecycle before Sandy Bridge.

 

[toyota]

Where did you get this info? Is it clear? If they don't release quad core 32nm before march/april(rumored Gulftown release), then it'll have way too short of a lifecycle before Sandy Bridge.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=240252

 

[IntelUser2000]

That is interesting. I always thought they could take two cores out of Gulftown and make a 4 core part to justify the cost of making another die, but nothing supported that so far. That might be a "wait-and-see" SKU based on how AMD does.

 

[ilkhan]

If it has 12MB of l3, its physically a hex-core. Remember, there are "dual" core bloomfield-DP chips as well.

 

[cbn]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/phenom-ii-x4-965-c3_7.html#sect0

Here are some results for Phenom II C3 stepping. Based on this I think Core i3 could give more expensive AMD processors trouble in some quad threaded titles.

 

[waffleironhead]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/phenom-ii-x4-965-c3_7.html#sect0

Here are some results for Phenom II C3 stepping. Based on this I think Core i3 could give more expensive AMD processors trouble in some quad threaded titles.

Based on what?

 

[cbn]

Based on what?

The Phenom II x4 c3 stepping doesn't look very strong against Core 2 quad.