• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Fastest single threaded CPU?

John Connor

John Connor

Lifer
I want to build a new PC for FS2004 and since FS2004 is my main game and is only single threaded and very CPU orientated, I would like a fast single threaded CPU within a budget of $250.

Looking here it seems the i3-7320 seems to fit the bill. But can PassMark be trusted for single threaded performance for CPUs?

What's say you?
 
Well, the 7350K is going to be faster than that, I would think, if we are staying under $250.

Keep in mind that on that chart there are a total of just 3 samples of the 7320 and 7350K combined.

For $250 I would get an i5-7600 or 7600K and have similar single thread performance, but much higher multi-thread performance.

If I were on a budget, I'd get the i3-7300.
 
Last edited:
Core i3-7350K is faster, but you'll need a Z170/Z270 motherboard, decent RAM + separate cooler if you plan to overclock. If you want to stick to a cheap MB/RAM combo then go for Core i3-7100, little difference to the faster models and you'll save some money.
 
Last edited:
https://ark.intel.com/compare/97455,97527,97484,97458,97144,97150

There is a comparo of some of these chips. You can see that single core turbo boost allows the i5 chips to keep up with the i3 chips in single threaded stuff, and still blow them away in multi threaded stuff.

The 7100 lacks cache compared to the 7300. I don't know how much that hampers it.

Overall, I think for the $250 budget, the i5-7600 is the best pick as it will have high single thread performance at 4.1ghz, and great multi-thread performance at 3.5ghz.

Basically it's clock speed that is going to make the champion here, and 100mhz difference isn't going to be noticeable.
 
Intel Core i3-6100 vs 6300 on Anandtech bench: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1682?vs=1683

Unsurpisingly, cache makes a more noticable difference in memory-intensive tasks: 7-Zip and WinRAR file compression and integrated GPU gaming.

I don't think Intel Core i3 other than the 7100 are worth the extra cost over the 7100.

Intel Core i5-7600K is a fine choice to for your conditions. Don't forget to use a good memory kit: DDR4-2666 15-15-15 for 1.2 V and anything higher for 1.35 V.

About PassMark: it's a ok resource but I think difference between AMD and Intel is exaggerated.
 
His CPU budget is $250, so the i5-7600 is well within that. It will give him what he wants, without limiting him to a 2 core cpu when he needs multi-thread performance.
The 7600K is better than the 7600, and also within his budget, but if he is not going to overclock it, then it's probably not the best choice.

If he actually needs to save money, then I would look at the 7300 or 7100. I think the 7320, and certainly the 7350K, are not worth their price premiums.
 
Only reason he should get the K CPU, is to superclock it. Maybe disable another core or two, to push it even further.
 
Don't skimp on slower ram either. An i3-7350k over clocked + fast and tight DDR4 should help a lot.

FS2004 is a pig and even the combo above won't be perfect.
 
Thank you all for the informative reply's. The i5 7600k sounds like a great deal and having multithreaded capability is nice too since I do play some multithreaded games and I do plan on buying GTA V once it's built.

I have an Evo 212 cooler at the momement. I was planing on using for a Skylake build, but scarped that idea for the skylake in favor of a more single threaded work horse within my budget since FS2004 is my main game and concern. Could I overclock on air with the Evo? Or do I need to throw all kinds of money at water cooling?

Does the old rule still stand for RAM? Lowest CAS possible, lowest volts possible and high speed? That's what I have always heard.
 
John Connor said:
Does the old rule still stand for RAM? Lowest CAS possible, lowest volts possible and high speed? That's what I have always heard.
Click to expand...
Higher speed generally trumps lower latencies, as long as the latencies aren't super-excessive. Just find a reasonably-priced 3200 speed set with CAS 16-18-18 or something. Unless something has changed since I last looked, 3200 speed is the price-performance sweet spot.

The EVO cooler isn't that impressive but if you're on a tight budget you can still use it. EVO vs. water isn't the real dichotomy. A Noctua D15 will kill the EVO and most cheaper AIOs. There are several "high-end" air coolers that offer better cooling per decibel than an EVO.
 
John Connor said:
So I can use Windows 7.
Click to expand...
Skylake is not Kabylake. Microsoft specifically said Kaby will not run on anything less than Windows 10.
John Connor said:
What exactly are the limitations with Kaby Lake and 7 anyway?
Click to expand...
It's a good question but probably anything related to power management and the iGPU driver. Intel's chipset driver will probably not support anything less than 10 for Kaby. Kaby is full of new DRM, including one that makes it the only CPU that is said to support 4K BluRay.

It's not a good idea to buy KL and hope for Windows 7 support. It would be better to see if someone with deep pockets has done it as an experiment and can show that it can be done without serious glitches/drawbacks. And, on top of that, there is the issue of not being able to take advantage of updated code, like a newer chipset driver that someone didn't bother to hack.
 
My bad. I thought that link about OS install and optical media, USB, etc was about KL.

Yeah, I can see someone at M$ must have payed Intel to force 10 on everyone. Well, at least that's a novel conspiracy theory. 😀
 
John Connor said:
My bad. I thought that link about OS install and optical media, USB, etc was about KL.

Yeah, I can see someone at M$ must have payed Intel to force 10 on everyone. Well, at least that's a novel conspiracy theory. 😀
Click to expand...
Intel doesn't care. It's easier for them to only develop code for one OS. Plus, since they probably have various embedded bits of spyware at the behest of the NSA and such it's also easier to satisfy the spooks by coding for 10.

The only way Intel can possibly care about Windows 7, 8, and 8.1 support is if enough businesses refuse to buy Windows 10 machines with Kaby in them. But, it's not like Intel can't produce legacy chips for those customers and charge a premium.

So, ultimately, it comes down to whether or not AMD can put any pressure on Intel in this area. Unlikely. People are very passive, overall.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top