Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'CPUs and Overclocking' started by Magic Carpet, Sep 3, 2013.
So i3 is still a failure, just a different kind of failure now? Yay.
I would hope that nobody seriously uses any Intel CPU for any kind of primary gaming off the IGP. They've improved just insanely over the years, but even better IGPs like the A10 still suck for gaming. The only possibility I can see for their viability is in cheap laptops. Desktop will always be better served by something like an Athlon X4 FM2 w/7750 for gaming, to a massive degree. Even a used 2500k + 650ti Boost would be infinitely better than any IGP on earth.
Now for casual angry-birds type gamers, or someone whose only game they play is ancient (CS:S, DOTA, Diablo 2, whatever), sure. But anything modern, BF3, BF4, Crysis 3, Witcher 3 coming soon, etc, hahaha : no.
4130 review here
but yes... CPU performance gain is not to amazing, and power usage is higher than IB.
Yea, i3 is probably the least well placed intel processor. Too close in price to the i5 if you want good performance, and a cheaper pentium is good enough if you want just a basic box.
I actually thought the igp would be closer to the A10, but I was expecting the HD4600 with 20 units. But you are right, something like the Athlon x4 with a HD7750 is still far superior to either igp for desktop gaming at nearly the same cost.
remember that the competition, the 6800k, requires either a second, earlier AMD chip to flash the mobo with, or a top-tier mobo, as AM3 mobos do not support it out of the box (unless you're spending $100 on the board from the go, which kinda kills the whole "cheap and cheerful" thing)
You mean FM2? Or FM2+?
I would think new motherboards you buy now should have firmware support for these CPU's baked in, depending on how much inventory a vendor was carrying.
I don't think too many people were saying that when the IVB i3's came out (ie, watch out, you'll need to flash an older but compatible LGA1055 board) - it seems like a weak argument.
I'd say all FM2/FM2+ boards on the market support 6800K out of the box. I would like to see one example of FM2 board that has no official BIOS CPU support for this model.
FM2/FM2+ is a new platform and there is no transition like there was between AM3 and AM3+.
Half the die is wasted on a gpu that is pretty much useless. Why cant they just make a really cheap small quad core with no gpu. How much would it really cost to produce a completely new quad core die with no gpu, and maybe even a smaller cache? It's not really a redesign of anything, so I'm thinking the cost would be pretty reasonable. And profitable. Who here would not pay $149 for a tiny i5 die with no gpu? Any pc gamer would call that the sweet spot and its a money maker for intel because its such a small die.
As it stands right now the best thing to do is buy a used 2500K and overclock it. There is nothing better in that price bracket. This isnt right because you'd think an i3 two generations newer would be faster, but its not.
That die would be pretty useless for a laptop, given what Intel wants to do, although I can't imagine why Intel wouldn't put out binned igp-disabled parts for relatively cheap prices instead.
So it's the same iGPU as the i5 and i7, does it have unlimited multipliers?
Haswell IMC is stupid strong, combined with a 1.75/1.8GHz iGPU with the same units as the i5/i7 and this would really put a lot of pressure on AMDs APU lineup.
Then again barely anyone overclocks >.<
I'll also point out that according to the ark, Haswell i3's don't support AVX2. Pentiums don't even have support for regular AVX. What is that all about Intel, my old 920 had SSE4.2 support and that's a 5 year old chip (a high end one, but still...). Why should programmers bother implementing AVX, when the lowest common denominator for Haswell is still SSE4.2?
Still looking for a good-enough SFF replacement for the wife's desktop. This might be a contender, we'll have to see some more benchmarks. I was considering also the A10-6700, but really can't trust it to stay within the thermal limits of a small enclosure without more data.
Okay wow, what the hell Intel?
Half-height 6570 + X4-750k?
Isn't the 6800K on its own roughly equal to a 6570? If you're going for a dGPU, I'd recommend a minimum of a half-height 7750.
EDIT: Although if your wife doesn't play games, just go for the integrated graphics.
She does some light gaming. Her desktop right now is a Xeon E5440 + HD 6670. The X4-750K is, sadly, very close to parity with that six year old Intel CPU. I think we can go backwards a little on 3D performance if necessary, but I want the CPU to be an upgrade, not a sidegrade.
The ZBox ID90 is fairly unbeatable for CPU performance in a compact PC, but the GPU is only HD4000.
I have tested the A10-5800K inside a small itx case with 200W PSU using the default Heat-Sink Fan. It was fine, no probs at all, A10-6700 will even have lower power usage and lower thermals.
I never understood the price of the i3's. $40 more gets you a quad, $60 less gets you 80% of the performance.
I appreciate the anecdote, and while I believe the A10 to be a good all-around solution for this scenario, hard thermal data will be requisite to want to wedge an A10 into a mini-ITX enclosure.
My thoughts exactly... :colbert:
With 2133MHz memory, its about equal (slightly faster) then a HD6670. Problem is that 2133/2400MHz memory gets expensive real quick and for roughly the same money as a 6800K+2133MHz memory you can get a 750K+HD7750 that's somewhere around twice the performance.
At least that's the situation here. Don't know about the US...
Looking through Intel's pricing, if I need a basic computer as a HTPC, then I would get a 3Ghzish Pentium, and if I wanted more processing power, I'd get something like a 3570K/4670K and overclock it a bit.
Pretty much everything else is a very hard sell to me.
You guys might be underestimating the real-world performance of the i3. Take a second look at many game benchmarks where it is hanging in there just below all the Intel quads, and beating the standard dual cores by huge margins. I didn't have any trouble gaming with an i3-3220 temporarily. You yourself have proclaimed the importance of single-threaded performance, i3 has that down, along with decent multi-threaded on par with i5 up to 3 or 4 threads, depending on the load.
I'd bet an Ivy i3 would be right by that 2500K.
In that bench perhaps. But looking at those numbers, apparently it doesn't scale with cores whatsoever (much like Skyrim in fact). Games that use 4 cores and beyond will divebomb on an i3 (BF3/BF4/yadda yadda), and that will mean Ivy i3 falling far far behind 2500K even at stock (and 2500K overclock like absolute monsters).
It's not that they're bad per se, but not a wise purchase circa 2013.
The problem is Intel refuses to sell an unlocked i3. I'm not sure why they have continued to leave a black hole in the $140 to 180 segment but there it is. If they sold an i3 K ed. at $150 to $160 I'm sure it would be a popular budget gaming performer. Especially since all chips are now locked down completely besides k/x chips. As it stands now a $35 used i3 530 clocked to 4.4 to 4.6ghz will still likely perform similar to a current gen i3.