• 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.

Pentium G4560 vs. Core i3-8100, which one will see worse shortage?

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
VirtualLarry said:
I missed this post the first time around. I didn't pay attention to the Pentium / Celeron CFL-S release SKUs, are there any 2C/4T CFL? If so, how expensive are they, and are they clocked higher than the G4560 or G4600?

I could see a CFL-S release 2C/4T, at 3.5-3.6-3.7Ghz... at what price, though? What would make sense? $64 was a relative steal, but when you can get a CFL-S 4C/4T for $117 or whatever, you would have to make it a decent value. I could see $70, or I guess in Intel's world, $64 is the price point for that range. But Intel would have to not gimp production on that part, this time around.
Click to expand...

Intel hasn't announced any hyper-threaded dual-cores for Coffee Lake, but I wouldn't be surprised if they do so. At the very least, a CFL Pentium or Celeron 2C/4T CPU wouldn't undercut their i3 lineup since it's a quad-core now. By that measure, you'll be given a reason to go for the i3 than skipping it altogether for a Pentium, Celeron, or even Ryzen.
 
Triloby said:
Intel hasn't announced any hyper-threaded dual-cores for Coffee Lake, but I wouldn't be surprised if they do so. At the very least, a CFL Pentium or Celeron 2C/4T CPU wouldn't undercut their i3 lineup since it's a quad-core now. By that measure, you'll be given a reason to go for the i3 than skipping it altogether for a Pentium, Celeron, or even Ryzen.
Click to expand...
My predictions are there will be a Kaby Lake refresh with a new Celeron dual-core model, a replacement for Pentium G4560 (optional by Intel, they may skip it), and a few new models for Core i3. Intel may bring back the plain dual-core slot below G4560 to replace the aging G4400.
 
kwalkingcraze said:
Anyone has a Phenom II X4 quad that can run at 4.3GHz stable? 50% more cores drop the frequency speed down to 3.9GHz or less, from 4.3GHz dual-core.
Click to expand...
You also had the same P2 X4 chips at 95 and 125W and also at 125W and 140W.
There was also an X6 1055T 95W chip, and an X6 1055T 125W chip, for example.

Same Phenom 2 line, same clock speeds, different TDPs.

The 7350K and 8350K are on different processes, as well. 14nm+ vs 14nm++.
 
mohit9206 said:
Ok few things i want to address.
First you don't have to get a Z370 board ,a basic cheap H series mobo will do.
Secondly the igpu is useful under some circumstances,like someone who wants to build a basic htpc so in that case igpu is all you need.
Another case where the dgpu has to be sent for rma and until it comes back,atleast you have something to use during that time.
And another where a PC is bought but budget doesnt allow for gpu so until money can be saved up,the person can still use the igpu for basic games like mobas and csgo etc.
So having that igpu can come very handy for someone who does not have spare gpus lying around.
These are the main appeal to me for the i3-8100 over ryzen 3 but im willing to consider ryzen 3 if its drops in price because at the same price ryzen 3 is not very good value and reviews have already pointed it out and after the launch of coffelake it will be a bit worse.
Click to expand...
Discrete basic used GPUs on marketplace sites like eBay sell from $3-8 shipped, so it's a non issue in the United States at least.
 
Scholzpdx said:
Discrete basic used GPUs on marketplace sites like eBay sell from $3-8 shipped, so it's a non issue in the United States at least.
Click to expand...

Not sure I'll be comfortable pairing an energy inefficient 10 year old GPU with my brand new CPU, but each to their own.
 
Well I i3 8100 is quad core, while G4560 is dual core with HT. So you know the answer.
But i3 8100 is very late to the party and expensive, locked on new platform. I would say it is dead on launch. R3 1200 can be found for less than 100€, but if you want to game new games you will grab 1400 or 1600. G4560 is good deal for budget gamers.

Gamer needs :
+ more than 4 threads
+ fast memory

High clock doesn't help if you have slow memory.

R5 1600 @ stock (low power, great ST, superb MT)
DDR4 3200 CL14 @ SOC 1,05V
GTX 1070/80/TI or RX VEGA 56 (even GTX 1060 or RX 580)
1080/1440p 144Hz
400/500W PSU

Best build.
 
Last edited:
My 6600K had issues running the COD Beta. Not always, but there was the ocassional parade of mouse lag caused by my system not being able to process things in time. CPU utilization was pegged to 100% on all four threads nearly all the time.

4 threads, even of a Skylake at 4.5GHz, is no longer enough to run all games smoothly.
The majority will still run excellently, so if you really don't have the budget, a cheap quad core will still do the job. But if you're at, say, 1060/1070 performance, I would really go for 8 threads minimum these days.
 
CatMerc said:
My 6600K had issues running the COD Beta. Not always, but there was the ocassional parade of mouse lag caused by my system not being able to process things in time. CPU utilization was pegged to 100% on all four threads nearly all the time.

4 threads, even of a Skylake at 4.5GHz, is no longer enough to run all games smoothly.
The majority will still run excellently, so if you really don't have the budget, a cheap quad core will still do the job. But if you're at, say, 1060/1070 performance, I would really go for 8 threads minimum these days.
Click to expand...

Could it be the fact that its still in beta form that is the cause of this stuttering? I mean, imagine the uproar when this game goes live and you have a horde of i5 users complaining of stuttering in game? We're not talking minimum framerates tanking, we're talking about actual pauses in gameplay input which seems to me to be poor optimisation or a game bug rather than an indication that 4C/4T quads cannot run the game without stuttering. I guess time will tell, I'm tempted to download the beta myself to try on my 2500K @ 4.5GHz and see if I encounter the same issues that you do. If anything the problem (if it occurs) should be exacerbated on my system because my CPU is significantly slower.
 
CatMerc said:
My 6600K had issues running the COD Beta. Not always, but there was the ocassional parade of mouse lag caused by my system not being able to process things in time. CPU utilization was pegged to 100% on all four threads nearly all the time.

4 threads, even of a Skylake at 4.5GHz, is no longer enough to run all games smoothly.
The majority will still run excellently, so if you really don't have the budget, a cheap quad core will still do the job. But if you're at, say, 1060/1070 performance, I would really go for 8 threads minimum these days.
Click to expand...
Do you have a Gigabyte Motherboard, with F20 or F22 BIOS? This may be a known issue.
 
VirtualLarry said:
Do you have a Gigabyte Motherboard, with F20 or F22 BIOS? This may be a known issue.
Click to expand...
Yes, Z170-D3H. Though using F5 BIOS.
Could you link me to this being discussed? This being a known issue is a completey new thing to me.

epsilon84 said:
Could it be the fact that its still in beta form that is the cause of this stuttering? I mean, imagine the uproar when this game goes live and you have a horde of i5 users complaining of stuttering in game? We're not talking minimum framerates tanking, we're talking about actual pauses in gameplay input which seems to me to be poor optimisation or a game bug rather than an indication that 4C/4T quads cannot run the game without stuttering. I guess time will tell, I'm tempted to download the beta myself to try on my 2500K @ 4.5GHz and see if I encounter the same issues that you do. If anything the problem (if it occurs) should be exacerbated on my system because my CPU is significantly slower.
Click to expand...
Entirely possible, but I never trust developers. I tend to buy hardware to significantly overpower whatever requirements they would want. So at least for me, next CPU purchase is going to be an octa core. And probably some extra memory considering devs are already recommending 16.
 
Last edited:
CatMerc said:
My 6600K had issues running the COD Beta. Not always, but there was the ocassional parade of mouse lag caused by my system not being able to process things in time. CPU utilization was pegged to 100% on all four threads nearly all the time.

4 threads, even of a Skylake at 4.5GHz, is no longer enough to run all games smoothly.
The majority will still run excellently, so if you really don't have the budget, a cheap quad core will still do the job. But if you're at, say, 1060/1070 performance, I would really go for 8 threads minimum these days.
Click to expand...
Your experience in COD WW2 beta seems consistent with reports from HWUnboxed regarding performance on 4C/4T CPUs. After all, it uses a P2P model so at least one core is responsible for keeping track of latency between connections.
 
Last edited:
IRobot23 said:
Well I i3 8100 is quad core, while G4560 is dual core with HT. So you know the answer.
But i3 8100 is very late to the party and expensive, locked on new platform. I would say it is dead on launch. R3 1200 can be found for less than 100€, but if you want to game new games you will grab 1400 or 1600. G4560 is good deal for budget gamers.

Gamer needs :
+ more than 4 threads
+ fast memory

High clock doesn't help if you have slow memory.

R5 1600 @ stock (low power, great ST, superb MT)
DDR4 3200 CL14 @ SOC 1,05V
GTX 1070/80/TI or RX VEGA 56 (even GTX 1060 or RX 580)
1080/1440p 144Hz
400/500W PSU

Best build.
Click to expand...
i3-8100 is definitely not expensive. It will be the same price as Ryzen 1300X and $40 cheaper than Ryzen 1400 and have an igpu that can be used for troubleshooting or emergency purpose.
Dead end platform is not an issue for 99% of the people because most keep their cpu for more than 4 years.
Ryzen 1200 would definitely be a good deal if it drops to about $90. But right now its still selling at msrp so i3-8100 is going to dethrone both 1200 and 1300X. But not having cheap H series motherboards at launch is definitely going to hamper the success of i3-8100.
 
VirtualLarry said:
They did it to dual-cores. I expect mainstream CPUs to be 8C/16T by 2018-2019 timeframe, so it seems logical, given that consoles have 8 cores or so, that developers would just take advantage of that symmetry, and make quad-cores obsolete in the same timeframe. Or at least, quad-cores without some form of SMT. 4C/8T would still function for an 8C game.
Click to expand...
They did,like 3-4 years ago,and before that they did take advantage of the PS3's symmetry.
That's the only reason you see quads pushed to 100% it's because pretty much every game uses more then 4 high usage threads for the last 3-4 years.
Stutters are 100% based on bad coding,bad resource management,bad API,bad texture streaming and so on,a quad could get you less FPS then you would like due to "only" 4 cores but any stutter or failure to launch is just bad software.
And this is easily proven since any game that causes problems for quads also causes them for octa or even higher core counts,they may be less severe but they are still present.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top