Discussion The GN review of the Pentium G7400, is a perfect example of what's wrong with big reviewers.

[DAPUNISHER]

Prefacing my remarks: I am a fan of GN. They are the best PC tech journalists for consumer advocacy, hands down. And they are developing into an excellent technical reviewer as well. I have gone as far as to purchase merch to support them.

That said: The aforementioned review strikes me as being out of touch with the ultra budget gamer. The narrative that there is room for a sub 4GHz 2/4 CPU as a budget gamer, in 2022, is bad advice. And a prime example of how bar graphs fail dismally, in fully conveying the problems a user faces. Assets loading slowly or not at all, greatly inhibit a game's enjoyability, and adversely impact its playability. Take that, on top of the frame pacing issues they do mention. Now, add that it is priced against a $85 10100f 4/8 and B560M $90 board, and it makes even less sense.

The place holder argument falls flat for me. It cannot handle the latest demanding titles already. In my mind, that makes it a losing your place holder. It is also too closely priced to the 12100f. GN pushes the idea to spend enough on a board that it can handle a beefier CPU later. That money would be better spent on a 4/8 CPU to begin with.

None of this addresses the used market, as that is not a apples to apples comparison. And for value, it would further the argument that the G7400 should not even enter the discussion, for a build that needs to be capable of playing the latest titles.

This review is also a good example of why video reviews can be so helpful, when done correctly. While this is a video review, it never shows actual gameplay with the hardware. I have seen, and experienced for myself, NPCs missing, large parts of the scene missing and/or popping in, weird A.I. behavior, textures taking too long to load, hitching, stuttering, freezing, audio issues; all the things. I have read some here say they only like text and picture reviews. That has probably never been an issue for you, because you can afford hardware that does not experience any of those issues. But those written reviews will never convey the real gaming experience, that a gamer playing on weak hardware can do by streaming or recording.

Some free unsolicited advice for inexperienced DIYers that may read this. Do not let the reputation and warm feels big reviewers may have garnered, overly influence your purchasing decisions. Even the ones that buy the stuff themselves, are greatly limited by time constraints. You are better off finding a smaller youtuber that plays the games with the hardware you are interested in, testing games you want to play, or that have similar levels of demand, at the very least.

I am looking forward to contrary opinions being expressed; that is the best way to improve my own POV and maybe even change my mind on a topic. Provided the points made are compelling and not simply, passive aggressive insults, with no agenda other than to express your dislike of either myself, or my opinions. Though you can do that too. Water off a duck's back baby.

Nearly forgot the review

 

[TheELF]

GN tested 2077, the G7400 failed the test. With the GPUs most buying it would use, it'd likely be worse yet.

Not really, with a worse GPU you would use way lower settings which would help the CPU out, it would still be bad but marginally playable at least for people that are used to low end hardware.

 

[Timorous]

Many excellent points made here. But it is a bit pedantic; a trait us forum goers are almost defined by. Everything you noted is almost indisputable.

Now, watch the timestamped part of the video I posted. Those many difficulties with conveying the real gameplay experience, you pointed out, fall by the way side. You can see, and for those of us fortunate enough to still having our hearing, hear the problems. The pop-in, missing NPCs, and audio issues are all obvious. There are other issues like freezing and chop you can't miss in vids either. And people like zWORMz will share their exasperation and frustration when these things happen too. So when the vid is failing to properly convey the experience, the presenter helps fill in the blanks.

And some of the responses have a text and pics v. vids feel to them. No thanks. I like written reviews, and video too. I even like the big reviewers stuff. But I tend to ignore them for low budget stuff, because as I have pointed out repeatedly, I think their factory assembly line style approach to testing, is inadequate to the tasks.

BTW, even more important imo, is when the issues happen. Usually at the worst possible moments. Being so bad as to inhibit your performance. This is stuff those pages and pages of graphs can't properly convey.

There is a post in this thread countering the claim a 12400 is slightly faster than a 5600x and refers to the TPU review. I find the whole thing silly. It's what decades of all of us, including reviewers, programming each other, on what constitutes acceptable data and debate has done to us. I would not be able to tell which of those 2 CPUs I was gaming on. But here we are getting pedantic about it = same old same old. Not looking to offend anyone, only pointing out why I think the hot blonde girl needs to break another wheel.

I made this thread to have a bit of go at what I consider entrench dogma. Big reviews, even of gaming stuff are fine. IF, they are not thrown around in every debate, as the appeal to authority tactic. Which is lamentably how most use them. As though, if all the big sites agree, we can put that baby to bed. Okay, with the more competent hardware, I'll concede it predominately works well enough. But don't try that smack with us low budget folks, that format often fails to tell the tale.

We need someone somewhere to revive the old [H]ardOCP testing methodology of max playable settings using in game scenarios while showing the fps/time line graph to show the sharp drops in performance.

To be honest Digital Foundry do a pretty good job of that in their console comparisons and it works pretty well on video as well.

 

[VirtualLarry]

@DAPUNISHER , how do you feel about this build, vis-a-vis the G7400, for gaming?

Using a used Athlon X4 AM4 CPU for $20. (Yeah, Carizzo lives! LOL.)

At least they're using 2x8GB 3200 RAM (Team Group for $55.)

BTW, that's the same case that I bought to put my G7400 PC into, although I paid $44.99, they said that they paid $25 @ Newegg for it. I must have missed the sale, LOL.

I also screwed up the RGB on mine, I tossed out that white molex "isolation unit" that didn't have any wires connected to it, so I'm apparently grounding / shorting my RGB. Or perhaps that's what killed my first mobo that I put in there.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

@DAPUNISHER , how do you feel about this build, vis-a-vis the G7400, for gaming?

Using a used Athlon X4 AM4 CPU for $20. (Yeah, Carizzo lives! LOL.)

At least they're using 2x8GB 3200 RAM (Team Group for $55.)

BTW, that's the same case that I bought to put my G7400 PC into, although I paid $44.99, they said that they paid $25 @ Newegg for it. I must have missed the sale, LOL.

I also screwed up the RGB on mine, I tossed out that white molex "isolation unit" that didn't have any wires connected to it, so I'm apparently grounding / shorting my RGB. Or perhaps that's what killed my first mobo that I put in there.

Let me start by shooting the messengers. Those guys suck. I have watched some of their content the last couple of years, and they shill and misrepresent. At least they have gotten roasted hard enough for it, that they did not use a ARESGAME PSU for the build. Or is it just that pricing is good on other brands now? They are the only youtubers I have seen that have shilled them. Did I mention they shill? I have seen them shill for HP too. They are a prime example of what's wrong with the techtube scene. They have a following that skews young and inexperienced, and they give them crap advice and shill their own inhouse S.I. systems on their audience too. Their channel keeps growing which is evidence that civilization has run its course, and our species is doomed.

That CPU is worthless, and I will tell you why they used it my friend. The almighty youtube algorithm. If you check their history and the history of all the other subpar channels that are part of their youtube "tech family" you will see they all spam the X dollar amount build titles. Before the dark age of DIY, it was the surest way to get more views and have the algorithm recommend your vids.

And how do I feel about comparing this ultimate turd, built by shills, to a G7400 which is also a turd? You can't pick a turd up by the clean end brudda.

 

[VirtualLarry]

And how do I feel about comparing this ultimate turd, built by shills, to a G7400 which is also a turd? You can't pick a turd up by the clean end brudda.

Thank you for your incomparable wisdom.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Thank you for your incomparable wisdom.

LOL

You know I like low budget stuff, and I honestly don't have anything against the G7400. I would use it for a retrogamer, if I had it. It'd be fine for HTPC duty too.

My issue is how they presented it. As if you can use it as a placeholder to get on LGA1700. The same way the douchey bros there, tried to push the Athlon, I.e. as a way to get on the platform. Content like that is a disservice to the hobby. A n00b following the bad advice, could end up being soured on PC gaming. And that's all the world needs, another console Peasant with anecdotal experience that convinced them, it is indeed better.

Put me on record for saying - It is wrong to recommend 2/4 or even 4/4 CPUs in 2022, for budget builds intended for MP and AAA gaming. Full stop.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Content like that is a disservice to the hobby. A n00b following the bad advice, could end up being soured on PC gaming. And that's all the world needs, another console Peasant with anecdotal experience that convinced them, it is indeed better.

Aye! Go big, or go home. PCMR!

Unfortunately, there are those that want to PC Game on a budget that largely precludes a 12400F and a $140 B660 board.

So, perhaps, on budget alone, they were predestined to be console peasants anyway?

I mean, should we, members of the PCMR (with easily $2000-and-up PCs), be "gatekeepers" of the "full PC Gaming Experience", and keep people away from it, unless they can experience the "full-on Wow"? (Edit: "All current PC Games on the market with at lest 60FPS".)

Because that seems to be sort of a thing too, even if one can actually play Elden Ring or GTA V acceptably on a G7400 and an RTX 3050. Even if FarCry 6 is stuttery.

Isn't that supposed to be one of the draws, one of the perks of PC Gaming, is that there are so many performance knobs to turn, compared to console gaming, that people are allowed to choose hardware that fits their budget, and allows one to still game with it?

Even if the experience that one can practically afford might be sub-optimal in some, popular, games? Have we all become cynical charts-n-graphs, "benchmark sluts"?

I guess I'm saying, is the G7400, really a turd, or is it just a (rotting) potato. (Speaking of how it will age in the next few years of console AAA ports, that were designed for six or more cores, and Intel gives us, at the most affordable end, only two.)

Thankfully, that "potato" can be replaced with a 12400F for not a lot more money.

 

[dullard]

Unfortunately, there are those that want to PC Game on a budget that largely precludes a 12400F and a $140 B660 board.

I don't see why you would skip over the 12100F on a $110 B660 board, or even a $80 H610 board. Sure, you lose memory overclocking and a few ports, but if you are that constrained for cash, the cheaper motherboards still let you game. The 12100F has just enough capability to play most games smoothly. It certainly would be far above the G7400 and the 10100F in the 1% lows (stuttering, missing scenes, etc problems)

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Aye! Go big, or go home. PCMR!

Unfortunately, there are those that want to PC Game on a budget that largely precludes a 12400F and a $140 B660 board.

So, perhaps, on budget alone, they were predestined to be console peasants anyway?

$85 10100f + $90 B560 = FTW. Even the misguided upgrade path/placeholder meme can be serviced. A 10/11700K will be a strong gamer for many years to come. Too bad we don't have a remind me forum bot, I'd use it to revisit that prediction in 5yrs.

 

[dullard]

$85 10100f + $90 B560 = FTW.

I still would go with the $109 12100F + $80 H610 if I had the chance. The $14 difference is the cost of a meal out. But in the gaming areas that you are concerned about the 12100F blows the 10100F out of the water. The the 1% lows here are much better (28% higher) with the 12100F. Meaning that much less likely to see the exact gaming artifacts that you are concerned with.

Intel Core i3-12100F Review: The New Budget Champ

The Core i3-12100F is more impressive than what we were expecting. Despite only packing 4 cores, the performance is excellent, often rivaling previous generation 6-core/12-thread processors....

www.techspot.com

 

[DAPUNISHER]

I still would go with the $109 12100F + $80 H610 if I had the chance. The $14 difference is the cost of a meal out. But in the gaming areas that you are concerned about the 12100F blows the 10100F out of the water. The the 1% lows here are much better (28% higher) with the 12100F. Meaning that much less likely to see the exact gaming artifacts that you are concerned with.

View attachment 59714

You do you bro. But I personally would not use a H610 for a build, it is a horribly crippled chipset. It is another viable route for a low budget builder though, no question. But myself? I could not deal with the the memory limitations or PCIe 3.0 8x on a board in 2022. It' unsavory.

 

[jpiniero]

You do you bro. But I personally would not use a H610 for a build, it is a horribly crippled chipset. It is another viable route for a low budget builder though, no question. But myself? I could not deal with the the memory limitations or PCIe 3.0 8x on a board in 2022. It' unsavory.

You do get the processor lanes at 4.0 on H610. I think the bigger issue is what power levels a board would support.

 

[dullard]

You do you bro. But I personally would not use a H610 for a build, it is a horribly crippled chipset. It is another viable route for a low budget builder though, no question. But myself? I could not deal with the the memory limitations or PCIe 3.0 8x on a board in 2022. It' unsavory.

My last motherboard purchase was a B560, that would be me doing me.

I just don't think the 10100F is enough to keep up for budget gaming going forwards. I also have trouble seeing the budget PC buyer affording a video card that would need more than PCIe 3.0 8x. The B560 only has PCIe 3.0 12x and the difference is extremely minimal in benchmarks. And as Jpineiero said, there is less pressure on the PCIe 3.0 lanes with the 600 series since the chipset to CPU communication uses PCIe 4.0.

Ultimately though, if you want the B660, you'll have to wait a bit longer for cheaper ones to come out (cheapest I've seen was $110). But that wait would be worth it since benchmarks are already showing the 10100F not up to par. At the very least, if you were going to go the Comet Lake route, get the 10105F instead. The 10105F isn't much better, but that 10100F needs every bit of help it can get.

 

[Ranulf]

Isn't that supposed to be one of the draws, on of the perks of PC Gaming, that there are so many performance knobs to turn, compared to console gaming, that people are allowed to choose hardware that fits their budget, and allows one to still game with it?

Yes, and for those in the price bracket you mention there is the option called used parts. Go find the deals that are out there even these days. If you're willing to part with the $300 (street price) for a 3050 gpu, you can save up and buy a better chip in the i3 12100. That or you go find old cpu's and systems that people are selling cheap to get rid of them. GTA5 runs fine on plenty of chips that are 8-10 years old. Elden Ring is just the latest sloppily coded game that requires a 2016 video card or better.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

But that wait would be worth it since benchmarks are already showing the 10100F not up to par.

Not up to par for what? With the budget GPUs it will get paired with, it will be a well balanced system. I have both a 10100f and 12100f combo at the moment. Haven't built them, but it's stuff like this that pushes me over the edge. Stop me before I build again!

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Yes, and for those in the price bracket you mention there is the option called used parts. Go find the deals that are out there even these days. If you're willing to part with the $300 (street price) for a 3050 gpu, you can save up and buy a better chip in the i3 12100. That or you go find old cpu's and systems that people are selling cheap to get rid of them. GTA5 runs fine on plenty of chips that are 8-10 years old. Elden Ring is just the latest sloppily coded game that requires a 2016 video card or better.

Partially agree, with a couple of differing views. My POV: people on such tight budgets, should not be buying gear on the wrong end of the bathtub curve. If it goes belly up, they are stuck right back with spending more money they don't have to begin with. I see a bunch of AM4 and Intel parts still on the left side of the curve, that would make a fine budget gamer. And $300 for a GPU is steep for a low budget build. But the used market can offer the best value on a low budget with the caveat of risking throwing money away.

 

[dullard]

Not up to par for what? With the budget GPUs it will get paired with, it will be a well balanced system. I have both a 10100f and 12100f combo at the moment. Haven't built them, but it's stuff like this that pushes me over the edge. Stop me before I build again!

I don't look into video reviews much, but since you like them, here is an example with the 10100 gaming. Check around the 1:05 to 1:20 mark with visual tearing across the screen. Almost all settings were on low. Even just the tree changing drastically at 1:07 throws me off. Playable? Yes. But that just isn't a good start for something that you want to keep a few years. I can't imagine how bad any future games will be.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

I don't look into video reviews much, but since you like them, here is an example with the 10100 gaming. Check around the 1:05 to 1:20 mark with visual tearing across the screen. Almost all settings were on low. Even just the tree changing drastically at 1:07 throws me off. Playable? Yes. But that just isn't a good start for something that you want to keep a few years. I can't imagine how bad any future games will be.

Quick tip - click share and check the box to have it start at the desired time. Would have been more expedient than typing it out.

And this is where my being a low budget guy can help others. First, 1050ti has been radically overpriced for years now. It is almost 6yrs old, and one of the worst budget card picks you can make. Are you looking at the usage; the CPU is waiting on that GTX turtle edition to catch up.

Now, the real secret to low budget gaming. Super cheap VRR monitors, used are even cheaper. Ever since Nvidia capitulated, it makes sub refresh gaming smooth and enjoyable. There would be no tearing, even with the turtle ti.

 

[VirtualLarry]

And this is where my being a low budget guy can help others. First, 1050ti has been radically overpriced for years now. It is almost 6yrs old, and one of the worst budget card picks you can make. Are you looking at the usage; the CPU is waiting on that GTX turtle edition to catch up.

Now, the real secret to low budget gaming. Super cheap VRR monitors, used are even cheaper. Ever since Nvidia capitulated, it makes sub refresh gaming smooth and enjoyable. There would be no tearing, even with the turtle ti.

Yeah, a GTX 1050ti - regardless of CPU - really isn't going to cut it for AAA titles like an AC:Odyssey. No matter what CPU you're running. It was barely a "1080P card" upon release, certainly not a "1080P60 card" for it's contemporary games, if HardwareUnboxed reviews were anything to go by at the time. (They were often critical of the card, and praised the Polaris cards.)

 

[dullard]

Quick tip - click share and check the box to have it start at the desired time. Would have been more expedient than typing it out.

And this is where my being a low budget guy can help others. First, 1050ti has been radically overpriced for years now. It is almost 6yrs old, and one of the worst budget card picks you can make. Are you looking at the usage; the CPU is waiting on that GTX turtle edition to catch up.

Now, the real secret to low budget gaming. Super cheap VRR monitors, used are even cheaper. Ever since Nvidia capitulated, it makes sub refresh gaming smooth and enjoyable. There would be no tearing, even with the turtle ti.

Note: your quick tip often doesn't work any more. Anandtech blocks it after a few minutes of being posted.

That was just the first of many links. Even faster video cards have the same issue with games like that on the 10100F. It dips into the sub 40 fps range too often.

Here it is with the 1060. Stutters a couple times between 13:50 and 14:00.

Now if you think a budget gamer is going into the 1070 or higher class, then they can afford the few bucks to move up to the i3 class.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Note: your quick tip often doesn't work any more. Anandtech blocks it after a few minutes of being posted.

That was just the first of many links. Even faster video cards have the same issue with games like that on the 10100F. It dips into the sub 40 fps range too often.

Here it is with the 1060. Stutters a couple times between 13:50 and 14:00.

Now if you think a budget gamer is going into the 1070 or higher class, then they can afford the few bucks to move up to the i3 class.

Fun fact: The reason this game stutters like that is that most of the latest AC games are broken, due to draconian DRM. Here is a vid that explains it. I will start it where I think it starts being interesting.

It makes them probably the worst reference for future performance, since it isn't the game's demands that nerf 4 cores, it is the DRM. If I was stuck on an older CPU and already paid for this game (I own it) I would be playing the cracked version.

Also make note that these are the same games that were broken right out of the gate on 12th gen with P&E cores both enabled.

 

[coercitiv]

Also make note that these are the same games that were broken right out of the gate on 12th gen with P&E cores both enabled.

Fun fact: AC Odissey is STILL broken on 12th gen with P&E enabled in Windows 10 (AFAIK Win11 works fine, didn't bother to check though), and it's not just stutter but downright collapse of framerate, down to a halt in same cases. Also, in the abilities screen, the video previews for abilities are dropping lots of frames.

Initially I thought it was some DRM/driver issue as well, especially after checking online to see whether Denuvo compatibility with 12th gen had been solved. In the end I disabled E cores and voilà: rubber banding and massive frame drops gone, ability previews are smooth as butter. Enabling E cores brought the issue back immediately.

 

[escrow4]

You shouldn't be buying a Celeron or pentium in 2022. Landfill tech. Doesn't matter if its an office or gaming box. No such thing as a budget gamer now anyway.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Threw the 10100f on the test bench with win11 pro- 2x8GB cl15 3000MHz and a MSI Gaming X 1650 Super. Then ran the Odyssey bench on 1080p low. 1440p 75Hz freesync monitor.

Also ran it on win11 pro - Ryzen 5800x - 32GB cl18 3600MHz - Asus dual 3060ti 1080p low and ultra high settings. 60Hz 1080p TV.

Things of note: The screen tearing in that yt vid, during the 180 degree turn at the end of the bench, is all GPU. It does not happen on the 3060ti at low, but there is a little at max settings. It also happens with the 1650 super.

The bench seems to disregard adaptive sync and vsync despite them being turned on. Verified they were working with 3DMark, which will warn you about it effecting your scores.

Screenshots of the runs -

 

[SteveGrabowski]

We need someone somewhere to revive the old [H]ardOCP testing methodology of max playable settings using in game scenarios while showing the fps/time line graph to show the sharp drops in performance.

To be honest Digital Foundry do a pretty good job of that in their console comparisons and it works pretty well on video as well.

Digital Foundry isn't trustworthy imo. A couple of months ago they did a review calling Horizon Forbidden West a PS5 Graphics Masterclass despite the 60 fps mode having an upscale that made the original Battlefield V DLSS 1.0 look amazing. Graphics had aliasing like we haven't seen since the PS3/360 gen before TAA became widely used. Guess I should have expected that after they sold their souls and did that video about how much they loved Turing and its rt though. Digital Foundry is an industry shill, nowhere near as reputable as Gamers Nexus.