[Tom's Hardware] Best entry level Gaming CPU for the money (July 2014)

[cbn]

Tom's Best Gaming CPU for the money ( July 2014 ) up:

(Pentium 3258 displaces Athlon x4 750K)

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106.html

Entry-Level Gaming

We've long suspected that a low-priced, multiplier-unlocked, Haswell-based processor could rock the enthuisiast world, and we were right. Intel's Pentium G3258 enables incredible performance and overclocking headroom, despite its $75 price point. This is a dual-core CPU without Hyper-Threading technology, but it still challenges the quickest Core i3s once you tune it up.

Entry-Level AMD Alternative

At $80, the Athlon X4 750K used to be the lowest-priced processor with an unlocked multiplier ratio. Intel recently usurped its position as our entry-level gaming recommendation using the typically-quicker Pentium G3258. In the short term, though, we'll keep the Athlon on our honorable mention list, at least until lower-priced overclocking-friendly LGA 1150 motherboards show up.

Although the Pentium is a dual-core architecture lacking Hyper-Threading, Haswell's excellent efficiency earns the Pentium a low-budget gaming CPU recommendation as a result of Chris' findings. My only hesitation comes from the fact that Intel's most affordable platform controller hubs aren't designed to enable overclocking, forcing you into a more expensive Z87 or Z97 Express-based board. With that said, several manufacturers have started slipping out BIOS updates for their B85/H81/H87/H97 offerings with multiplier tuning tweaks. Some of those products sell for under $60. They're not supposed to be doing that, but we'll see how the saga plays out.

What does this mean for AMD's Athlon X4 750K, one of the CPUs that undoubtedly compelling Intel to capitulate and introduce an unlocked budget processor of its own? We'll give it the respect it deserves with an honorable mention, attributable to the supporting platforms selling around $55 that are designed for overclocking. Should Intel's board partners introduce low-cost LGA 1150-based solutions that don't require leaked firmware, the unlocked Athlon's days will be numbered, though.

Their major concern (and rightfully so) appears to be the cost of the motherboard required to OC Pentium 3258. However, It is encouraging to see mention that several manufacturers started shipping tuning tweaks on the H and B series motherboards.

So I wonder who besides ASUS is planning to offer non-Z overclocking on an inexpensive board? (I know that Asrock has functional Non-Z overclocking currently working on this premium priced B85 board--> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813157476) .......but will this Non-Z overclocking also begin to extend to some or all of their H81 offerings as well?)

 

[richierich1212]

You should just have posted this in that other thread

 

[Vesku]

MSI was touting non-Z overclocking as well:

"Did you know that ‪#‎MSI‬ H97, H87 and B85 motherboards could also OC the new Devils Canyon Intel CPU’s? Overclocking is no longer limited to Z97!"

https://www.facebook.com/MSINBCanada/posts/800939179938666

 

[Rakehellion]

No AMD to be found.

 

[Homeles]

No AMD to be found.

The FX 6300 is still hanging in there.

 

[monstercameron]

how it is definitive if in order to take of its unlocked nature one must use a relatively expensive mobo [or maybe find one with a non-intel sanctioned uefi]. Still sounds like the athlon has it.

on another note it's pentium vs athlon...

 

[cbn]

You should just have posted this in that other thread

Well it does go beyond the motherboard issue.

It marks the first time I have seen a dual core (without hyperthreading) actually displace an Overclockable AMD quad core for a gaming processor recommendation.

But how far could this go?

Could we potentially see unlocked Celeron dual cores considered as viable gaming processors at some point in the future?

(If so, make mine Celeron BGA GT1 and please release it before the Celeron 20th Anniversary which occurs in 2018)

 

[cbn]

MSI was touting non-Z overclocking as well:

"Did you know that ‪#‎MSI‬ H97, H87 and B85 motherboards could also OC the new Devils Canyon Intel CPU’s? Overclocking is no longer limited to Z97!"

https://www.facebook.com/MSINBCanada/posts/800939179938666

Hopefully MSI includes H81 for the Pentium 3258.

(Apparently they have included H87, H97 and B95 for overclocking Devil's Canyon because some of those boards do in fact come with extra VRM phases and heatsinks)

Example of an MSI H87 with beefed up power delivery:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813130697

....but the Pentium 3258 shouldn't need that kind of power delivery, so lets hope MSI includes H81 Non-Z overclock in the very near future.

 

[erunion]

No AMD to be found.

No VIA either

 

[Sable]

how it is definitive if in order to take of its unlocked nature one must use a relatively expensive mobo [or maybe find one with a non-intel sanctioned uefi]. Still sounds like the athlon has it.

on another note it's pentium vs athlon...

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/asus-overclocking-h87-h97-b85,27076.html

Asus has announced that it is releasing new UEFI BIOSes for its H87, H97, B85, and H81 series motherboard that enable support for overclocking. While the company doesn’t guarantee that all of the processors will be overclockable in combination with these motherboards, Asus did indicate that you should be able to overclock the K series Haswell and Haswell Refresh processors, along with the new Pentium Anniversary Edition CPU.

 

[USER8000]

Well it does go beyond the motherboard issue.

It marks the first time I have seen a dual core (without hyperthreading) actually displace an Overclockable AMD quad core for a gaming processor recommendation.

But how far could this go?

Could we potentially see unlocked Celeron dual cores considered as viable gaming processors at some point in the future?

(If so, make mine Celeron BGA GT1 and please release it before the Celeron 20th Anniversary which occurs in 2018)

Well the Toms Hardware review does ignore the stuttering problems they had with the Pentium dual core in Thief ,or even the uneven frametimes compared to say a Core i3 in many of the games they tested. At this point,it really makes more sense to get a Core i3 or even an FX6300,or even save up some more and get a lowish end Core i5. The next two years are going to see more and more Thief and Watch Dogs like scenarios. It would not surprise me if GTAV is more of the same and I see a lot of interest in that game. Both DX12 and Mantle will push improved multi-threading,so unless you really only play a sub-set of certain games,it makes more sense to spend more. A lot of very popular lightly threaded games run perfectly well on slower CPUs,ie,LoL and DOTA for example,since the devs want the maximum amount of players,meaning they are not about to target the market served by 4GHZ+ Intel CPUs exclusively.

I agree with what Guru3D said about the Pentium:

That said, even overclocked you should not be looking at this processor for a gaming rig. Overclocked it will get you very decent game performance, but two cores is not something we recommend for mainstream and better gaming, especially with minimum framerates in mid.

This is only a stop-gap CPU(a bit like the X4 750K),so ultimately unless you intend to ditch the G3258 in a year or so,I don't really see the point of it.

Sounds more like a PR move to me - if Intel really cared we would have had a unlocked Core i3. They don't want to do that since less people would buy a Core i5,just like with the Core i3 530.

 

[cbn]

Well the Toms Hardware review does ignore the stuttering problems they had with the Pentium dual core in Thief ,or even the uneven frametimes compared to say a Core i3 in many of the games they tested. At this point,it really makes more sense to get a Core i3 or even an FX6300,or even save up some more and get a lowish end Core i5. The next two years are going to see more and more Thief and Watch Dogs like scenarios. It would not surprise me if GTAV is more of the same and I see a lot of interest in that game. Both DX12 and Mantle will push improved multi-threading,so unless you really only play a sub-set of certain games,it makes more sense to spend more. A lot of very popular lightly threaded games run perfectly well on slower CPUs,ie,LoL and DOTA for example,since the devs want the maximum amount of players,meaning they are not about to target the market served by 4GHZ+ Intel CPUs exclusively.

Regarding the stuttering problems I have to wonder how much of this is due to using very high end graphics settings with a large GPU?

For example, I currently I have a Celeron G1620 and despite what most people say I found it very playable for 64 player Battlefield 3 even on tight maps like Metro. (But then again I am using low resolution and low detail settings....so it not like the draw calls (as I understand it) are bogging down my CPU and slowing things down.)

I agree with what Guru3D said about the Pentium:

That said, even overclocked you should not be looking at this processor for a gaming rig. Overclocked it will get you very decent game performance, but two cores is not something we recommend for mainstream and better gaming, especially with minimum framerates in mid.

This is only a stop-gap CPU(a bit like the X4 750K),so ultimately unless you intend to ditch the G3258 in a year or so,I don't really see the point of it.

Sounds more like a PR move to me - if Intel really cared we would have had a unlocked Core i3. They don't want to do that since less people would buy a Core i5,just like with the Core i3 530

Well, they did write "Overclocked it will get you very decent game performance" and that what is I would expect. The thing is as long as the price is good enough, it doesn't have to be the ultimate...it just has to be justifiable for the money spent.

P.S. Regarding the Core i3, I still think that is an expensive CPU (although in unlocked and overclocked form it would be quite powerful indeed). However, based, on my real world experience with low resolution and detail settings so far I think most people with a modest GPU would probably be better served with an unlocked Celeron, rather than the i3, and saving some money in the process.

 

[USER8000]

Regarding the stuttering problems I have to wonder how much of this is due to using very high end graphics settings with a large GPU?

For example, I currently I have a Celeron G1620 and despite what most people say I found it very playable for 64 player Battlefield 3 even on tight maps like Metro. (But then again I am using low resolution and low detail settings....so it not like the draw calls (as I understand it) are bogging down my CPU and slowing things down.)

Well one of our forum members had the same issue with a much slower HD7950 with one of the other Haswell Pentiums(a 3.2GHZ one).

Also,at least in Europe cards like the GTX660 and R9 270 and R9 270X are hitting quite low price points(well at least in the UK),and they are not massively slower IMHO.

Well, they did write "Overclocked it will get you very decent game performance" and that what is I would expect. The thing is as long as the price is good enough, it doesn't have to be the ultimate...it just has to be justifiable for the money spent.

I also hope that people realise there are alternatives for not much more,and don't underplay the obvious disadvantages of the CPU. We are all excited that Intel is making overclocking on a non-Core i5 and Core i7 accessible CPUs again,but I just hope that does not get in the way.

The thing is the next 18 months are going to start seeing some big changes IMHO. Look at Planetside2 - it really only hogged two threads at the start,and SOE decided to make a PS4 version,and now it pushes 4 threads even on a Core i5.

 

[cbn]

Well one of our forum members had the same issue with a much slower HD7950 with one of the other Haswell Pentiums(a 3.2GHZ one).

Also,at least in Europe cards like the GTX660 and R9 270 and R9 270X are hitting quite low price points(well at least in the UK),and they are not massively slower IMHO.

See, to me, that HD7950 is still a big GPU (although obviously not as big as the Titan used in the Tom's testing.)

For unlocked and overclocked Pentium or Celeron I would be thinking of much smaller GPUs than what you are mentioning....along with the corresponding lower resolution/detail settings.

 

[USER8000]

See, to me, that HD7950 is still a big GPU (although obviously not as big as the Titan used in the Tom's testing.)

For unlocked and overclocked Pentium or Celeron I would be thinking of much smaller GPUs than what you are mentioning....along with the corresponding lower resolution/detail settings.

The thing is the GTX660,R9 270 and R9 270X are around £100 to £120 here,and a Sapphire R7 265(with a decent cooler and can be overclocked a decent amount I suspect) can be had for as low as £80. The Pentium is around the £50 to £55 mark at many retailers.

The performance difference is not massive,and even the R7 275 is probably at least GTX570 level and probably GTX580 level when overclocked.

Within the next 6 to 9 months,there will be newer AMD and Nvidia efforts which will be faster,so this is the problem.

If you restrict yourself to much cheaper GPUs you might have a point,but I have see people being pushed from Core i3s and their AMD equivalents(using such cards I mentioned) onto the Pentium CPU since it can be "overclocked" and so on.

 

[justin4pack]

Well this is a no brainer. In for 1. err 2 that is. http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboD...=Combo.1730239

 

[Ricochet]

justin4pack, thanks for the post. That is a pretty sweet deal for cheapo setup.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Well this is a no brainer. In for 1. err 2 that is. http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboD...=Combo.1730239

That is a nice price, but can you overclock on that board? If not it kind of defeats the purpose.

 

[cbn]

That is a nice price, but can you overclock on that board? If not it kind of defeats the purpose.

MSI was touting non-Z overclocking as well:

"Did you know that ‪#‎MSI‬ H97, H87 and B85 motherboards could also OC the new Devils Canyon Intel CPU’s? Overclocking is no longer limited to Z97!"

https://www.facebook.com/MSINBCanada/posts/800939179938666

If anyone is successfully able to overclock that MSI B85 board please post in this thread---> http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2389948

 

[richierich1212]

I'll let you guys know as soon as I get it later this week. I'm guessing Wednesday. By then I'm not so sure it will still be on sale though.

 

[cbn]

Here is a thread I made over in the motherboard forum for the Pentium 3258 Non-Z overclockers:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2389948

(Hopefully in another few months we will have a good database of boards.)

 

[cbn]

For anyone wondering how OC'd Pentium 3258 stacks up against 3MB Haswell Core i3 (rather than the 4MB Core i3 used in the Tom's testing) here are some results showing better performance:

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2014/06/24/intel-pentium-g3258-review/5

.....and these results from this review: https://translate.google.com/transl...sl=auto&tl=en&u=http://pclab.pl/art57691.html

NOTE: In all fairness though there were some gaming benchmarks from the PC lab review where the 3MB Core i3 did beat the OC Pentium 3258 (I did not post those however)

 

[USER8000]

For anyone wondering how OC'd Pentium 3258 stacks up against 3MB Haswell Core i3 (rather than the 4MB Core i3 used in the Tom's testing) here are some results showing better performance:

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2014/06/24/intel-pentium-g3258-review/5

.....and these results from this review: https://translate.google.com/transl...sl=auto&tl=en&u=http://pclab.pl/art57691.html

NOTE: In all fairness though there were some gaming benchmarks from the PC lab review where the 3MB Core i3 did beat the OC Pentium 3258 (I did not post those however)

No frame latencies or no minimums.

However,it appears things like stuttering and smooth gamplay are only important for any other AMD or Intel CPU bar the Pentium dual core. People are getting way too excited over this CPU IMHO.

Plus the PCLab.pl BF4 MP benchmarks AFAIK(could be wrong) are smaller domination maps,not the larger conquest ones,and you ignore the part of Crysis3 which does badly on the Pentium dual core.

On top of this,the Witcher 3 is coming out early next year and it has the improved Red Engine 3 and will ONLY be on PC and next gen consoles,probably meaning the engine is going to thread better than that from the Witcher 2 which came out THREE years ago.

Civilization: Beyond Earth is coming out this year with a new engine which supports Mantle which means it supports multi-threading better than the 4 year old Civilization 5.

Even then in both The Witcher 2 and Civilization V,where is the big victory for the Pentium dual core??

GTA4 is over 6 years old and uses an older version of the RAGE engine. GTAV is using the latest version of the RAGE engine,which Max Payne 3 uses.

So that means GTAV is going to not do that well with the Pentium dual core.

CS:GO is Source based and still does better on the Core i3.

Watch Dogs like GTAV is open world and does badly.

AC4 the G3258 cannot beat the Core i3.

Thats now even considering the minimums let alone the frametime distribution(stuttering).

Looking at those results,ARMAIII,FSX and maybe SC2 are the kind of games this will do fine with.

However,outside ARMAIII and Rome:Total War,all the other games are ancient and the sequels are sporting new updated engines.

DX12,Mantle and the next generation consoles are starting to change things already especially with newer releases. Unless you want to have it as a stop gap CPU(replaced by a Core i5 or Core i7 in the next 6 to 18 months),or play only oldish games,then the Core i3 still comes out as a better balanced CPU.

PS:
Deleted an image in the quote due to image limit being reach in my reply.

 

[cbn]

you ignore the part of Crysis3 which does badly on the Pentium dual core.

The 4700 Mhz Pentium 3258 is a little slower than the i3-4150, but not much:

 

[USER8000]

Also those Bit-tech Skyrim results are quite suspect.

The averages for their Pentium at 3.2GHZ are massively higher than for a 3.4GHZ Core i3.

The 3.2GHZ G3258 is getting 103FPS and the 3.4GHZ Core i3 is getting 87FPS??

The 4700 Mhz Pentium 3258 is a little slower than the i3-4150, but not much:

Ah,OK misread that one,but still no minimums or frametimes.

Its a shame The Tech Report has not tested Crysis3 with the new Intel dual cores,but look at Crysis2.

They did test Crysis2,and with the older SB Pentium dual cores had the worse frame time latencies of all the CPUs they tested,including frankly old AMD chips and the Core i3s. Yet in pure FPS measurement was close to the Phenom II X4s.