i game at 1080p will i see a big jump or can i just ride out the year and wait until 2015? edit:gtx760
will i see a big jump from i-3 3220 to an i-5 paired with gyx760
- Thread starter ultralo
- Start date
Depends on what games you run. Some can be up to 40-50% faster, others (eg, Bioshock Infinite) barely 1%. What motherboard do you have now? If you've already got a decent SKT 1155 motherboard, you could just stick an i5 Ivy Bridge in now without needing to change boards.
man i forgot what kind it is....but i will check it out....40-50% thats dam good...
Rakehellion
Lifer
- Jan 15, 2013
- 12,181
- 35
- 91
Well it depends on the game. That's really a peak in 1 or 2 cherry picked games vs a Haswell i5, eg, the heaviest BF3/BF4 multi-player maps. The vast majority of games are more like 10-20% difference overall. Some games there's hardly anything between them. Most older games also hardly any difference. Example i3-3220 vs i5 for Thief is 20%:-
http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/787/bench/CPU_01.png
That's generally a "good" game to show the difference. Others are barely 5%. Example Bioshock Infinite:-
http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/655/bench/CPU_03.png
Borderlands 2 and Tomb Raider are about 15% vs i5 at 1080p:-
http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/fx-8350-8320-6300-4300/borderlands2.png
http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/645/bench/CPU_03.png
But Far Cry 2 & 3 were nearer 20-30% at 1080p:-
http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/fx-8350-8320-6300-4300/farcry2.png
http://www.techspot.com/review/615-far-cry-3-performance/page6.html
etc, etc. This is typical of most games - realistically you're basically looking at 10-25% average over a large spread of games. Some will be higher, many others lower. Don't take "40-50%" as a universal solid upgrade expectation. You're lucky to get that only in perfectly threaded apps & games, video encoding, etc. An i3 is typically 2/3rds of the speed of an i5 at same clock for same generation for perfectly-threaded apps. For most games, the gap is much smaller due to hardly any games maxing out all 4 cores of i5 at once, and not all games being equally threadable.
Last edited:
hmmmmm thanks after looking over this i really dont see a need until more games take advange of more cores thanks .....I think i will hold on until sometime next year....
frozentundra123456
Lifer
- Aug 11, 2008
- 10,451
- 642
- 126
As others said it depends on the game. There are a couple of games coming out, Watchdogs and the new Mordor game that have very high CPU requirements (quad core as the minimum) so it will be interesting to see how i3s perform in those games.
I'm not so sure if this is relevant, Watchdogs requires a Q6600, and Mordor Q8200, the 3220 should be able to outperform these CPUs for MT,
but let's wait and see...
and sure, i5 is a much nicer CPU to use with the gtx760.
frozentundra123456
Lifer
- Aug 11, 2008
- 10,451
- 642
- 126
Well, that is the minimum requirement. Recommended is a hyperthreaded modern quad core, i.e. 3770k. These requirements do seem insane to me, as well as the 8gb ram for recommended specs. I cant imagine the game wont run well on an i5 for sure and maybe i3, but like we both said, time will tell.
Considering the direction games are going in, hold off and save for an i7. Some people are going to disagree with me, but it seems obvious that we're moving toward 6-8 threads being needed for high-end gaming.
Yuriman
Diamond Member
- Jun 25, 2004
- 5,530
- 141
- 106
It doesn't make a ton of sense to me to try and future-proof. Buy what you need when you need it. People were saying the same in 2011, and we're really not all that much closer. If anything, Mantle and DX12 might send things in the other direction.
Last edited:
I don't buy into it. Even next gen console games are generally IPC biased, Titan fall being a good indication of such. There are 1-2 outliers per year, but IPC still matters. If it changes, it changes, and we'll see then. But the statement that it's "obvious"....it really isn't obvious. The past few major AAA titles for the PC are all favoring IPC - and while more threads can make a difference, it can't hide the effect of poor IPC either. Elder Scrolls Online, Titan Fall, D3: ROS, Dark Souls II (very undemanding game, but the point still stands). These are the latest PC AAA titles. And they ALL favor IPC over high thread counts. It isn't obvious by any stretch of the imagination, not yet anyway. The only exception that comes to mind is BF4. That's like, 1 game per 8 months that is an outlier. With everything else favoring IPC. So with that i'd say, it's hardly obvious that more cores/threads will matter in the long run. Ideally, that would be the case. But I just don't see that we're there just quite yet.
Anyway, is the i5 better? Yes, because you can overclock the K i5's and they have higher clockspeeds and are true quad cores. But, with DC coming out soon it may be wise to wait a bit and see how DC Does. The way I see it is, the i5 K SKUs are the best bang for the buck - such as the 4670k. The 4770k is better, but the 4670k is better bang for the buck. If DC offers an i5 SKU that is slightly better than 4670k for overclocking, it may be worth waiting for that. Even though IPC matters, you'll get better overall performance due to overclocking and higher clockspeeds. And those games which can take advantage of true quad cores will of course benefit.
Anyway, is the i5 better? Yes, because you can overclock the K i5's and they have higher clockspeeds and are true quad cores. But, with DC coming out soon it may be wise to wait a bit and see how DC Does. The way I see it is, the i5 K SKUs are the best bang for the buck - such as the 4670k. The 4770k is better, but the 4670k is better bang for the buck. If DC offers an i5 SKU that is slightly better than 4670k for overclocking, it may be worth waiting for that. Even though IPC matters, you'll get better overall performance due to overclocking and higher clockspeeds. And those games which can take advantage of true quad cores will of course benefit.
Last edited:
Deders
Platinum Member
- Oct 14, 2012
- 2,401
- 1
- 91
It will mostly depend on whether the game fully utilises 4 cores or not. A lot of games will only use 50% of the CPU (2 full cores) with maybe a little extra here and there that can be handled by the extra threads.
Modern games like Crysis 3 will get a significant boost with 4 full cores.
Modern games like Crysis 3 will get a significant boost with 4 full cores.
One thing I will say is that there are varying levels of threadedness and core count support among games. With the next gen consoles not being powerful at all and rather weak, that does affect things. There are some games that outright favor IPC with core count being damned, some favor dual, some favoring quad, but beyond quad the benefits literally drop off a cliff overall. There are a few exceptions here and there such as BF4 and Crysis 3, but in the past couple of years there have really only been a handful of titles - maybe 2-3 per year that truly benefited past 4C/8T.
I think quad is the best bang for the buck area since the i5's are around 200 bucks. I like the i7's of course but for someone budget minded the i5 would just be better overall given the PC gaming and software situation. And there are enough games which are quad biased or dual biased to make the i5 worth it, since it's not too much more expensive than i3s. Whether it's worth upgrading from an i3? It's hard to say. I mean your i3 should perform great, and doing a same generation (Haswell > Haswell) i3 to i5 upgrade may not be beneficial. In any case i'd say wait till the 2nd of June and see how DC does if you do decide to upgrade.
I assume you're selling your i3? If so then it would make sense to upgrade I suppose. If you don't lose much of your initial investment.
I think quad is the best bang for the buck area since the i5's are around 200 bucks. I like the i7's of course but for someone budget minded the i5 would just be better overall given the PC gaming and software situation. And there are enough games which are quad biased or dual biased to make the i5 worth it, since it's not too much more expensive than i3s. Whether it's worth upgrading from an i3? It's hard to say. I mean your i3 should perform great, and doing a same generation (Haswell > Haswell) i3 to i5 upgrade may not be beneficial. In any case i'd say wait till the 2nd of June and see how DC does if you do decide to upgrade.
I assume you're selling your i3? If so then it would make sense to upgrade I suppose. If you don't lose much of your initial investment.
Yuriman
Diamond Member
- Jun 25, 2004
- 5,530
- 141
- 106
On a semi-related note, games that favor IPC running better on an FX-6300 than on a 4300 probably perform better because when you go over 2 threads on a 4300, you're splitting resources, and the first and second thread perform worse. An FX-6300 can run up to 3 threads without any performance sacrifices. I'm willing to bet that if AMDs chips didn't have resource sharing, we'd see much less benefit moving to a 6300/8320. The dies would be bigger too, though, and thus more expensive...
Am I understanding how that works correctly?
Am I understanding how that works correctly?
Having had both a i3 2100 and a i5 2500, I could certainly say the i5 would do wonders. Hell I noticed a difference when I was rocking a 6790 with the i3 lol.
Buddy of mine has a i3 3220 and a gtx650 and plays WOT like me and I could tell you I saw a 20fps difference easily when swapping in the i5.Of course this is running standard 720p settings but you wouldn't think such a difference could have been seen with such a low end gpu.
Buddy of mine has a i3 3220 and a gtx650 and plays WOT like me and I could tell you I saw a 20fps difference easily when swapping in the i5.Of course this is running standard 720p settings but you wouldn't think such a difference could have been seen with such a low end gpu.
Mantle favors more threads, and I assume that DX12 will do the same. Most AAA games as of late are recommending i7s and the FX 8350. The new consoles have such low single threaded performance that compensating with multi threading is necessary, and that will reflect in ports. If the OP isn't going to buy until next year, there's a good chance that 8 threads will no longer be "future-proofing".
nah if i upgrade i will build my son pc i have a spare gtx660sc in the closet.....
toyota
Lifer
- Apr 15, 2001
- 12,957
- 1
- 0
frozentundra123456
Lifer
- Aug 11, 2008
- 10,451
- 642
- 126
Well, back to the original question, it comes down to philosophy I guess. One viewpoint says if you are satisfied with what you have, just keep it until a game comes out that you want to play that the system will not handle.
OTOH, with the slow to minimal progress in cpu performance, it seems sort of pointless to wait with the assumption that there will be something in a year or two that will be a major improvement from a current i5 or i7. If one is planning to upgrade either now or in a year or so, might as well just upgrade now and enjoy the performance without waiting.
Which is better? I really cant say. But personally, if I were planning to upgrade eventually for sure, I think I would just do it now instead of waiting in the hope that some major improvement in cpu performance shows up in a year or two. I have some hope for skylake, but otherwise, I see the major improvements in cpus coming in lower power usage and better igpu performance, neither of which will be of much benefit for a gaming rig.
OTOH, with the slow to minimal progress in cpu performance, it seems sort of pointless to wait with the assumption that there will be something in a year or two that will be a major improvement from a current i5 or i7. If one is planning to upgrade either now or in a year or so, might as well just upgrade now and enjoy the performance without waiting.
Which is better? I really cant say. But personally, if I were planning to upgrade eventually for sure, I think I would just do it now instead of waiting in the hope that some major improvement in cpu performance shows up in a year or two. I have some hope for skylake, but otherwise, I see the major improvements in cpus coming in lower power usage and better igpu performance, neither of which will be of much benefit for a gaming rig.
here it says q6600 and it was updated 10 days ago
http://www.ign.com/wikis/watch-dogs/PC_System_Requirements
also it says phenom 9750 which is even slower...
even if it was q8400, it hardly changes anything (still only 2.6GHz and half the l2 compared to the q6600)....
toyota
Lifer
- Apr 15, 2001
- 12,957
- 1
- 0
those are just partially made up specs as again the store page has the official requirements. http://store.steampowered.com/app/243470/
and I was just saying his current cpu is hardly any better than the minimum.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter