Your choices for best gamer CPUs in the $75, $100 and $125 categories

[cbn]

Here are my picks based on commonly found street prices (not sale prices). I will, however, make comment on the sale prices.

$75 and under:

Pentium G3258. Price: $69.99, but can be found as low as $54.99 on sale. Great single thread performance and overclocking on the Intel stock cooler (which is copper bottom and rated 95 watts).

$100 and under:

FX-6300. Price: $99.99, but can be found for as low as $79.99 on sale. Great multi-thread performance for the dollar.

$125 and under (two selections):

FX-8300. Price: $124.99 with bundled cooler at Tiger Direct. $114.99 without bundled cooler, but can be found for as low as $99.99 when on sale (without cooler).

Core i3-4150: $119.99, but can be found for as low as $99.99 when on sale.

P.S. Regarding the situation with FM2+, I am still studying that but I am having a hard time (at the moment) justifying those processors. Granted, AM3+ is an old platform but with the right chipset I have a hard time believing the feature set isn't modern enough for a value gamer.

 

[Yuriman]

I find myself largely in agreement. It's hard to find a 750k in stock and the 860K is priced about the same as an FX6300, or just $10 less than a Haswell i3 ($99 on Amazon right now).

 

[cbn]

I find myself largely in agreement. It's hard to find a 750k in stock and the 860K is priced about the same as an FX6300, or just $10 less than a Haswell i3 ($99 on Amazon right now).

Yes, for FM2+ I am thinking specifically about processors like the Athlon x4 750K, 760K and 860K (ie, cpus that would be used with video cards).

 

[boozzer]

my question is do the price of amd mobos factor into your choices? I am not sure if amd mobos still cost more.

 

[Ken g6]

The Athlon 860k is currently on sale at NCIX for $70. It's mostly replaced the G3258 in [thread=2389797]my low-end builds[/thread]. If you want to go really cheap, though, you can do a 3258 with the stock CPU cooler and an H81 mobo. I guess Intel hasn't complained, so that's likely to continue to work?

 

[Yuriman]

From Newegg:

ASRock has a $43 FM2+ board, a $46 1150 board, and a $50 AM3+ board.

Gigabyte has a $40 FM2+ board (after $10 rebate), a $42 1150 board, and a $37 AM3+ board (after $10 rebate). There is also a $54 1150 board with $25 off a G3258 right now, making it effectively $29.

Looks like prices are pretty similar.

 

[crashtech]

The caveat with the G3258 is that not all of them overclock well.

 

[cbn]

The Athlon 860k is currently on sale at NCIX for $70. It's mostly replaced the G3258 in [thread=2389797]my low-end builds[/thread]. If you want to go really cheap, though, you can do a 3258 with the stock CPU cooler and an H81 mobo. I guess Intel hasn't complained, so that's likely to continue to work?

I've been noticing about $10 difference between FX-6300 and Athlon x4 860K at both the regular price level ($99.99 for FX 6300 and $89.99 for Athlon x4 860K) and the sale price level ($79.99 for FX-6300 and $69.99 for Athlon x4 860K).

But is going for the Athlon x4 860K really worth saving the $10 (on average)?

Based on these overclocked results:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=36998949&postcount=10
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=36998951&postcount=11

(Athlon x4 860K just barely wins 1 game out of 15)

And these stock clocked results:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=37003724&postcount=18
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=37003725&postcount=19

(Athlon x4 860K only wins 3 games out of 15 and by a margin of only a few percent.)

I am thinking definitely no.

P.S. When the FX-6300 beats the Athlon x4 860K in those charts, the margin is often much bigger than a few percent. In some cases it is 10's of percent (with the BF 4 MP results being 55% or greater FPS for FX-6300 over Athlon x4 860K)

 

[crashtech]

It would be nice to see what a hexcore Steamroller could do.

 

[janeuner]

Unless they were somehow the same price, I would take a G3258 over a i3 4150 for every application.

The $125 pick should probably be a FX-6300 and a Hyper 212 cooler for overclocking.

 

[Yuriman]

Unless they were somehow the same price, I would take a G3258 over a i3 4150 for every application.

The $125 pick should probably be a FX-6300 and a Hyper 212 cooler for overclocking.

?? The 3258 is cheaper?

 

[crashtech]

The latest iteration of Hyperthreading can make a big difference. If HT wasn't effective, the i7 wouldn't be able to dominate the i5 the way it does. Also, I'll mention again that not all G3258's overclock well.

 

[janeuner]

Confirming that ~10% more performance for ~100% more dollars is a big difference. That is $50 you could spend on more ram, an SSD, or a couple cases of beer, any of which will make you happier than hyperthreading on a dual-core processor.

 

[crashtech]

Since you want to take other parts into consideration and not consider the CPU in a vacuum, then calculating the entire system performance vs the entire system cost puts the G3258 into an even worse light. Not to mention that not all of them overclock well.

Also, your figures exaggerate.

 

[cbn]

Since you want to take other parts into consideration and not consider the CPU in a vacuum, then calculating the entire system performance vs the entire system cost puts the G3258 into an even worse light.

I'm not sure what to think of the Core i3 to be honest. I have seen several on sale for $69 (via the Fry's "secret promo code" emails I get) and I have yet to be tempted to buy one to replace my G3258.

Still, some reviews show it better (sometimes much better) than the G3258 so I chose to include it in the $125 category.

With that mentioned, I do think you make a good point about not all G3258s overclocking well. Mine has has been a good one capable of 4.5 Ghz on the stock cooler so I haven't seen the need yet for an upgrade in the games that I am playing.

P.S. Right now I am planning a triple 1280 x 1024 Eyefinity, this will most likely necessitate a video card upgrade from the R7 250X I am using for single 1080p (usually with low detail settings on advanced games). Therefore, it will be interesting to see how the OC G3258 holds up when trying to feed something like a R9 270 or 270X (hopefully things remain stutter free).

 

[Yuriman]

Hyperthreading is generally worth around 30%, so a stock i3 4150 should have similar total throughput to a 4.5-4.6ghz Pentium with less power use and heat (which is admittedly still low). In some cases I've seen hyperthreading worth less (or zero, in 2 threaded or less programs), and in others, on Haswell, you might see as much as 45%. i3's also have AVX.

 

[Kalessian]

I agree the difference in price and performance between 860k and fx-6300 makes the choice a tough one slightly favoring the 6300.

I think the bigger decision is AM3+ vs FM2+. I guess support for pcie3 is the big thing here?

Otherwise the 860k may consume 30W less power under load, but I haven't seen consumption numbers for an OC'ed 860k so I don't know well steamroller scales with voltage+clocks.

 

[cbn]

Otherwise the 860k may consume 30W less power under load, but I haven't seen consumption numbers for an OC'ed 860k so I don't know well steamroller scales with voltage+clocks.

Regarding those load numbers, we do have to take into account the FX-6300 having two more cores.

Maybe a better comparison would be an overclocked Athlon x 4 860K vs. stock clocked FX-6300? What set-up has a better absolute performance? better performance per watt?

My guess is that the OC Athlon x4 860K would improve in single thread (improving its very small lead over FX-6300), but most likely still lose in multi-thread and multi-thread performance per watt.

In fact, comparing Athlon x4 860K at 4.5 Ghz (43.6 FPS in BF4 MP):

to FX-6300 at 3.5 GHz (59.4 FPS in BF4 MP):

We can see the stock clocked FX-6300 still beating the OC Athlon x4 860K by 36%.

 

[cbn]

Comparing Crysis 3 "Welcome to the Jungle" (Another highly threaded gaming benchmark), it looks like the gap narrows between Stock clocked FX-6300 and OC Athlon x 4 860K:

FX-6300 at 3.5 Ghz + turbo: 57.6 FPS

Athlon x 4 860K at 4.5 Ghz: 52.6 FPS

Still, the FX-6300 wins but this time only by about ~10%.

 

[Yuriman]

Does anyone have any links to reviews that thoroughly explore module penalty in Kaveri? I would imagine that, despite the improved IPC, an FX-6300 would still have better single-threaded performance at a given clock because you can load up more threads before each thread gets slower.

 

[cbn]

Does anyone have any links to reviews that thoroughly explore module penalty in Kaveri? I would imagine that, despite the improved IPC, an FX-6300 would still have better single-threaded performance at a given clock because you can load up more threads before each thread gets slower.

Yep, that was basically the question I had when I made this thread:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2413015

 

[cbn]

Comparing Overclocked Athlon x4 860K to stock clocked FX-6300 in Skyrim (a lightly thread game):

4.5 GHz Athlon x4 860K: 72.6 FPS
3.5 Ghz + turbo FX-6300: 64.1 FPS

Overclocked Athlon x 4 860K wins by 13%.

But then if we compare oveclocked x4 860K (72.6 FPS) to overclocked FX-6300 (76.6 FPS) the FX-6300 wins by 5.5%. (Although the FX-6300 does have clockspeed advantage at 4.7 GHz vs 4.5 Ghz)

 

[escrow4]

You are intentionally gimping yourself. Its 2015 you want an i5 as a minimum. You spend $100 now and in less than a year you'll be kicking yourself wondering why you didn't spend an extra $120 on an i5. Buy a CPU that will last in the first place and focus on GPU upgrades.

 

[janeuner]

Hyperthreading is rarely worth around 30%...

FTFY

Does anyone have any links to reviews that thoroughly explore module penalty in Kaveri? I would imagine that, despite the improved IPC, an FX-6300 would still have better single-threaded performance at a given clock because you can load up more threads before each thread gets slower.

I got curious... here's an ad-hoc benchmark using Handbrake.

Media Source: MKV video+audio file (27 seconds) I had sitting around.
Processor: AMD FX-6300 @ 3.5Ghz (3 modules, 6 threads)

Methodology:
1) Disable Turbo in Bios. Boot into Windows 7.
2) Start Handbrake and Task Manager.
3) Set Handbrake's core affinity to 5,6. Encode media source.
4) Change Handbrake's core affinity to 3,4. Encode media source.
5) Change Handbrake's core affinity to 3,5. Encode media source.

Result from step 3:

[13:59:50] sync: first pts is 2970
[14:04:57] reader: done. 1 scr changes
[14:05:55] work: average encoding speed for job is 2.437883 fps
Total Time: 365 seconds

Result from step 4:

[14:08:56] sync: first pts is 2970
[14:14:03] reader: done. 1 scr changes
[14:15:01] work: average encoding speed for job is 2.432627 fps
Total Time: 365 seconds

Result from step 5:

[14:15:54] sync: first pts is 2970
[14:19:59] reader: done. 1 scr changes
[14:20:46] work: average encoding speed for job is 3.048587 fps
Total Time: 292 seconds

If curious, the x264 Encoder Settings:

+ encoder: H.264 (libx264)
+ preset: slower
+ tune: film
+ profile: high
+ level: 4.1
+ quality: 19.00 (RF)

------------------------------

TL;DR:

In Handbrake, using MP4(x264+AAC) decoder and MKV(x264+AAC) encoder, a Vishera module's single-thread performance decreases 20% when both threads are being utilized.

- or -

In Handbrake, using MP4(x264+AAC) decoder and MKV(x264+AAC) encoder on a Vishera module, switching from one thread per module to two threads per module may only increase throughput by 60%.

YMMV. If it does, share the experience!

 

[Charlie98]

You are intentionally gimping yourself. Its 2015 you want an i5 as a minimum. You spend $100 now and in less than a year you'll be kicking yourself wondering why you didn't spend an extra $120 on an i5. Buy a CPU that will last in the first place and focus on GPU upgrades.

I tend to agree... I've been running ModernWarfare on my lightly OC'd G3258 with my GTX560Ti 448... which I thought would be a pretty well matched combination... and the performance isn't something I would build into my machine. What I mean is... I would not build a dedicated gaming rig powered by a Pentium unless all you play is Solitaire or FSX, et al.

The money I spent on the i5 in my main rig 3 years ago (albeit... a Black Friday 2500K for $150!) is still showing it's worth. I would probably take a used i5/Z68 or Z77 combo for a gaming rig before I would take a G3258.