Pentium G3258 is it worth it?

[Wingfan]

OP @Tjc222 should really jump back into this convo

[Totally-A-Hero]

Well, if it's a backup rig then it really does not need anything more than a pentium g3258 either.

Not to mention a mATX intel board can be quite cheap. 

Yes if he wants Matx then i think a pentium would be better, although he should upgrade it fairly soon  then. We also need to fine out what games he plays, if he plays MMO's or lots of single core games, then intel. If he plays multi core games, Battlefield, GTA-V,and assaisins creed. Then a 6300 would be good.

 

OP what games do you play?

[TMar]

 Basicly NO.

 

Especialy if you play gpu + cpu bound scenario´s.

Those reviewers just need to stop, about the whole Pentium G overclocked gaming voodoo magic BS

The only tests they show, are GPU bound scenario´s, on which the cpu does not make that much sense in the first place.

 

If you play cpu + gpu demending games, then you will see how weak that cpu is.

Trow BF4 on multiplayer 64+ people server on a big map like Chaina, and your pentium G will be rubbish.

Or trow Watchdogs or fully modded skyrim on it

 

Offcourse like i said, if you only play gpu bound scenario´s

then it will be a fine cpu, with a midrange card.

But i would not recommend it for an hardcore allround gamer.

 

 

Another one the speaks without knowing.  I would suggest you go to the youtube's and type g3258 BF4 multiplayer into that search box before spewing such misconceived "facts".

[Totally-A-Hero]

Another one the speaks without knowing.  I would suggest you go to the youtube's and type g3258 BF4 multiplayer into that search box before spewing such misconceived "facts".

Not really misconceived. While you will still get more than playable frames, it will not perform as well as a 6300, i3/i5 or FX Cpu. This being said its still a great budget option, but to me its the difference beetween buying a 280x and a 290, save for the 290 its better.

[i_build_nanosuits]

Another one the speaks without knowing.  I would suggest you go to the youtube's and type g3258 BF4 multiplayer into that search box before spewing such misconceived "facts".

no need to watch youtubes and un-trusty benchmarks we can just disable cores and see how weak a dual core CPU with no hyper-threading really is.

60% load on my GTX 780 is what i get on average on BF4 with 2 cores disabled at 4.6ghz...it sucks...and still it's an i7 so plenty of cache and faster cache...

can't get a steady 25 FPS in watchdogs and it stutter like crazy.

[TMar]

Not really misconceived. While you will still get more than playable frames, it will not perform as well as a 6300, i3/i5 or FX Cpu. This being said its still a great budget option, but to me its the difference beetween buying a 280x and a 290, save for the 290 its better.

 

Misconceived that just because it's a dual core it will be "rubbish", yeah kinda is.  So it will be "out performed" by others but it's consistently staying above the max refresh rates of most monitors, what's the point?  Yay, you'll get more frames that will never be displayed properly.  Still much more than just "playable frames" ("playable" being >40).  Yeah, it's not future proof but you're also not throwing much money at it and there are upgrade paths.

[Mr crabcake]

Or trow Watchdogs or fully modded skyrim on it

 

Well I've got my 4.2 Ghz G3258 paired with a 7870 + 7850 and I'm GPU bound in skyrim even with the lighter versions of Realvision ENBs. In my opinion the Pentium is awesome for gaming at the moment. And if you buy a z97 board you can later on upgrade to a more powerful broadwell chip.

[i_build_nanosuits]

Misconceived that just because it's a dual core it will be "rubbish", yeah kinda is.  So it will be "out performed" by others but it's consistently staying above the max refresh rates of most monitors, what's the point?  Yay, you'll get more frames that will never be displayed properly.  Still much more than just "playable frames" ("playable" being >40).  Yeah, it's not future proof but you're also not throwing much money at it and there are upgrade paths.

for me playable is 60...nothing more, nothing less...and a pentium won't deliver them in MANY modern games.

[Aniallation]

Is it also worth to buy the Pentium G3258 if you're not going to mess around with OCing it?

No

[fRodzet]

I think it's kinda weird how these things can bring so much discussion?

 

Let's take a step back and let's give OP the response he really needs, instead of just throwing stones at each other, telling who is right and who is wrong.

 

We need to take a look at some facts here:

 

The Intel Haswell series, including the very low end products such as the G3258, will per core clock deliver up to twice the performance of AMDs High-End CPU's. 

Most games today, does not yet utilize more than 2 cores, the additional 6 cores some AMD processors offer will have an insignificant part in gaming.

Some games make use of 2 cores and can utilize HyperThreading, the i3 would be the superior pick.

Games like Battlefield 4 and WatchDogs are multi-threaded based and not as high based on clock speeds. The AMD processor would defeat the Pentium and the i3 series.

 

In order for us to tell what OP should pick, we need to know what he is going to use the machine for.. If it's games that is not based on multi-threaded workloads, a G3258 or an i3 would be the best pick, if the games he plays is based on multi-threaded workloads, he would need something else.

[Totally-A-Hero]

I think it's kinda weird how these things can bring so much discussion?

 

snip

Yes we need to know the games he is playing. Or wants to play.

[D3MON]

 Basicly NO.

 

Especialy if you play gpu + cpu bound scenario´s.

Those reviewers just need to stop, about the whole Pentium G overclocked gaming voodoo magic BS

The only tests they show, are GPU bound scenario´s, on which the cpu does not make that much sense in the first place.

 

If you play cpu + gpu demending games, then you will see how weak that cpu is.

Trow BF4 on multiplayer 64+ people server on a big map like Chaina, and your pentium G will be rubbish.

Or trow Watchdogs or fully modded skyrim on it

 

Offcourse like i said, if you only play gpu bound scenario´s

then it will be a fine cpu, with a midrange card.

But i would not recommend it for an hardcore allround gamer.

It depends what you mean by cpu demanding.... 

there's cpu demanding and cpu limited.

cpu limited games are the ones that only use a single or dual core at most and both are pinned at 100% in which case an overclocked pentium-k is awesome and frankly anything other than a pentium-k is dumb IMHO, These scenarios are the ones intel fanboy's like to point to when comparing to amd fx because a 4.5ghz haswell will perform about 50% faster than a 4.5ghz piledriver. these games are typically indie titles (of which steam has billions) and typically look like console games (yayyy for indie!).

Then there's cpu demanding games that use certain engines, game title doesn't matter (much) here its what game engine it uses, well threaded but demanding game engines like cryengine and frostbite are well made and evenly distribute threads so that you're gpu limited (because who wants to buy a graphics card to find its not being used because your i5 is pinned at 100% on 1 core with the other 3 doing sweet FA).

in those games it doesn't matter if you have an i3 (to an extent) an overclocked q6600 and fx6300 or a 4930k, your gpu will be the limiting factor as it should be.

There are a few other titles though thankfully rare that will be "kinda" threaded where core 1 will be at 80%, core 2 at 50%, core 3 at 20% and core 4 at 40%, these games are gpu limited most of the time but in certain parts of the games like indoors where the gpu doesn't have much to do (and your fps consequently doubles regardless) the cpu becomes the limit and in those parts of a game intel cpu's will pull ahead but again outside for the most part you'll be gpu limited and cpu wont matter. arma 2 was like this and for a while skyrim.

That brings me onto a problem, some games like skyrim early on maxed out 2 cores and were cpu limited hence lots of people got poor performance on bulldozer and some people got better fps on sandybridge, updates a while ago that fixed this, and its now evenly threaded across 4 cores/modules, unfortunately allot of people remember how it was before and still consider it cpu limited where now its just kinda cpu heavy (but not tons).

Some games like battlefield that require a powerful cpu because of allot going on you should have a quad core at 3ghz, you can get by with 3 cores as i tested with my phenom a year ago on bf3 atleast, and on 2 cores your averages will be close but your minimums will suffer because both cores will be pinned at 100%, less heavy games like skyrim and bioshock infinite can be run down to 2 cores and not much will change because they are not that demanding (personally anyway) but i could be wrong with skyrim, haven't tested it on a dual core (locked down quad) but i have tested the hardline beta on 2 modules 4 threads and while cpu usage was high it wasn't limiting which should be promising for anyone running an fx4 or i3.

As to the OP, no a pentium-k wont be worth it if your not going to overclock, just buy a normal pentium, the exception of course is if you're going to overclock later in which case maybe, if your tasks/games evenly use more threads you might want to look at something with more threads instead whether it be an i3, i5, fx6300 etc. if you're just doing normal stuff on it that isn't heavily threaded just get a normal pentium. it depends on the use case.

I have lots of screenshots in my "stuff" gallery which give an indication to how games use a heavily threaded cpu like my 8320 and in some cases a typical style cpu.... my phenoms, reading the title is needed and sometime's I probably should of clarified whats going on but meh.

edit- gotta say, as beta's go that hardline was well made, I didn't experience any glitches or crappy performance, Dayz....what's going on man?

As for mantle the way I look at it is reducing game side limits/bottlenecking/problems, no matter what system I'm using or what speed, once you get to a big city with 120,000 population the performance tanks and neither cpu or gpu is used and I put this down to the game itself, performance increase should be effective on all system types that can use it but it being more prevelant on lower end systems.

[Faa]

Most of you have been spewing BS. If you'd like a comparison between a i3 & Pentium at 4.9GHz with my gpu's in SLI, go ahead ask for it I'll upload it so you can compare the loads by yourself.
 

Anyways, I've disabled 4 cores & HT and putted the CPU at 4.9GHz (gave me 3.5 score in CB as far as I can remember). SLI wasn't fully disabled, just through 3D manage settings I've set it to single GPU mode but the physics was offloaded to my 2nd card (which wasn't used in SLI mode). So take my first gpu load and 6% to it.

Pretty much averaging at 60 fps, it hitted 90% many times actually, most averaging between 75-80% which is obviously 75%-80% of a 780's max performance.
 

amd fx because a 4.5ghz haswell will perform about 50% faster than a 4.5ghz piledriver. 

I'd love to see your CPU (which is actually 8 years outdated in terms of clock per clock) clock for clock performing 30% less than my 3930K considering Haswell added 10%, Ivy 10%. Please run BF4 with one core only enabled in the bios. Do it, record it with that AMD gaming evolved thing get back and you'd get a video back.

All you usually do is overrating AMD though, you completely ignore that you're recommending CPU's that have lower IPC than 8 years old CPU's.

[alphadragon]

Pretty good processor for single core performance for multi core its kinda shotty

[felixthemaster1]

I was going to use this on a small web browsing machine but everyone is talking about overclocking it, so maybe the celeron is better for me.

[D3MON]

I was going to use this on a small web browsing machine but everyone is talking about overclocking it, so maybe the celeron is better for me.

Love that avatar (just sayin') if you're sure that's all you're doing then a celeron won't be a problem.

you're in the UK so...

if you have an lga1155 board.

http://www.ebuyer.com/409232-intel-celeron-g1620-2-70ghz-socket-1155-2mb-cache-retail-boxed-processor-bx80637g1620

if you have an 1150 board

http://www.ebuyer.com/629961-intel-celeron-g1840-2-80ghz-socket-1150-2mb-l3-cache-retail-boxed-processor-bx80646g1840

[felixthemaster1]

Love that avatar (just sayin') if you're sure that's all you're doing then a celeron won't be a problem.

you're in the UK so...

if you have an lga1155 board.

http://www.ebuyer.com/409232-intel-celeron-g1620-2-70ghz-socket-1155-2mb-cache-retail-boxed-processor-bx80637g1620

if you have an 1150 board

http://www.ebuyer.com/629961-intel-celeron-g1840-2-80ghz-socket-1150-2mb-l3-cache-retail-boxed-processor-bx80646g1840

Building it for my parents. Cheers.

 

And thanks, made it myself

[Totally-A-Hero]

Love that avatar (just sayin') if you're sure that's all you're doing then a celeron won't be a problem.

you're in the UK so...

if you have an lga1155 board.

http://www.ebuyer.com/409232-intel-celeron-g1620-2-70ghz-socket-1155-2mb-cache-retail-boxed-processor-bx80637g1620

if you have an 1150 board

http://www.ebuyer.com/629961-intel-celeron-g1840-2-80ghz-socket-1150-2mb-l3-cache-retail-boxed-processor-bx80646g1840

That shut him up.

[Sintezza]

New usefull AMD vs Intel gaming benchmarks are comming very soon lol

[i_build_nanosuits]

New usefull AMD vs Intel gaming benchmarks are comming very soon lol

logan announced he will benchmark the 8370 against intel very soon in a video that should be...interesting LOL

AMD gave him cpu's AGAIN i can't wait to see im post gpu bound benchmarks on those

[nokturrduk84]

logan announced he will benchmark the 8370 against intel very soon in a video that should be...interesting LOL

AMD gave him cpu's AGAIN i can't wait to see im post gpu bound benchmarks on those

Do you trust him & his benchmarks?

[i_build_nanosuits]

Do you trust him & his benchmarks?

yes...of course...if you test an overclocked FX CPU against any intel cpu with a stock GTX 670 at 1080P they perform the same...indeed...his first sets of benchmarks where absolutely trusty.

Also should be pointed out that he tested mostly multi-threaded modern games.

[Sintezza]

logan announced he will benchmark the 8370 against intel very soon in a video that should be...interesting LOL

AMD gave him cpu's AGAIN i can't wait to see im post gpu bound benchmarks on those

 

We will see what happens.. .

Still not that i realy care to much about it.

But its just cool to look at.

But i like to see what the FX9590 still can showup against the 5820K in gaming.

 

My AMD FX8350 still works awesome.

But yeah i do more then gaming. like virtualization and such.

On which the FX8350 is just awesome.

[i_build_nanosuits]

We will see what happens.. .

Still not that i realy care to much about it,

But i like to see what the FX9590 still can showup against the 5820K in gaming.

hummm...are you serious? a 5ghz FX can't even compete with a core i5-4570 in gaming...don't put it against a 6 core 12 threads intel beast with DDR4 ram it's just plain unfair.

[Sintezza]

hummm...are you serious? a 5ghz FX can't even compete with a core i5-4570 in gaming...don't put it against a 6 core 12 threads intel beast with DDR4 ram it's just plain unfair.

 

Well the benchmarks will show what happens there.

I allready know that the 5820K will blow it out of the water in productivity.

But in gaming.... The 5820K should basicly blow it out of the water aswell.

 

I hope he comes with vallid tests, i allready assumed he should do cpu + gpu demending gaming benchmarks, with highend cards.

So lets see if he has listened to that lol

 

Im still more interessted in Wendells KVM project, but thats a diffrent story