z97 or core i3?

[hudane123]

Now i have a pentium g3258 anniversary edition but after the windows 10 come out i currently can't overclock in my mobo anymore because my mobo is h81m-vg4 r2.0 motherboard.

Should i bump up on core i3 or z97 mobo?

By the way the pricing on my country is shitty core i3 and z97 both costs 150$ which one should i upgrade?

P.S : i have a tower cpu cooler that is deepcool gammaxx 300 if i were to buy the i3 i guess i will sell the cooler too

Sorry for bad english

[AlwaysFSX]

You should get an H97 mobo and overclock the snot out of your G3258.

[hudane123]

Sorry forgot to mention that

Now intel locked down overclocking an h an b series chipset on new windows 10 builds.

[Mate]

for oc'ing you need an Z97 mobo or an ASUS H97 series board, cuz they have unlocked multiplier as far as I know

[AlwaysFSX]

Sorry forgot to mention that

Now intel locked down overclocking an h an b series chipset on new windows 10 builds.

They can't. That's not how motherboards work..?

[Suffokation]

They can't. That's not how motherboards work..?

Yeah this

Im so confused now.

[hudane123]

Last time i installed windoes 10 rtm on my pc and BOOM i can only boot on 1 core active and oveeclocked and then asrock came with the bios update to fix that and overclocking options gone. It applies to all g3258 users as far as i know

Correct me if i'm wrong

[cragger89]

Didn't know you could overclock using an H81 board.

[SteveGrabowski0]

Didn't know you could overclock using an H81 board.

 

I could get my Pentium to 4.4 GHz on a Gigabyte GA-H81M-DS2V, which is like a $50 board.

[SteveGrabowski0]

Now i have a pentium g3258 anniversary edition but after the windows 10 come out i currently can't overclock in my mobo anymore because my mobo is h81m-vg4 r2.0 motherboard.

Should i bump up on core i3 or z97 mobo?

By the way the pricing on my country is shitty core i3 and z97 both costs 150$ which one should i upgrade?

P.S : i have a tower cpu cooler that is deepcool gammaxx 300 if i were to buy the i3 i guess i will sell the cooler too

Sorry for bad english

 

Z97 makes no sense unless one of the following three apply to you:

1. You will buy the i5-4690k eventually

2. You will buy the i7-4790k eventually

3. You will run two graphics cards eventually

 

Otherwise, Z97 is just pissing money away, and the i3 would be a far better upgrade. Plus you'll have to buy a new Windows license if you bought it OEM and change out the board.

[i_build_nanosuits]

Last time i installed windoes 10 rtm on my pc and BOOM i can only boot on 1 core active and oveeclocked and then asrock came with the bios update to fix that and overclocking options gone. It applies to all g3258 users as far as i know

Correct me if i'm wrong

revert to the old BIOS...windows has absolutely nothing to do with overclocking...it's your motherboar BIOS version that is wrong...revert to your old one.

[hudane123]

revert to the old BIOS...windows has absolutely nothing to do with overclocking...it's your motherboar BIOS version that is wrong...revert to your old one.

If i revert to the old one i can't boot at all. I can boot only when 1 core disabled if both of them enabled i can't boot again

.

[hudane123]

Z97 makes no sense unless one of the following three apply to you:

1. You will buy the i5-4690k eventually

2. You will buy the i7-4790k eventually

3. You will run two graphics cards eventually

Otherwise, Z97 is just pissing money away, and the i3 would be a far better upgrade. Plus you'll have to buy a new Windows license if you bought it OEM and change out the board.

If i upgrade to core i3 will it give a tangible performance improvement?

[i_build_nanosuits]

If i upgrade to core i3 will it give a tangible performance improvement?

yes i did tested many games with 4.5ghz dual-core vs 3.6ghz dual-core with hyper-threading and the core i3 is much better and much smoother in demanding aaa titles. its worth the upgrade 100%...but the i5-4460 would be even better.

[SteveGrabowski0]

If i upgrade to core i3 will it give a tangible performance improvement?

 

It depends what you play and how strong the rest of your hardware is. For instance, I have a GTX 970 and a Xeon E3-1231v3, and when I disabled two cores but left hyperthreading on to simulate a 3.8 GHz i3 the gaming performance was night and day better than when I disabled two cores and hyperthreading to simulate a 3.8 GHz Pentium (my Xeon is locked so I can't turn the clockspeed any higher, and 3.8 GHz is its default dual core turbo). The simulated i3 ran a smooth 55-75 fps at a combination of very high and ultra while the simulated Pentium was a stuttering mess running from 25-45 fps with some really bad drops and which never felt smooth at any time. That's the only game I have tried to simulate an i3 on, but when I ran my actual G3258 at 4.4 GHz I got tons of framerate oscillation between 45-90 fps on my GTX 970 even in CPU light games like Tomb Raider. If you're running a low-end GPU like an HD 7750, HD 7770, R7 250x, GTX 750 Ti, R7 260x you might not notice a big difference. If you're running something much more powerful like a GTX 760 or better I would imagine you'd notice a huge difference, and then there are games like Far Cry 4 and Dragon Age Inquisition that absolutely require at least 4 hardware threads or they won't even launch. Far Cry 4 came with my 970 and it wouldn't launch until I replaced my G3258 with my Xeon.

[SteveGrabowski0]

yes i did tested many games with 4.5ghz dual-core vs 3.6ghz dual-core with hyper-threading and the core i3 is much better and much smoother in demanding aaa titles. its worth the upgrade 100%...but the i5-4460 would be even better.

 

You should post your i3 Battlefield video. The game looked great on it, whereas it looked like a total trainwreck on your 4.5 GHz simulated Pentium in the other video. I was flat out blown away by how well GTA V played on my simulated i3. As a matter of fact, I think I'm going to fire it up at 3.4 GHz and see how it runs, because I think it might be a good simulation of a 3.7 GHz i3-4170, as I saw a benchmark that had the performance difference at about 7% between 3MB and 8MB L3 cache and that would be an 8% lower clockspeed running at 3.4 GHz with turbo set to off on my Xeon. Be back in about 20 minutes or so and I'll report what the game plays like.

[i_build_nanosuits]

You should post your i3 Battlefield video. The game looked great on it, whereas it looked like a total trainwreck on your 4.5 GHz simulated Pentium in the other video. I was flat out blown away by how well GTA V played on my simulated i3. As a matter of fact, I think I'm going to fire it up at 3.4 GHz and see how it runs, because I think it might be a good simulation of a 3.7 GHz i3-4170, as I saw a benchmark that had the performance difference at about 7% between 3MB and 8MB L3 cache and that would be an 8% lower clockspeed running at 3.4 GHz with turbo set to off on my Xeon. Be back in about 20 minutes or so and I'll report what the game plays like.

indeed bf4 ran very well...i dont even think the framerate dropped bellow 60 at any time and this was on a full server in one of the most demanding map of the game...these settings i show at the beginning are the one i use for my daily bf4 gaming...they are quite gpu intensive though (4xmsaa and 110%'scalling) but still the game played really well and real smooth...not the case with an overclocked pentium!

[techguru]

Now i have a pentium g3258 anniversary edition but after the windows 10 come out i currently can't overclock in my mobo anymore because my mobo is h81m-vg4 r2.0 motherboard.

Should i bump up on core i3 or z97 mobo?

By the way the pricing on my country is shitty core i3 and z97 both costs 150$ which one should i upgrade?

P.S : i have a tower cpu cooler that is deepcool gammaxx 300 if i were to buy the i3 i guess i will sell the cooler too

Sorry for bad english

SET BIOS TO SINGLE CORE

 

1.- Enter bios

2.- Go to "Advance" option

3.- Click on "CPU Configuration"

4.- Click on "Active Processor Cores

5.- Choose "1"

6.- Go to "Exit"

7.- Select "Save and exit"

8.- Boot from windows installation media and install normally

 

RENAME FILE

 

1.- Once on windows go to C:\Windows\System32

2.- Search for a file named "mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll"

3.- Follow this guide to Take Ownership (Permission) of the file

http://www.askvg.com/guide-how-to-take-ownership-permission-of-a-file-or-folder-manually-in-windows/

4.- Once you get permisson, change the file name "mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll" to "OLDmcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll"or everything else.

5.- Reboot

6.- Enter bios

7.- Go to "Exit"

8.- Select "Load UEFI defaults

9.- Select "Save and exit"

 

And thats all 

[SteveGrabowski0]

Well crap, GTA V crashed on me after about 10 minutes when I tested it with two cores disabled, and the only other time I have had it crash on me was doing the exact same kind of test when disabling cores whereas I have 50-60 hours playing the game with my Xeon fully enabled and not a single crash. I don't know if perhaps it's a Windows 7 bug when disabling cores or if GTA V hardcodes a core number like Far Cry 4 perhaps. Before it crashed it wasn't running as good as it did on a 3.8 GHz simulated i3 when running at 3.4 GHz. In the daytime it ran great mostly 57-72 fps or so. At sunset it ran more in the low 50s to low 70s and I had a drop into the mid 40s after crashing the car. I suspect this CPU bottleneck could be mostly resolved by dropping shadows down to a lower level since shadows are mostly CPU computation and since I don't have this problem in the day simulating an i3.

[hudane123]

It depends what you play and how strong the rest of your hardware is. For instance, I have a GTX 970 and a Xeon E3-1231v3, and when I disabled two cores but left hyperthreading on to simulate a 3.8 GHz i3 the gaming performance was night and day better than when I disabled two cores and hyperthreading to simulate a 3.8 GHz Pentium (my Xeon is locked so I can't turn the clockspeed any higher, and 3.8 GHz is its default dual core turbo). The simulated i3 ran a smooth 55-75 fps at a combination of very high and ultra while the simulated Pentium was a stuttering mess running from 25-45 fps with some really bad drops and which never felt smooth at any time. That's the only game I have tried to simulate an i3 on, but when I ran my actual G3258 at 4.4 GHz I got tons of framerate oscillation between 45-90 fps on my GTX 970 even in CPU light games like Tomb Raider. If you're running a low-end GPU like an HD 7750, HD 7770, R7 250x, GTX 750 Ti, R7 260x you might not notice a big difference. If you're running something much more powerful like a GTX 760 or better I would imagine you'd notice a huge difference, and then there are games like Far Cry 4 and Dragon Age Inquisition that absolutely require at least 4 hardware threads or they won't even launch. Far Cry 4 came with my 970 and it wouldn't launch until I replaced my G3258 with my Xeon.

My gpu is gtx 750 ti so i won't get a big improvement?

[i_build_nanosuits]

My gpu is gtx 750 ti so i won't get a big improvement?

it will be smooter, if you are getting some stuttering in some games for example then now it will be gone...but yeah that GPU is pretty weak and it will be your limiting factor in games that's for sure...unless you game at 768P or something?!

[hudane123]

it will be smooter, if you are getting some stuttering in some games for example then now it will be gone...but yeah that GPU is pretty weak and it will be your limiting factor in games that's for sure...unless you game at 768P or something?!

I ran some games @ultra 900p right now and it runs smoothly like ac rogue and grid autosport but when i play the witcher 3 sometime it's stuttering but the settng is custom mostly medium to high

I think when i upgrade to i3 this problem will be gone?

Or should i upgrade my gfx card to something like 270x?

[i_build_nanosuits]

I think when i upgrade to i3 this problem will be gone?

yes, if you play at 1440x900 then a CPU upgrade should make a nice difference in modern intensive titles, even with the 750ti.

[hudane123]

Thanks all for the response

I really appreciate your help

P.S : actually my resolution 1600x900 but thanks anyway