Older CPU with nice looking specs

[trevb0t]

Hey, I'm looking at a budget gaming PC. I am looking at various older model CPUs that have decent processing power, support multi threading, etc. 

 

My question is: If an older, now $75 CPU is running similar stats to a $200 recent CPU, is that new boy really going to out-process the fogey in a meaningful way?

 

What are the ultimate drawbacks to an older CPU?

 

For example I'm seeing a slough of Intel XEON E5-1650 V3 available for $75ish

[dgsddfgdfhgs]

1 minute ago, trevb0t said:

My question is: If an older, now $75 CPU is running similar stats to a $200 recent CPU

I think a $200 recent cpu refers to ryzen 2600, good luck if you can get that xeon for $75. and a working mobo 

performance wise shall be similar, you could expect mobo life expectancy will be shorter considering its age 

[trevb0t]

1 minute ago, dgsddfgdfhgs said:

I think a $200 recent cpu refers to ryzen 2600, good luck if you can get that xeon for $75. and a working mobo 

performance wise shall be similar, you could expect mobo life expectancy will be shorter considering its age 

yeah, for $200 I'd probably be looking to the 2600x

[leo1798]

In terms of speed, you'll be losing a fair bit of gaming performance in comparison to a more modern CPU of the same spec. In terms of the logistics of actually getting the CPU set up, you'll have a headache hunting down a good motherboard that doesn't shatter the value aspect of the CPU in terms of price, plus you'll need EEC memory that will have slightly higher latency and a lower frequency. Not to mention being on a dead platform with no upgrade path minus your RAM. Imo I'd get the Ryzen 2600 Non-X and a good B450 motherboard. The processor will be more expensive, but the motherboard will be much cheaper, and you'll have access to a far greater variety of RAM as well as a platform that will be supported for two more generations. You could even find an r5 1600 on ebay for even cheaper and not miss out on much in terms of performance.

[trevb0t]

12 minutes ago, leo1798 said:

In terms of speed, you'll be losing a fair bit of gaming performance in comparison to a more modern CPU of the same spec. In terms of the logistics of actually getting the CPU set up, you'll have a headache hunting down a good motherboard that doesn't shatter the value aspect of the CPU in terms of price, plus you'll need EEC memory that will have slightly higher latency and a lower frequency. Not to mention being on a dead platform with no upgrade path minus your RAM. Imo I'd get the Ryzen 2600 Non-X and a good B450 motherboard. The processor will be more expensive, but the motherboard will be much cheaper, and you'll have access to a far greater variety of RAM as well as a platform that will be supported for two more generations. You could even find an r5 1600 on ebay for even cheaper and not miss out on much in terms of performance.

Awesome! Thanks for the advice. I do see what you mean about MOBO pricing/availability for that model.

[trevb0t]

18 minutes ago, Cvet76 said:

Not all megahertz are created equal. I think there was a video a while back with this title...

Newer processors are better than the old one because of their features and bandwidth along a host of other improvements within the architecture and motherboard tech.

 

If you're just looking at gaming inexpensively, though, you shouldn't have many issues as long as your system is somewhat capable and balanced.

I was able to find the video you refer to. It definitely cleared up the difference between a higher IPC with the accompanying clock speeds. 

 

I've gotten a bunch of different answers, and all are good advice for different reasons! So thanks!

[narrdarr]

Most people need better multicore preformance. But I if you want better single core performance used skylake cpus might be an ok option