Have i3's become irrelevant?

[SteveGrabowski0]

well the Pentium I feel like is a better deal price-to-performance.  Its about 50 bucks cheaper depending on where you look and it is a good bang for buck in a budget build.  I feel like it would be a better choice just to get an older gen locked i5 than an i3.

 

The G3258 is not a good gaming CPU, I had one at 4.4 GHz and it was lousy even in CPU light games like Tomb Raider. I imagine it's truly awful for GTA V. When I turned off two cores and hyperthreading on my Xeon to simulate a 3.8 GHz G3258 (if it had 8MB L3 cache instead of 3MB) the experience playing GTA V was awful, mostly fps in the 40s with tons of drops into the 30s and occasional drops into the 20s too. Meanwhile leaving two cores disabled but turning on HT to simulate a 3.8 GHz i3 (again with 8MB instead of 3MB L3) the experience was really smooth. Occasional drops to 55 fps or so on my 970, but mostly in the 60s and 70s with GPU usage around 80% or so, and none of the stutter that was so pronounced with my simulated Pentium (or my real Pentium in other games).

[SteveGrabowski0]

What is a respectable gpu that you could typically pair up with an i3?

 

GTX 960 4GB is probably your best bet. AMD GPUs don't do well in DirectX 11 games when combined with a lower end CPU like an i3 even when they're significantly more powerful on a hardware level than their Nvidia counterparts in similar price brackets. Now with an i5 or better an R9 380 soundly beats a GTX 960.

[Guest]

HTing helps a lot.

 

Also, i3 builds are still good for servers, due to the fact the support ECC RAM

[Prysin]

the G3258 SHOULD die off. it is an atrocious piece of shit CPU that blinds naive people who fail to understand that 90FPS MAX is not great when your minimum is 19FPS...

i3 is great, but atm it has TWO flaws...

the AMD 860k/FX 6300 performs VERY CLOSE to it in most games. But they are cheaper.

on the other front is the i5 4460, which has come down in price over time, and is now within "reach" of i3's...

Decent GPUs has come down in price too. So again, that step up to a i5 can be made if you select your parts carefully and or do not get a SSD (which i personally think is a bad idea).

To put it bluntly, at the 500-600 USD mark, there is MANY options atm.

the 860k performs within 10-15% of an i3 4360 in gaming, yet it costs HALF of the i3... it is also unlocked for overclocking. So with a OC around 4.3-4.5GHz it will actually claw its way up to within 5-7% of the i3 4360 in overall performance. Only losing out in raw single thread performance..

For productivity and gaming, a FX 6300 would beat out almost all options from Intel at the lower end budgets, due to its multi-core performance.

For raw gaming, the i5 4460 is great!...

For just casual use, the i3 is good. But again it sits in a peculiar spot performance wise (and multi-tasking wise). Therefore, it is not as great as it used to be. Competition is giving it a fair run for its monetary value.

[don_svetlio]

the G3258 SHOULD die off. it is an atrocious piece of shit CPU that blinds naive people who fail to understand that 90FPS MAX is not great when your minimum is 19FPS...

i3 is great, but atm it has TWO flaws...

the AMD 860k/FX 6300 performs VERY CLOSE to it in most games. But they are cheaper.

on the other front is the i5 4460, which has come down in price over time, and is now within "reach" of i3's...

Decent GPUs has come down in price too. So again, that step up to a i5 can be made if you select your parts carefully and or do not get a SSD (which i personally think is a bad idea).

To put it bluntly, at the 500-600 USD mark, there is MANY options atm.

the 860k performs within 10-15% of an i3 4360 in gaming, yet it costs HALF of the i3... it is also unlocked for overclocking. So with a OC around 4.3-4.5GHz it will actually claw its way up to within 5-7% of the i3 4360 in overall performance. Only losing out in raw single thread performance..

For productivity and gaming, a FX 6300 would beat out almost all options from Intel at the lower end budgets, due to its multi-core performance.

For raw gaming, the i5 4460 is great!...

For just casual use, the i3 is good. But again it sits in a peculiar spot performance wise (and multi-tasking wise). Therefore, it is not as great as it used to be. Competition is giving it a fair run for its monetary value.

Check this - http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/475582-fx-6300-vs-i3-4130-1600mhz-ram/#entry6372976

[Nena Trinity]

Pentium is pointless a Skylake i3 is a good idea now!

[byalexandr]

as someone who has an i3, do you ever feel limited in terms of what you can do with it? Does it perform well enough for gaming? And what about non gaming related tasks?

stay away from any cpu that ends in 41xx 61xx or 81xx...they use the older Zambezi archetecture and perform far worse than the fx 43xx 63xx and 83xx CPUs.

Of course, although not nearly as much as my FX processor that I used to have. I got rid of that because it was bottlenecking the crap out of my old 760, now I have a liquid cooled 290 and it doesn't bottleneck it. The only downside is it doesn't have an unlocked multiplier so overclocking is a pain, and sometimes it feels slow, but only in games like ARMA that destroy processors. Other than that it is a very smooth experience and I have never had any troubles with it. In fact I think it's the only component in my system that hasn't given me trouble.

[IMPERIUS]

For gaming the i3 is OK. I would pair of with something like the gtx 950-960-280x types of gpus and budget gaming systems.

Dual cores do struggle in today's games so a better option would be an i5 with a decent gpu if you do care about fps and so on. For the casual gamer an i5 isn't really needed imo but as usual the more you pay the more you get.

[Prysin]

For gaming the i3 is OK. I would pair of with something like the gtx 950-960-280x types of gpus and budget gaming systems.

Dual cores do struggle in today's games so a better option would be an i5 with a decent gpu if you do care about fps and so on. For the casual gamer an i5 isn't really needed imo but as usual the more you pay the more you get.

Not always...

i mean, yes you get better performance, but then again there is diminishing returns at some point...

 

 

Of course, although not nearly as much as my FX processor that I used to have. I got rid of that because it was bottlenecking the crap out of my old 760, now I have a liquid cooled 290 and it doesn't bottleneck it. The only downside is it doesn't have an unlocked multiplier so overclocking is a pain, and sometimes it feels slow, but only in games like ARMA that destroy processors. Other than that it is a very smooth experience and I have never had any troubles with it. In fact I think it's the only component in my system that hasn't given me trouble.

what FX did you own?

[typographie]

Is this true? How big of a difference is hyperthreading on i3s as opposed to a haswell dual core overclocked?

 

At best, a G3258—even one heavily overclocked—can match a Haswell i3's gaming performance. More often than not, the G3258 is actually quite far behind. I would not say a modern i3 is irrelevant in a low- to mid-range gaming system, they can actually be quite capable.

 

Some game data… and note that many of these games aren't even particularly well-threaded:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8232/overclockable-pentium-anniversary-edition-review-the-intel-pentium-g3258-ae/4

[IMPERIUS]

Not always...

i mean, yes you get better performance, but then again there is diminishing returns at some point...

 

Agree, like i5k -> i7k. But, an i5 will be definitely much better performing than an i3.

[byalexandr]

Not always...

i mean, yes you get better performance, but then again there is diminishing returns at some point...

 

 

what FX did you own?

FX 6300, so almost top tier, if not top tier since I had a 4.2GHz OC on it.

[Morgan MLGman]

Athlon X4 860k > Pentium G3258. Pentium is not relevant, it's a dual core and there are games that don't even run on dual cores.

[Nena Trinity]

Athlon X4 860k > Pentium G3258. Pentium is not relevant, it's a dual core and there are games that don't even run on dual cores.

860K, FX-6300, i3-6100 and i5-4460 Is my top 4 budget CPUs for 2015!

[Morgan MLGman]

860K, FX-6300, i3-6100 and i5-4460 Is my top 4 budget CPUs for 2015!

I had the X4 750k @4,5 ghz, the best price/performance CPU I've ever seen in my life ^^

[Biggerboot]

They certainly still have a place on the market.  For me I do productivity stuff and occasionally some gaming, but not nearly as much as I use to.  I like the assurance of good single threaded performance chip for a low price.

[MageTank]

Athlon X4 860k > Pentium G3258. Pentium is not relevant, it's a dual core and there are games that don't even run on dual cores.

Find me one game that i cannot run on my G3258, and i will not only run it, but i will run it at playable frame rates too. Before you say Far Cry 4, or Dragons Age Inquisition, understand that patches exist to make them work. To say it's not relevant would be an ignorant statement. Everything has relevance depending on the task. I wouldn't recommend using a G3258 and expecting it to last years for AAA gaming, but for MMO's/MOBA's, it will be fine for quite some time. These genre's use less demanding hardware requirements to cater to the lowest common denominator simply because it's in their best interest for their business model. Reaching more people means you sell more in-game currency.

 

In the grand scheme of every single game that is available on PC, less than 1% of them are unplayable on dual cores. Of those that are unplayable, more than 90% of those can be patched to be perfectly playable. 

[Morgan MLGman]

Find me one game that i cannot run on my G3258, and i will not only run it, but i will run it at playable frame rates too. Before you say Far Cry 4, or Dragons Age Inquisition, understand that patches exist to make them work. To say it's not relevant would be an ignorant statement. Everything has relevance depending on the task. I wouldn't recommend using a G3258 and expecting it to last years for AAA gaming, but for MMO's/MOBA's, it will be fine for quite some time. These genre's use less demanding hardware requirements to cater to the lowest common denominator simply because it's in their best interest for their business model. Reaching more people means you sell more in-game currency.

 

In the grand scheme of every single game that is available on PC, less than 1% of them are unplayable on dual cores. Of those that are unplayable, more than 90% of those can be patched to be perfectly playable. 

So yeah, buy a CPU just to have to patch games so it can even run them at all. X4 860k > G3258. 2015/16 ≠ dual cores

[MageTank]

So yeah, buy a CPU just to have to patch games so it can even run them at all. X4 860k > G3258. 2015/16 ≠ dual cores

You are side stepping sir. Besides those very 2 specific games i mentioned, name another game that needs to even be patched to be playable. The entire internet has evidence to prove me right, and you wrong. If you need more proof, i am more than happy to oblige.

[Morgan MLGman]

You are side stepping sir. Besides those very 2 specific games i mentioned, name another game that needs to even be patched to be playable. The entire internet has evidence to prove me right, and you wrong. If you need more proof, i am more than happy to oblige.

My point is, games like that are going to be more frequent as the time goes by. The very fact that you have to patch those games to be playable cause of your CPU makes it stupid.

[Biggerboot]

My point is, games like that are going to be more frequent as the time goes by. The very fact that you have to patch those games to be playable cause of your CPU makes it stupid.

 

This again comes down to how developers utilize cores in the future, which is no guarentee.  But personally if I'm only spending 70 dollars on a CPU, I'm not really looking that far ahead.

 

860k isn't bad or worse than the pentium by any means, I just don't think this particular argument applies here.

[MageTank]

My point is, games like that are going to be more frequent as the time goes by. The very fact that you have to patch those games to be playable cause of your CPU makes it stupid.

 

Find me one game that i cannot run on my G3258, and i will not only run it, but i will run it at playable frame rates too. Before you say Far Cry 4, or Dragons Age Inquisition, understand that patches exist to make them work. To say it's not relevant would be an ignorant statement. Everything has relevance depending on the task. I wouldn't recommend using a G3258 and expecting it to last years for AAA gaming, but for MMO's/MOBA's, it will be fine for quite some time. These genre's use less demanding hardware requirements to cater to the lowest common denominator simply because it's in their best interest for their business model. Reaching more people means you sell more in-game currency.

 

In the grand scheme of every single game that is available on PC, less than 1% of them are unplayable on dual cores. Of those that are unplayable, more than 90% of those can be patched to be perfectly playable. 

I've been preaching this on this forum since the G3258 became popular. Pretty sure i repeated myself on this subject not too long ago, when this exact same thread was brought up about the i5. http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/475092-i5-4690k-showing-its-age/?p=6367165

 

@ the people talking about the pentium: Go buy one. It's very clear that people do not have pentiums when they keep making the same misinformed statements involving them. That "stuttering" rumor is simple to explain. In games where textures are streamed in (Such as GTA 5) the cpu is too slow to stream in the textures at 60fps. You can do an artificial frame cap to 45-50fps, and it will never stutter again. Trust me, i run a G3258 as my daily CPU. I also have access to a 4690k and an FX 8320, and i can tell you, the G3258 and i5 run exactly the same in MMO's and less CPU intense games (Both clocked in at 4.2ghz). They both run laps around the FX 8320 (Clocked in at 4.0ghz) in everything but compression and video rendering. 

 

The Athlon 860k will out perform the Pentium in games that are threadbound. Not many games, even the latest AAA games, are super threadbound. You might be able to name 5, if you are lucky. Even Far Cry 4 is playable after patching it. Dragons Age Inquisition is the same way. The only game that absolutely smashes the G3258 is Ryse, but if you pair it with high performance memory, you can alleviate that CPU overhead quite a bit, making it playable. 

 

Would i recommend a G3258 to someone wanting a gaming PC? Depends on what kind of gaming they plan on doing. MMO's and DOTA's? Sure, G3258 will handle those no problem. Would i recommend it for the latest AAA games? Not really. It requires patching and frame caps to make the experience enjoyable for some games, and not a lot of people are going to want to do this. The 860k is reasonable in this scenario, because its plug and play. Don't need to worry about patching DLL's and setting frame limits in texture-streamed games.

 

At the end of the day, the G3258 should only be recommended if someone meets one or more of the following categories:

 

1. They new to overclocking, and want a cheap processor to toy with

2. They are short on money for an i5 or i7 processor, and need a cheap stop-gap

3. They only do light-medium gaming, and do not intend on playing the latest AAA titles

 

That's it. Simple, sweet, to the point. I am a firm believer of using the right tool for the job. The G3258 is t he right tool when used like i stated above. In my case, i fell under categories 1 and 2. While i was used to overclocking AMD CPU's from the past, going to a platform that had the voltage regulation on the chip was new to me. I wanted to learn how to OC under those circumstances, and i wanted to use a cheap CPU to do it. I was also waiting on buying an i7, so i figured i'd get a cheap CPU to hold me off until then anyways. 10 months later, i have the same CPU, still use it for gaming (Mostly MMO's, and occasionally GTA 5 and Witcher 3) and am waiting to move to Skylake this Friday. It was worth the $55 i spent on it.

 

 

Pay attention to the i3 6100, and look at the difference memory speed makes on the i3 in situations with high CPU overhead. Also take a look at the following OCN thread: http://www.overclock.net/t/1487162/an-independent-study-does-the-speed-of-ram-directly-affect-fps-during-high-cpu-overhead-scenarios

 

My pentium might be running fine, because i run a very aggressive memory overclock. Perhaps the people with stuttering pentiums are using 1333mhz on H81 boards, and cannot OC the memory. Either way, I stand by my previous statements regarding the G3258.

 

 

My point is very simple. Dual cores are not irrelevant yet. I know people want them to be, and i personally wouldn't mind seeing it happen either, but you have to think of the larger picture. AAA gaming is NOT the only PC gaming segment. So many MMO's and MOBA's make up a large potion of PC gaming. You see these large tournaments and even hardware sponsors for these games all the time too. They are designed to be playable on absolutely terrible hardware. I play Elder Scrolls Online and Skyforge on a 4.0ghz G3258. I decided to test ESO on a mobile Celeron (2.8ghz) with intel HD graphics, and managed to get the game to run at 30fps on absolute lowest settings (outside of town, in town, it averaged 17fps). 

 

Until the majority of these players upgrade their hardware and leave their dual cores behind, then these gaming segments will continue to design games to run on this low end hardware. They have to. Otherwise, they run the risk of customers quitting their games due to the fact that their PC can no longer handle them. If you think i am lying, i can direct you to a few friends of mine that i game with, that own computer cafe's in the Philippines. They've stated on multiple occasions that if Perfect World updated their engine, and required more demanding hardware, that they would simply cease to exist.

 

I still don't recommend the G3258 over the 860k (unless people meet one of those three requirements i my previous quote) simply because of the reasons you have stated. Dual cores are not enough to do everything. However, if people are aware of that, and are comfortable with that knowledge, then the choice is theirs. As far as budget gaming goes, the G3258 and 860k perform pretty much the same in most games, so either choice is great. The G3258 offers the stronger, more expensive upgrade path, while the 860k offers native support for pretty much all AAA games with no additional effort required. It's upgrade path is weak though. 

 

Sorry for the long wall of text, i tend to get carried away with my posts, so i'll end it here by repeating what i've been saying on this forum from my first day. Use the right tool for the job.

[Morgan MLGman]

This again comes down to how developers utilize cores in the future, which is no guarentee.  But personally if I'm only spending 70 dollars on a CPU, I'm not really looking that far ahead.

 

860k isn't bad or worse than the pentium by any means, I just don't think this particular argument applies here.

 

Considering the fact that along with DX12 kicking in, all of the threads of any CPU are going to be used, the 860k is going to be relevant for a longer period of time, it's a better budget choice.

[Biggerboot]

Considering the fact that along with DX12 kicking in, all of the threads of any CPU are going to be used, the 860k is going to be relevant for a longer period of time, it's a better budget choice.

 

Perhaps the 860k will be slightly more relevant in the future.  But again, for that price range, I'm more interested in my performance for the short term.

 

I predict it's still going to be some time after DX12 comes out before dual cores are completely abandoned.

[PlayStation 2]

The G3258 was relevant only because it overclocked like a motherfucker.

Then the 860K was found to be a much more well-rounded CPU.

 

i3s are really relevant, hell, more than ever.