i3-7100 How heavy is multitasking?

[apaydinabdul]

Okay, so I've got a really old desktop downstairs in the living room with an i7-2600K (Not overclocked) and a disgusting 550TI.

My father gave me permission to buy a desktop and put it in my room! I got to pay it myselves and I'm kind of on a budget. A small budget.

I'll be getting a GTX 1060 (3GB) and an i3-7100 (I'm well aware of the giant downgrade with the CPU).

Now I've got a question about the CPU.

So as long as I don't multitask too heavily, an i3-7100 should be fine, right? I know I can get the i3-6100 and it would work similary to the 7100, but I want the 3.9 GHZ so I have at least one spec which is better than the 2600K (Turbo boost 3.8). I know this won't make a huge differece but I don't want to get the feeling that I'm completely downgrading my CPU.

The biggest difference I can think of between the i7 and i3 is multitasking, am I right? I'm not the kind of guy who watches livestreams while gaming and browsing his Twitter at the same time. I'm very organized when it comes to PC's and I know what game-settings make my FPS drop. 

The biggest type of multitasking I'll be doing would be just gaming and recording the gameplay with Shadowplay. If that would be the heaviest multitasking I would do, will I be OK with the i3-7100? That's my question!

 

Thanks in advance and sorry for the long text, I like explainig stuff.

[m0k]

but the 2600k can be overclocked to like 4.5-4.6 ghz ......

[apaydinabdul]

6 minutes ago, mok said:

but the 2600k can be overclocked to like 4.5-4.6 ghz ......

I don't have an overclockable motherboard, and that was not my question. I'm getting the chance to game in my bedroom, so I don't annoy my family when chatting with people on Teamspeak and stuff. I'm basically building a new PC and my old one stays downstairs for my sisters to work on for school.

[Guest]

It should be fine but if you could somehow fit a 6500 that would be ideal. Also get an RX 480, especially over a 3gb 1060.

[apaydinabdul]

4 minutes ago, Abyss Gaming said:

It should be fine but if you could somehow fit a 6500 that would be ideal. Also get an RX 480, especially over a 3gb 1060.

I may get an i5 if I got the patience for it (getting my budget to be higher takes time and hard working in the local supermarket lol). I've never really been into AMD cards though, I'll see if I like the RX 480 after watching some benchmarks. Thanks for the recommendations!

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, apaydinabdul said:

I may get an i5 if I got the patience for it (getting my budget to be higher takes time and hard working in the local supermarket lol). I've never really been into AMD cards though, I'll see if I like the RX 480 after watching some benchmarks. Thanks for the recommendations!

 

I'd say the 480 4gb cause the 1060 3gb isn't the same as the 6gb in more ways than just vram. Plus 480 beats 1060 in dx12 and are neck and neck in dx11.

[Brooksie359]

11 minutes ago, apaydinabdul said:

I may get an i5 if I got the patience for it (getting my budget to be higher takes time and hard working in the local supermarket lol). I've never really been into AMD cards though, I'll see if I like the RX 480 after watching some benchmarks. Thanks for the recommendations!

yeah i would recommend the rx 480 4gb also mostly because it isn't a cut down chip like the gtx 1060 3gb version. unfortunately nvidia decided to cut down the 6bg version of the gtx 1060 and sell it with the same name. also an i5 will be much better for gaming if you can afford it or if you aren't building for a little bit it may be worth while to wait for amd to come out with there new line of cpus as prices of cpus will mostly come down as a result. 

[Zyndo]

16 minutes ago, apaydinabdul said:

I've never really been into AMD cards though

You will start to be into them if you purchase a 480 4GB over a 1060 3GB (assuming they're close to each other in price.


But yeah, the i3 7100 should be fine for your needs.... but definitely having an i5 of some sort (even if its just a 7400) would be better if you can swing it. Shouldn't take you too long to work up the extra money as the price difference is less than 100 bucks. a couple days of work would cover something that is going to last you years.

[apaydinabdul]

28 minutes ago, Abyss Gaming said:

I'd say the 480 4gb cause the 1060 3gb isn't the same as the 6gb in more ways than just vram. Plus 480 beats 1060 in dx12 and are neck and neck in dx11.

The 3GB 1060 is better in performance compared to the 6GB 1060 right? Or am I completely wrong now? Of course the 6GB one is better, because of the vram and has better performance, but the 3GB versions is faster when it comes to speeds.

27 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

yeah i would recommend the rx 480 4gb also mostly because it isn't a cut down chip like the gtx 1060 3gb version. unfortunately nvidia decided to cut down the 6bg version of the gtx 1060 and sell it with the same name. also an i5 will be much better for gaming if you can afford it or if you aren't building for a little bit it may be worth while to wait for amd to come out with there new line of cpus as prices of cpus will mostly come down as a result. 

I'm definitly not going with AMD cpu's, because with the oldschool, badly programmed game I play (WarRock) it is always worse than an Intel CPU. The way WarRock is programmed, it somehow only uses a single core with AMD chips, which is definitly not enough to plag the game.

I've also watched some benchmarks of the RX 480, I don't really know about it..

Y'all saying the card is good, would be the only reason for me to get it over the 1060. Otherwise, purely from the benchmarks, I would definitly have chosen the 1060. AMD doesn't seem stable to me, and Intel has almost always been better with performance over the past years. I'd feel better getting a 1060 3GB.

25 minutes ago, Zyndo said:

You will start to be into them if you purchase a 480 4GB over a 1060 3GB (assuming they're close to each other in price.


But yeah, the i3 7100 should be fine for your needs.... but definitely having an i5 of some sort (even if its just a 7400) would be better if you can swing it. Shouldn't take you too long to work up the extra money as the price difference is less than 100 bucks. a couple days of work would cover something that is going to last you years.

That last thing you say is true. But you know, I'm still a student, who just now and then plays games in his spare time. Obviously when I start going to university I will have more time to work (and I will be older so earn more) and get a normal PC with an i7 and such. I just don't want to spend too much on a pc, because I know I'm not going to multitask or do crazy stuff with it.

[Brooksie359]

3 minutes ago, apaydinabdul said:

The 3GB 1060 is better in performance compared to the 6GB 1060 right? Or am I completely wrong now? Of course the 6GB one is better, because of the vram and has better performance, but the 3GB versions is faster when it comes to speeds.

I'm definitly not going with AMD cpu's, because with the oldschool, badly programmed game I play (WarRock) it is always worse than an Intel CPU. The way WarRock is programmed, it somehow only uses a single core with AMD chips, which is definitly not enough to plag the game.

I've also watched some benchmarks of the RX 480, I don't really know about it..

Y'all saying the card is good, would be the only reason for me to get it over the 1060. Otherwise, purely from the benchmarks, I would definitly have chosen the 1060. AMD doesn't seem stable to me, and Intel has almost always been better with performance over the past years. I'd feel better getting a 1060 3GB.

That last thing you say is true. But you know, I'm still a student, who just now and then plays games in his spare time. Obviously when I start going to university I will have more time to work (and I will be older so earn more) and get a normal PC with an i7 and such. I just don't want to spend too much on a pc, because I know I'm not going to multitask or do crazy stuff with it.

the gtx 1060 3gb is not faster than the 6gb version. it is a smaller chip also and will boost to the same frequencies as a 6gb version. also waiting for amd to release their new cpus to buy a cpu isn't necessarily about buying an amd cpu. its about waiting for competition to come back into the cpu market causing intel to lower their prices possibly. 

[Brooksie359]

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/73945-gtx-1060-vs-rx-480-updated-review.html here is a link to updated benchmarks of the gtx 1060 vs the rx 480. it shows that they are relatively the same performance in dx 11 and the rx 480 outperforms the gtx 1060 in dx 12 making it the better of the 2 cards based on these metrics. not only that but the 3gb version of the gtx 1060 has lower performance than the 6gb version so the rx 480 4gb would definitely out perform the 3gb model if its basically on par with the 6gb model.  

[Zyndo]

3 hours ago, apaydinabdul said:

Of course the 6GB one is better, because of the vram and has better performance, but the 3GB versions is faster when it comes to speeds.

 

No. the 1060 3GB has fewer operating cores than the 1060 6GB does. It is a cut down version of the full 1060 6GB. it tuns about 95% the speed of a 1060 6GB. the RX 480 8GB and 4GB do not have that issue, so the RX480 4GB pulls ahead by a decent amount in the 4GB version compared to the 1060 3Gb (both in VRAM and fps)

 

3 hours ago, apaydinabdul said:

I'm definitly not going with AMD cpu's, because with the oldschool, badly programmed game I play (WarRock) it is always worse than an Intel CPU. The way WarRock is programmed, it somehow only uses a single core with AMD chips, which is definitly not enough to plag the game.

AMD is not synonymous with "bad cores"... Buying one of the older, outdated, AMD chips would result in poor IPC and single core performances.... but if you bought an intel chip that was 3-5 years old you would encounter the same issue. AMD's current offerings are bad because they're outdated, not because AMD is bad. their new releases (Zen/Ryzen/whatever the hell they're calling it) are quite likely to be extremely competitive with Intel's mainstream offerings. By all means if you want intel then get intel I'm not trying to talk you out of that. I'm just saying that there is nothing inherently wrong with AMD as a whole for their CPU's.

 

3 hours ago, apaydinabdul said:

I've also watched some benchmarks of the RX 480, I don't really know about it..

Y'all saying the card is good, would be the only reason for me to get it over the 1060. Otherwise, purely from the benchmarks, I would definitly have chosen the 1060.

1060 6GB or RX480 8GB... they're pretty darn close across the board. People have been yelling and screaming about this topic since the two were released. Effectively what it boils down to is the RX480 8GB is better in DX12 games (which is what games going forward will be more often programmed in) and the 1060 6GB is better in DX11 games (which is what current and previous games are programmed in). But honestly they both perform closely enough across the board that getting one or the other doesn't really matter all that much. It mostly comes down to price and preference. RX480 8GB also has a pretty significant advantage in the Vulkan API, however very few games are programmed in that right now, and who knows how many will be going forward so its tough to really say wether or not that is a worthwhile reason to invest. the 480 has had recently improved drivers and whatnot and a lot of benchmarks are trying to put it slightly above the 1060 in DX11 games as well, but I'm not entirely sold on that. People on Youtube don't really know how to properly conduct experiments and comparisons so its very difficult to know exactly how accurate or precise those numbers are.

THAT BEING SAID! that is about the 6GB and 8GB versions of the respective cards. As mentioned earlier, the 1060 3GB is a cut down version of its 6GB bigger brother... Not only does it have less VRAM, but it ALSO has fewer CUDA cores in it, resulting in lower fps as well. the RX 480 4GB is ONLY a VRAM reduced variant of the 480 8GB, so its performance is unaffected, and this gives the 480 4GB an advantage over the 1060 3GB. If the 480 4GB can be bought for a similar price to the 1060 3GB, then I would recommend the 480 4GB.

3 hours ago, apaydinabdul said:

AMD doesn't seem stable to me, and Intel has almost always been better with performance over the past years. I'd feel better getting a 1060 3GB

Its your money and you can do whatever you want with it. There is nothing inherently wrong with the 1060 3GB; its a fine card. But based on this sentence (and I don't mean to be a dick) you do not have any idea what you're talking about and this is a baseless claim... Intel doesn't make Nvidia GPU's such as the GTX 1060 3GB.... Nvidia makes them. Intel is largely a CPU/Motherboard/Storage manufacturer.... I'm not aware of any GPU's being made by them. the GTX 1060 3GB is very definitely not made by them. If you want to buy the 1060 and avoid AMD for whatever reason, thats completely fine! as I say; its your money!... but don't be talkin such nonsense when you clearly have no clue what you're saying.

 

3 hours ago, apaydinabdul said:

That last thing you say is true. But you know, I'm still a student, who just now and then plays games in his spare time. Obviously when I start going to university I will have more time to work (and I will be older so earn more) and get a normal PC with an i7 and such. I just don't want to spend too much on a pc, because I know I'm not going to multitask or do crazy stuff with it.

the i3 7100 will do fine for you in a lot of games.... but if you get into your more CPU intensive titles, it will struggle to maintain a steady 60 fps, and even moreso when you have background applications running. There are a ton of games where it will do great though. And a handful of some more CPU intensive games where it will struggle. You may want to check which games you're playing and planning to play before you decide which CPU you wish to get.

 

 

So to answer your question " will I be OK with the i3-7100?" Yes. "okay" is the word I would use to describe that CPU for gaming. Its definitely "okay", but its not going to be "good" in every situation, and its certainly not "ideal".

[apaydinabdul]

7 hours ago, Zyndo said:

No. the 1060 3GB has fewer operating cores than the 1060 6GB does. It is a cut down version of the full 1060 6GB. it tuns about 95% the speed of a 1060 6GB. the RX 480 8GB and 4GB do not have that issue, so the RX480 4GB pulls ahead by a decent amount in the 4GB version compared to the 1060 3Gb (both in VRAM and fps)

 

AMD is not synonymous with "bad cores"... Buying one of the older, outdated, AMD chips would result in poor IPC and single core performances.... but if you bought an intel chip that was 3-5 years old you would encounter the same issue. AMD's current offerings are bad because they're outdated, not because AMD is bad. their new releases (Zen/Ryzen/whatever the hell they're calling it) are quite likely to be extremely competitive with Intel's mainstream offerings. By all means if you want intel then get intel I'm not trying to talk you out of that. I'm just saying that there is nothing inherently wrong with AMD as a whole for their CPU's.

 

1060 6GB or RX480 8GB... they're pretty darn close across the board. People have been yelling and screaming about this topic since the two were released. Effectively what it boils down to is the RX480 8GB is better in DX12 games (which is what games going forward will be more often programmed in) and the 1060 6GB is better in DX11 games (which is what current and previous games are programmed in). But honestly they both perform closely enough across the board that getting one or the other doesn't really matter all that much. It mostly comes down to price and preference. RX480 8GB also has a pretty significant advantage in the Vulkan API, however very few games are programmed in that right now, and who knows how many will be going forward so its tough to really say wether or not that is a worthwhile reason to invest. the 480 has had recently improved drivers and whatnot and a lot of benchmarks are trying to put it slightly above the 1060 in DX11 games as well, but I'm not entirely sold on that. People on Youtube don't really know how to properly conduct experiments and comparisons so its very difficult to know exactly how accurate or precise those numbers are.

THAT BEING SAID! that is about the 6GB and 8GB versions of the respective cards. As mentioned earlier, the 1060 3GB is a cut down version of its 6GB bigger brother... Not only does it have less VRAM, but it ALSO has fewer CUDA cores in it, resulting in lower fps as well. the RX 480 4GB is ONLY a VRAM reduced variant of the 480 8GB, so its performance is unaffected, and this gives the 480 4GB an advantage over the 1060 3GB. If the 480 4GB can be bought for a similar price to the 1060 3GB, then I would recommend the 480 4GB.

Its your money and you can do whatever you want with it. There is nothing inherently wrong with the 1060 3GB; its a fine card. But based on this sentence (and I don't mean to be a dick) you do not have any idea what you're talking about and this is a baseless claim... Intel doesn't make Nvidia GPU's such as the GTX 1060 3GB.... Nvidia makes them. Intel is largely a CPU/Motherboard/Storage manufacturer.... I'm not aware of any GPU's being made by them. the GTX 1060 3GB is very definitely not made by them. If you want to buy the 1060 and avoid AMD for whatever reason, thats completely fine! as I say; its your money!... but don't be talkin such nonsense when you clearly have no clue what you're saying.

 

the i3 7100 will do fine for you in a lot of games.... but if you get into your more CPU intensive titles, it will struggle to maintain a steady 60 fps, and even moreso when you have background applications running. There are a ton of games where it will do great though. And a handful of some more CPU intensive games where it will struggle. You may want to check which games you're playing and planning to play before you decide which CPU you wish to get.

 

 

So to answer your question " will I be OK with the i3-7100?" Yes. "okay" is the word I would use to describe that CPU for gaming. Its definitely "okay", but its not going to be "good" in every situation, and its certainly not "ideal".

Thanks for your time and everybody elses time. When I said Intel I actually meant NVIDIA, my bad. Ii's just that I've never been into AMD before and I don't know if I was discussing with the wring people until now but almost everyone said I'd be better off with NVIDIA cards and Intel chips, even though (as you guys showed me) the benchhmarks are right there.

I gues I'll just wait for the Ryzen chips to see what they offer and maybe, just maybe I will get a 480 4GB along with it.

The small thing is, I've never been able to use Shadowplay on my 550TI (Doesn't support Shadowplay) and it seems like it does almost not drop FPS in games while recording (2-3 FPS as far as I know).

But ye, I'll wait for AMD's new chips and make a permanent decission. Thanks!