G4560 vs R3 1200

[Billy_Mays]

Im wanting to upgrade soonish and I realized that the g4560 with a LGA 1151 mobo on newegg costs $150 cad and the Ryzen 33 and mobo costs $250 so which one should I go for and I dont mid selling stuff

[ybriK]

1200.

 

 

 

 

 

[MaxBunny]

1 minute ago, Billy_Mays said:

Im wanting to upgrade soonish and I realized that the g4560 with a LGA 1151 mobo on newegg costs $150 cad and the Ryzen 33 and mobo costs $250 so which one should I go for and I dont mid selling stuff

Considering it's CAD, that's like a $1 difference. No brainer here. Just go with Ryzen. It's the better long run investment.

[Damascus]

1200

[Zando_]

Just now, Damascus said:

1200

Yup. 4 actual cores will beat 4 threads, plus you can OC Ryzen. 

[Billy_Mays]

5 minutes ago, Damascus said:

1200

 

5 minutes ago, MaxBunny said:

Considering it's CAD, that's like a $1 difference. No brainer here. Just go with Ryzen. It's the better long run investment.

 

6 minutes ago, ybriK said:

1200.

 

 

 

 

 

 

4 minutes ago, Zando Bob said:

Yup. 4 actual cores will beat 4 threads, plus you can OC Ryzen. 

Ok I wasnt too sure 

[ARikozuM]

1200. Physical cores are better than logical cores in this case. 

[dizmo]

Depends on how tight you are budget wise. If you're super tight, playing on a 1080p monitor, then going with Intel isn't a horrible choice. If you can afford it, obviously the 1200 is better.

[Billy_Mays]

Just now, ARikozuM said:

1200. Physical cores are better than logical cores in this case. 

Ok 

[Billy_Mays]

Just now, dizmo said:

Depends on how tight you are budget wise. If you're super tight, playing on a 1080p monitor, then going with Intel isn't a horrible choice. If you can afford it, obviously the 1200 is better.

I have a 1440x900p monitor right now and I would like to upgrade to 1080p but I dont want to spend over $500 cad

[Billy_Mays]

Just now, Strike105X said:

Slightly offtopic but i seen you around and gotta ask, why " 4.5 overclocked hopefully" ? Is it or not at 4.5 ?:p.

I was getting a OCing board but it was DOA and I found out my mobo from a spare PC that the windows file had corrupted so I didnt know it was broken but in the long run I couldve had my PC running months ago if i knew it was a windows coruption

[MyName13]

They both perform the same, Pentium sometimes performs even better than r3, just get the Pentium if you can't afford r5 1600, r3 CPUs are a horrible choice with Pentium around.Upgrade path is bullsh!t since r3 alone costs as much as Pentium+h110 motherboard (so Pentium now + another CPU in the future would cost the same as r3 now + future Zen CPU), not to mention that some am4 motherboards might not receive support for future Zen CPUs.

[MyName13]

2 hours ago, ybriK said:

1200.

 

 

 

 

 

Are you trolling him?They perform almost the same and yet r3 costs twice as much, even the minimums are similar, since he has 60 hz monitor Pentium is the obvious choice since even it is capable of 60 fps (so much about "bf1 requires lots of cores"...).

I wouldn't trust hardware unboxed much because his benchmarks differ too much from gamers Nexus (or maybe they shouldn't be trusted, idk), compare their bf1 benchmark with hardware unboxed's

 

 

Sorry for double post but I can't put this quote in my previous post.

[Billy_Mays]

6 hours ago, Strike105X said:

Thanks, sorry for butting in but it sparckled my curiosity :p.

It's fin but it took a long while or it to finish

[ybriK]

On 05/08/2017 at 6:14 PM, MyName13 said:

Are you trolling him?They perform almost the same and yet r3 costs twice as much, even the minimums are similar, since he has 60 hz monitor Pentium is the obvious choice since even it is capable of 60 fps (so much about "bf1 requires lots of cores"...).

I wouldn't trust hardware unboxed much because his benchmarks differ too much from gamers Nexus (or maybe they shouldn't be trusted, idk), compare their bf1 benchmark with hardware unboxed's

 

 

Sorry for double post but I can't put this quote in my previous post.

Probably because not every reviewer benchmarks the same way? Sure he can get the cheaper G4560 but he will be upgrading sooner than later once he encounters performance issues. If he chose the R3 1200 path then he wouldn't need to upgrade ASAP. It's called "future proofing". I hope you know what the quotation marks mean in regards to future proofing. Get off your self-centered individualism and show some "benchmarks" that you believe is "right".

 

Also if I was trolling him I would've said something like "Don't bother with these CPUs, go back to consoles. You need at least an R7 or i7 to join the PC Master Race." I don't think you know what "trolling" means.

[Guest]

I'd even go as far as saying 1200 isn't future proofing as the 4 cores will be at 90+ usage as soon as he puts it in his PC and plays a modern game. Same can be said for the I5 as well.and the pentium 

[MyName13]

1 hour ago, jdwii said:

I'd even go as far as saying 1200 isn't future proofing as the 4 cores will be at 90+ usage as soon as he puts it in his PC and plays a modern game. Same can be said for the I5 as well.and the pentium 

Neither are 4c8t CPUs, smt can't help much since it only allows the CPU to be used while another thread is waiting for something, this means that software has to be cleverly optimised, it's much easier to simply put the workload on another core, quad cores are maxed out because we've been using them for 6 years and that won't change soon and consoles still have very weak CPUs, they can't make a game that will work on a 2017 beast hexa core and on a weak 2011-2013 jaguar.Hexa cores are still expensive for most gamers and most of them won't buy them right now.

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, MyName13 said:

Neither are 4c8t CPUs, smt can't help much since it only allows the CPU to be used while another thread is waiting for something, this means that software has to be cleverly optimised, it's much easier to simply put the workload on another core, quad cores are maxed out because we've been using them for 6 years and that won't change soon and consoles still have very weak CPUs, they can't make a game that will work on a 2017 beast hexa core and on a weak 2011-2013 jaguar.Hexa cores are still expensive for most gamers and most of them won't buy them right now.

SMT helps quite a bit Gamernexus has proved this with their best CPU for VR. Also look at how the 2600K is aging compared to the 2500K they both started out being the same now the 2600K has a decent lead. 

 

But 4 thread 4 core CPU's are simply not enough for gaming and keeping everything smooth. This includes even Intel I5. Right now i know its been repeated by several other users and i HATE repeating what others say but Ryzen 1600 or 7700K for gaming. God i hate saying what others say haha. 

 

 

[MyName13]

4 minutes ago, jdwii said:

SMT helps quite a bit Gamernexus has proved this with their best CPU for VR. Also look at how the 2600K is aging compared to the 2500K they both started out being the same now the 2600K has a decent lead. 

 

But 4 thread 4 core CPU's are simply not enough for gaming and keeping everything smooth. This includes even Intel I5. Right now i know its been repeated by several other users and i HATE repeating what others say but Ryzen 1600 or 7700K for gaming. God i hate saying what others say haha. 

 

 

Yeah, around 25% difference, that's as much as we should expect from smt.