G3258 with new mainboard VS 4150 i3 and current cheap MB?

[john5220]

ok UPDATE

I am wondering what you guys think about buying the unlocked pentium and a new budget overclocking mainboard for the same price of a 4150 i3?

would it be a better trade off? assuming the stock cooler for the unlocked pentium which has a copper core can OC the chip to about 4.5 GHZ








Both are same frequency

However one is less cache and only costs $109

I would prefer the 4150 i3 with 3MB cache because its so much cheaper than the 4330

But not sure how big the performance difference in Battlefield 4 multi player would be. Its strictly for gaming use!!!

 

[SteveGrabowski]

These games are kind of old, but it doesn't look like a whole lot of difference between a 4330 and a 4130 when tested with a GTX 780:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i3-4340-4330-4130_5.html#sect0

Not sure on BF4.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

Probably what you're paying most for in the 4330 vs 4150 is the HD 4600 graphics instead of the HD 4400 though.

 

[skipsneeky2]

Would go for the 4330 if it was me and my money,simply for that extra cache+ beefier gpu. If your sitting on a tight budget perhaps save the cash. HD4600 would be nice for a back up gpu.

 

[john5220]

No I have absolutely 0 need for the GPU in that chip.

I am about to buy a GTX 750 ti or a Radeon R9 270 2GB

Both of which I would assume is night and day difference?

Or I could hold out on those new GPU and use the igp in the i3 and abandon my HD 4870? but even then I think that i3 is going to stink compared to my old HD 4870 which runs battlefield 3 on high with 1080p

 

[Lepton87]

Unfortunately that larger cache is also slower I didn't see a single benchmark where it would make a noticeable difference.

 

[Arachnotronic]

No I have absolutely 0 need for the GPU in that chip.

I am about to buy a GTX 750 ti or a Radeon R9 270 2GB

Both of which I would assume is night and day difference?

Or I could hold out on those new GPU and use the igp in the i3 and abandon my HD 4870? but even then I think that i3 is going to stink compared to my old HD 4870 which runs battlefield 3 on high with 1080p

Get either of the two dGPUs that you mentioned. The iGPU on Intel LGA processors just isn't that great for gaming.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

No I have absolutely 0 need for the GPU in that chip.

I am about to buy a GTX 750 ti or a Radeon R9 270 2GB

Both of which I would assume is night and day difference?

Or I could hold out on those new GPU and use the igp in the i3 and abandon my HD 4870? but even then I think that i3 is going to stink compared to my old HD 4870 which runs battlefield 3 on high with 1080p

Someone posted a disturbing screenshot showing truly awful performance for an i3-4130 in combination with an R9 280 on COD Advanced Warfare in the i3 thread I started. I found the review of the game, where they said:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-call-of-duty-advanced-warfare-face-off

However, we can report that we see the same issue to different degrees on other AMD GPUs too, though the lower down the stack you go, the less noticeable the impact (as you're hitting GPU, rather than CPU limitations) - as we saw when testing with an R7 265, essentially an overclocked version of the classic Radeon HD 7850. Generally speaking though, if you're running anything at the R9 270 level or better, we'd recommend an Intel quad-core processor or the equivalent for best performance with an AMD card, while a Core i3 is potent enough to deal with Nvidia equivalents in this performance range.

So maybe that R9 270 would be a bad combo with an i3-4150. Maybe it's just that game, but that's certainly something to research before your buy. Maybe it would be worth it to hold out for three weeks to see if you can snag a GTX 760 cheap on Black Friday. I can't imagine those are selling all that well right now at $200 with AMD's price cuts and the GTX 970 so impressive at $330. Seems like a GTX 760 would be a prime candidate to see big price cuts for Black Friday. Just conjecture though.

If you check my i3 thread in this forum, you can see pretty impressive performance with a GTX 780 Ti, so Nvidia might be the way to go with an i3.

 

[AtenRa]

Someone posted a disturbing screenshot showing truly awful performance for an i3-4130 in combination with an R9 280 on COD Advanced Warfare in the i3 thread I started. I found the review of the game, where they said:



So maybe that R9 270 would be a bad combo with an i3-4150. Maybe it's just that game, but that's certainly something to research before your buy. Maybe it would be worth it to hold out for three weeks to see if you can snag a GTX 760 cheap on Black Friday. I can't imagine those are selling all that well right now at $200 with AMD's price cuts and the GTX 970 so impressive at $330. Seems like a GTX 760 would be a prime candidate to see big price cuts for Black Friday. Just conjecture though.

If you check my i3 thread in this forum, you can see pretty impressive performance with a GTX 780 Ti, so Nvidia might be the way to go with an i3.

Every AMD Card will do fine with Core i3, here is with R9 290X in COD Advanced Warfare

 

[Yuriman]

It's true though that right now, in directx-based games, AMD GPUs hit the CPU significantly harder. OP might be better off with an NV card to pair with his i3.

Mantle is another story.

 

[john5220]

Hey guys I am in no rush for the GPU.

I am going to buy black ops 2 for thanks giving or black friday. I could get it for $30 on steam currently my steam wallet has $20 from selling CS GO skins and crates I win free while just playing so only need to spend $10 of my real life money as it goes on sale 50% off the current $60 asking price.

And my HD 4870 runs black ops 2 60 FPS on max settings with shadows on low which hardly even makes a difference.

So what I am doing is just browsing amazon daily to see if deals comes up I actually plan on waiting till next year if necessary, I really would prefer a GTX 760

But at $200 I can't afford it right now its out of my budget because I need to save money for the i3. Honestly I am even thinking of a used video card there are lots of R9 270 going used for $95 on amazon. You can't beat that right?

But I wanna hold off and see what happens to the GTX 760 price. It might also be better to wait for the GTX 960 aswell right?

But then I think to myself why bother with the new CPU if I am going to stick to black ops 2 and advanced warfare. Its clear from all the youtube videos that AW runs super fast on a dual core pentium, unlike battlefield 4 which is 64 player maps. AW is max 18 players which is why it runs so well on dual core and it also seems very optimized also. though admittedly a i3 and a used R9 270 would be a better combo than GTX 760 and my current pentium

 

[john5220]

I have decided to wait till black friday to see what deals come up on the i3 or video card

 

[Yuriman]

You might consider a used CPU, too. From the forum classifieds here, I picked up a 1st-gen i7 920, 8GB DDR3, a motherboard, and the seller threw in an old video card and small hard drive (which we didn't end up using) for $150. Considering you already have an 1150 board I expect you'd only be looking at Haswell, but you might score a heavily discounted locked Haswell i5 on eBay.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

ok UPDATE

I am wondering what you guys think about buying the unlocked pentium and a new budget overclocking mainboard for the same price of a 4150 i3?

would it be a better trade off? assuming the stock cooler for the unlocked pentium which has a copper core can OC the chip to about 4.5 GHZ








Both are same frequency

However one is less cache and only costs $109

I would prefer the 4150 i3 with 3MB cache because its so much cheaper than the 4330

But not sure how big the performance difference in Battlefield 4 multi player would be. Its strictly for gaming use!!!

You should really create a new thread for this with the drastic change. I have a G3258 which I got up to 4.4GHz on the stock cooler, but with huge temperature gains for those last couple hundred MHz (e.g., an hour of Prime95 small FFT peaks about 81C and runs mostly high 70s for 4.4 GHz, while it peaks about 70 and runs mostly high 60s at 4.2GHz).

 

[4ghz]

You can usually find a used r9 270 for $80 or 7950s for $110 or so shipped in the classifieds. As for the cpu it really depends on how much you want to keep your itx board. The g3258 + mobo deals that pop up every other week on newegg are a pretty good deal. But of course the i3 is a better overall chip as you won't run the risk of micro-stutter and it runs cooler and more efficiently (about 30 watts difference under full load when the g3258 is overclocked).

 

[cbn]

I am wondering what you guys think about buying the unlocked pentium and a new budget overclocking mainboard for the same price of a 4150 i3?

would it be a better trade off? assuming the stock cooler for the unlocked pentium which has a copper core can OC the chip to about 4.5 GHZ

But not sure how big the performance difference in Battlefield 4 multi player would be. Its strictly for gaming use!!!

Battlefield 4 64 player will easily run on a OC G3258.

No need for a i3 if that is all you are trying to accomplish.

My only caveat would be not to go too big on the GPU.

 

[SPBHM]

Every AMD Card will do fine with Core i3, here is with R9 290X in COD Advanced Warfare

Digital Foundry disagrees

one test does not prove the other wrong, since they both cannot test the entire game, but it's worrying to see performance going so low

"You can see that below as we run a Core i3 4130 at stock speeds compared with a Core i7 3770K overclocked to 4.3GHz. There's little difference in the performance results posted by Nvidia's GTX 760, while the Radeon R9 280 - a more capable card overall - has a firm lead when powered by the i7, but collapses significantly in draw-intensive areas when paired with the i3.

However, we can report that we see the same issue to different degrees on other AMD GPUs too, though the lower down the stack you go, the less noticeable the impact (as you're hitting GPU, rather than CPU limitations) - as we saw when testing with an R7 265, essentially an overclocked version of the classic Radeon HD 7850. Generally speaking though, if you're running anything at the R9 270 level or better, we'd recommend an Intel quad-core processor or the equivalent for best performance with an AMD card, while a Core i3 is potent enough to deal with Nvidia equivalents in this performance range."

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-call-of-duty-advanced-warfare-face-off

consistently we've seen Nvidia cards performing a lot better relative to AMD with the slower CPUs, so balancing a low budget build with CPUs and GPUs can be complicated.

 

[cbn]

Hey guys I am in no rush for the GPU.

I am going to buy black ops 2 for thanks giving or black friday. I could get it for $30 on steam currently my steam wallet has $20 from selling CS GO skins and crates I win free while just playing so only need to spend $10 of my real life money as it goes on sale 50% off the current $60 asking price.

And my HD 4870 runs black ops 2 60 FPS on max settings with shadows on low which hardly even makes a difference.

If that is the case, I wouldn't bother with a new GPU. Sounds like you don't even need one anyway.

Therefore at this point, I was just focus on making a good foundation for your PC so you can upgrade to quad core (and the appropriate GPU) when you finally need to.

 

[cbn]

OP, what CPU and mobo are you using now?

 

[john5220]

^ hey I have this mainboard

http://www.amazon.com/ECS-Elitegroup...words=ecs+1150

And I have a Pentium G 3220 haswell @ locked 3 GHZ

From the benchmarks I have seen advanced warfare barely even uses CPU power, infact COD AW has a lower graphic impression than Battlefield 3 and 4. And its only 18 players max for online gaming.

Where as I would have to worry about battlefield 3 and 4 since they have lots of players, and absolutely DO NOT run on dual core CPU. I tested battlefield 3 myself it stinks on my haswell dual core even on lowest settings 648x480 and an overclocked HD 4870 it still stinks down to 28 fps.

nasty CPU bottleneck with online play. Stupid anandtech refuses to benchmark CPUs with 64 player maps they insist on doing worthless benchmarks on single player in these games which no one ever plays. People aren't interested in SP bench marks for gods sake. They are soo misleading for what you would assume to be a high tech review site they are so backwards and primitive.

Anyways my solution to all of this could be relatively simple. I could stick to call of duty, this way I won't need to touch my dual core CPU as any dual core will run advanced warfare at over 60 fps. And I can get nice eye candy by upgrading my video card.

I just have to avoid battlefield 4 is all. I am sure its very much possible, I find call of duty games to be much more fun to begin with. so if I can avoid battlefield games and dayz I can invest my money in a GTX 760 or a GTX 960

And Advanced Warfare and Black Ops 2 will be all I will be playing for a very long time to come. If you think about it I don't need to buy a new CPU at all.

And at the same time I can wait for the GTX 960 or for the 760 price to drop because I definitely won't be buying advanced warfare till it goes on sale for $30 which will take a year or 2.
Black ops 2 should give me enough entertainment till then. So you guys see life can be simple once one avoids battlefield like a plague. Admittedly its graphics is indeed enticing.

While I was originally aiming for battlefield 4 because of how oudated COD graphics were, the thing is with the release of advanced warfare and true next gen visuals in cod I can now afford to forget about battlefield 4 etc. Advanced Warfare really looks fantastic compared to previous COD games and best of all it runs like a breeze on dual core. Heck it runs great on even a R7 260x. almost 60 fps maxxed out to be precise.

So its best for me to invest in RAM and a new GPU and save the rest of money for COD AW. That should carry me thorough college for the next 4 years.

 

[cbn]

^ hey I have this mainboard

http://www.amazon.com/ECS-Elitegroup...words=ecs+1150

And I have a Pentium G 3220 haswell @ locked 3 GHZ

I would find out if that motherboard you have can OC a G3258:

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/ASRock-ECS-overclocking-bug-H87,23409.html

(Granted that article was from last year, but since then many motherboard manufacturers have brought back the OC on Non-Z boards)

Then think about looking for a Pentium-AE on sale. Usually they go for about $55.

 

[cbn]

Where as I would have to worry about battlefield 3 and 4 since they have lots of players, and absolutely DO NOT run on dual core CPU. I tested battlefield 3 myself it stinks on my haswell dual core even on lowest settings 648x480 and an overclocked HD 4870 it still stinks down to 28 fps.

nasty CPU bottleneck with online play.

Having a faster Pentium will remove that bottleneck.

Then I would pair with your HD4870 and you should be good to go for 1080p low. (I use a R7 250X myself with a OC G3258)

 

[john5220]

LOL I heard Ocing the pentium G on myboard would melt the board lol

but no sadly the unlocked pentium isn't supported by my board

 

[skipsneeky2]

Having had a i3 2100 and a thread based around the purchase and use of it in BF3, any i3 would be a excellent starting point for gaming. I came from a e8200@ 3.2Ghz and BF3 went from barely playable to pretty much good to go.

 

[crashtech]

Funny thing about BF4 MP is that I saw it run good on an OCed G3258 and a GTX 770 @ 1080P Ultra. It did have quite a few dips into the 50fps territory, but it was very playable. Wish I'd gotten a video of it.