Pentium G3220 vs G3258?

[Denis54]

Would I see a significant difference in speed between a G3258 and a G3220 for a basic computer that will be used for: Mail, Internet, YouTube and Word? No games and no overclocking.

 

[DrMrLordX]

There is no reason to get the 3258 unless you overclock it.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

There is no reason to get the 3258 unless you overclock it.

Sometimes you do get ridiculous combo board + CPU deals with the G3258 though.

 

[DrMrLordX]

True. In that case, the G3258 may be a value even without overclocking. But separated from combo deals, there really is no reason to get it just to run it at stock.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Sometimes you do get ridiculous combo board + CPU deals with the G3258 though.

I wish that they would have a ridiculous combo deal including a mini-ITX mobo though.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

True. In that case, the G3258 may be a value even without overclocking. But separated from combo deals, there really is no reason to get it just to run it at stock.

Yeah, if there are no good combos at the time then you might as well buy whichever is cheaper. I'm running my G3258 at stock right now until newegg gets that graphics card I want in stock, and it's really snappy for web browsing, youtube, and even solving differential equations in mathematica. The G3220 is the same CPU minus 200 MHz, which I can't imagine would feel any different for light computer use.

 

[Charlie98]

I've got 2 G3220's running in systems (in fact, I'm working on one right now...) and they are very good in general purpose use, especially when coupled with an SSD. I joke that I can't tell much difference between the G3220 and my OC'd 2500K in general use (like the OP describes.)

I would agree with the others... unless you can get a deal on a G3258/mobo combo, or they are the same price ~$5 or so, the G3220 is a solid pick.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

With the really strong single core performance on LGA1150 CPU's either one should be great for a long time in your intended use.

 

[Denis54]

Would the onboard GPU be powerful enough for those needs?

 

[crashtech]

A $47 Celeron G1840 is more than enough for the usage described in the OP.

 

[Charlie98]

Would the onboard GPU be powerful enough for those needs?

Yes.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

A $47 Celeron G1840 is more than enough for the usage described in the OP.

Wow, that's pretty crazy to get a CPU that good for $47. Blows me away how cheaply you can build a quality computer these days.

 

[escrow4]

If you do buy a dual core don't go lower than an i3 especially if this is a set it and forget it type of build. A G1820 is a 2014 E8500, its not that snappy. You want more than the bare minimum.

 

[eton975]

If you do buy a dual core don't go lower than an i3 especially if this is a set it and forget it type of build. A G1820 is a 2014 E8500, its not that snappy. You want more than the bare minimum.

The G1840 should be around 25% faster than the E8500.

I'd really like to see some benchmarks, to be honest. I had the thought of matching an R9 270 with the G1840.

 

[VirtualLarry]

The G1840 should be around 25% faster than the E8500.

I'd really like to see some benchmarks, to be honest. I had the thought of matching an R9 270 with the G1840.

I know escrow4 is basically a "#pcmasterrace" 1%'er, but his suggestion of an i3 for gaming is sound, if you care about playing "modern" games. The extra threads help a lot, for those games that are multithreaded. In fact, a Haswell i3 competes favorably with AMD's FX-6300, for gaming.

A Haswell Celeron is a solid chip for web browsing, and office tasks, but it's quite weak for gaming.

 

[eton975]

I know escrow4 is basically a "#pcmasterrace" 1%'er, but his suggestion of an i3 for gaming is sound, if you care about playing "modern" games. The extra threads help a lot, for those games that are multithreaded. In fact, a Haswell i3 competes favorably with AMD's FX-6300, for gaming.

A Haswell Celeron is a solid chip for web browsing, and office tasks, but it's quite weak for gaming.

Actually, I found some benches:

http://benchmarks-tests.com/reviews/processors/intel_celeron_g1820/

While somewhat weaker than the G3220, the G1820 (.1 Ghz slower than the G1840) actually does OK with an R9 270X, though there is a bottleneck in some cases.

 

[DrMrLordX]

The OP did specify "no gaming" so I don't think that's going to be a major concern.

 

[escrow4]

I know escrow4 is basically a "#pcmasterrace" 1%'er, but his suggestion of an i3 for gaming is sound, if you care about playing "modern" games. The extra threads help a lot, for those games that are multithreaded. In fact, a Haswell i3 competes favorably with AMD's FX-6300, for gaming.

A Haswell Celeron is a solid chip for web browsing, and office tasks, but it's quite weak for gaming.

Not exactly 1% all the way, but I never specifiy the absolute minimum for builds. An i3 will last and last, you use that Celeron box for anything else beyond simple office tasks and it will grind to a halt.

 

[Charlie98]

Not exactly 1% all the way, but I never specifiy the absolute minimum for builds. An i3 will last and last, you use that Celeron box for anything else beyond simple office tasks and it will grind to a halt.

That's why I tend to use/recommend the Pentiums. I'm using my G3220 to run MW1/2 and flight sims coupled with my old GTX560Ti and it's working pretty well. Unless you are processing video or running big spreadsheets or something, an i3 would be overkill in a GP rig.

 

[crashtech]

The i3 will allow for more bloatware to be installed before it needs attention. That's why I try to spec them when I can, the overall experience over time seems to be improved.

 

[eton975]

Not exactly 1% all the way, but I never specifiy the absolute minimum for builds. An i3 will last and last, you use that Celeron box for anything else beyond simple office tasks and it will grind to a halt.

Proof?

 

[Jimzz]

SSD, not the CPU, would be my first thing to budget for if there is no gaming. i.e. get a cheaper CPU to get a better harddrive.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Proof?

He had driver installation issues with a G1610, such that it was taking 90% CPU playing back 1080P YouTube, so now he badmouths modern Celerons. IIRC.

 

[sm625]

If you're going to use a dual core non-HT cpu in 2014 then you need to be familiar with task manager. You'll want to have it running so you can see it in your system tray. Because you will get processes that peg one cpu core for no reason and you may have to deal with them, whereas on a 4 or 8 thread machine you can get away with letting them chomp away in the background.

 

[AnonymouseUser]

If you're going to use a dual core non-HT cpu in 2014 then you need to be familiar with task manager. You'll want to have it running so you can see it in your system tray. Because you will get processes that peg one cpu core for no reason and you may have to deal with them, whereas on a 4 or 8 thread machine you can get away with letting them chomp away in the background.

This is true. I've seen it countless times because it's occurs daily, an old program using 100% of 1 core as soon as it's minimized. The Celeron Pentium chokes, but since it's dual core it's tolerable. A 4-thread CPU would handle this problem much better.