Here are the best bang per buck gaming processors for August 2010:
Price / Processor:
Thinking of building a new gaming rig this Q3 2010? Tom’s Hardware recommends these gaming CPUs from AMD and Intel as best picks:
CPUs:
The current best value gaming processor is the AMD Athlon II X3 435, with the Athlon II X3 445 breathing down its neck. If the actual street price difference between the two is not that much, it’s probably best to get the latter instead.
Not an AMD fan? The Intel Core i3-530 would be the value gaming processor for you. Yes, the Core i5 models may be tempting, but it would cost you almost double for the i3.
For better performance picks, you could take a look at the AMD Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition or the Intel Core i5-750.
We take a look at one of Intel’s dual-core processors with built-in graphics core. This introduces a new two-chip package Intel architecture (CPU and Platform Control Hub), as opposed to the previous three-chip package (CPU, Northbridge, Southbridge).
Intel Clarkdale Processor Models (2 Cores, 4 Threads, 4MB cache, DDR3-1333 memory support):
PCPerspective suggests that you also look at the Core i3-530 processor as possible better alternative:
“We have Westmere parts in our hands (a bit earlier than we expected last year) with Clarkdale and while I am impressed to see the technology working, the processor really fills a specific market segment. The most specific thing I can say to a potential buyer of a Clarkdale processor is this: it only makes sense to buy one if you are going to utilize the integrated graphics. If you plan on adding a discrete graphics card anyway, then it makes more sense to use that processor budget for a Lynnfield part.
The exception to this? Extreme low cost requirements. You can get a Core i3 processor for $113 that will give you similar levels of CPU performance but without the Turbo Mode features. You still get the Intel HD Graphics and HyperThreading support so you could create a nice HTPC system for minimal cost by pairing it with one of the Intel HD55TC mATX motherboards or another option.” [PCPer.com | Core i5-661]
AnandTech feels that Clarkdale needs to improve its on-package memory controller:
“To conclude I can only go back to my only real complaints about Clarkdale. The off-die, on-package memory controller hampers performance. We've taken a step back in terms of memory latency, a step we can't correct until Sandy Bridge. I can't help but think that Clarkdale would be so much more competitive if it had Lynnfield's memory controller. I guess we'll have to wait a year to find out.
The other issue is that its pricing at the high end just doesn't make any sense. There isn't a single Core i5 I'd recommend, but the i3s are spot-on.” [AnandTech | Core i5 661]
Tom’s Hardsare sees promise in the home theater niche:
“The Core i5-661 we tested—which could easily be substituted for the i5-660 at the same price point—completely eclipses the Core 2 Duo E8500 and solidly rivals some of the fastest Core 2 Quads. Our opinion is reinforced by Intel’s limiting the H55 and H57 chipsets to a single graphics card.
Clarkdale also shows promise in the home theater. Support for hardware accelerated Blu-ray playback, multi-channel LPCM output, and lossless bitstreaming of high-def audio formats leaves very little else to be desired from a media-oriented platform, so long as you don’t intend to game on it. Not having to buy a discrete Radeon HD 5000-series graphics card means we’ll be seeing remarkably powerful mini-ITX platforms with 73W Clarkdale CPUs taking care of processing and graphics in one compact (affordable) package.” [Tom’s Hardware | Core i5-661]
HardwareZone enjoyed the better media playback, but not convinced with the i5-661’s performance when compared to a Core 2 Duo E8500:
“From a pure performance point of view, the new Intel HD Graphics is a slight upgrade over the GMA X4500HD, even in its fastest (900MHz) incarnation on the Core i5-661. What it does significantly better is media playback, where it certainly manages to justify its HD tag.
As a processor, the dual-core nature of the Core i5-661 meant that it was rarely going to challenge the higher-end quad-core processors, even with Turbo Boost and HyperThreading. Most of its better scores were naturally recorded for system suites like SYSmark 2007 and not heavily multi-threaded applications. In fact, from some of our benchmarks, we can't help but wonder if the smaller L3 cache on the Core i5-661 affected its performance compared to the older Core 2 Duo E8500.
With a US$196 price tag for 1k units, the Core i5-661 will likely be competing against Intel's own Core i5-750. And like we said, it won't surpass the quad-core. Still, we hope the new H55 motherboards are competitively priced to give these new Clarkdale processors more value. Already, unlike the i5-750, the i5-661 has a decent mainstream graphics core inside, which should be adequate for some users, including businesses.” [HardwareZone | Core i5-661]
Are the Clarkdale processors a good buy? It would depend on the prices of H55 motherboards, as HardwareZone pointed out. And, still talking about value, a Core i3-530 looks to offer the best bang per buck, among the Clarkdales, that is. For performance, the Core 2 Quad processors would most probably serve you better.
Nowadays, DDR3 memory is slowly being the de facto standard of system RAM. One of the major hindrances of building an inexpensive AMD rig with DDR3 is the price of the motherboard.
X-bit Labs took a close look at the Gigabyte MA770T-UD3P (US$80) mainboard:
“According to the results of our test session, despite its modest price, this mainboard may become a good choice not only for inexpensive unpretentious platforms, but also for computer enthusiasts. It has adequate specifications meeting today’s needs, and flexible configuring options together with overall predictable behavior are just as good as those of more expensive Socket AM3 products. In other words, during our test session, we didn’t reveal any serious issues that could give anyone the reason to underestimate Gigabyte MA770T-UD3P. Especially, since it performs and overclocks just as good as Gigabyte MA790FXT-UD5P, for instance, that belongs to a much higher price range.” [X-bit Labs | Gigabyte MA770T-UD3P]
Gigabyte MA770T-UD3P Specs:
If you are looking to build a new AMD rig with a socket AM3 processor and DDR3 memory, it’s worth looking for the Gigabyte MA770T-UD3P.
Tom’s Hardware built an Intel machine with an MSI Intel P45 motherboard and Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 processor, and then overclocked it up to 4.2 GHz.
System Setup:
“Although the 4.26 GHz setting provided the most performance, the 3.9 GHz overclock turns out to be the winner of this efficiency analysis. The clock speed increase provides a nice speed bump when compared to the 3.33 GHz stock speed without bumping power consumption up to excessive levels. If you are looking to get the best performance paired with the lowest effective power consumption, the fastest possible speed without a voltage increase should be your goal.” [Tom’s Hardware | Overclocking Core 2 Duo: Power Versus Performance]
Although an Intel Core i7 and/or AMD Phenom II based system would be the ideal setup for future-proofing your build, the Intel P45 and Core 2 Duo E8600 combo is still a great one to have, especially if you are into overclocking.
The Phenom X3 8750 is a processor from AMD that has the following features:
ExtremeTech put the Phenom 8750 head-to-head with an Intel Core 2 Duo E8400:
"AMD has an excellent argument for going with a CPU with an odd number of cores. The triple-core equipped CPU performed admirably most of the time. ,,, If you consider that it runs at a mere 2.4GHz compared to the 3.0GHz Core 2 Duo we tested it against, you must conclude that the extra core had, at the very least, some positive effect on the benchmark results. ... at its factory frequency, it's a solid contender in the midrange CPU market-something AMD hasn't been able to brag about in a very long time. " [ ExtremeTech | 8750 Review ]
Then the Phenom 8750 was overclocked:
"The battle was finally over. I threw up my white flag, once again a victim of a Phenom CPU with very little factory overspec to speak of." [ExtremeTech | 8750 Overclocking]
So is the Phenom X3 8750 worth it? I say yes. Just don't have your hopes up on having a decent overclock.
All 3 processors feature:
The 9950 Black Edition consumes 140 Watts maximu, while the 9350e and 9150e, being the energy-efficient Phenom X4s, consume no more than 65 Watts.
AnandTech.com tested the Phenom X4 9950, 9350e and 9150e processors:
"... AMD's CPU division is finally competitive again. The return to competition isn't because of an increase in performance or architectural changes, it's simply through very aggressive pricing. ... The Phenom X4 9950 BE and 9850 BE are reasonably competitive with the Q9300 and Q6600, although we would still opt for the Intel solutions thanks to lower power consumption and significantly better overclocking potential. ... The Phenom X4 9550 is the sweet spot of AMD's product line and it does do well against Intel's dual-core E8400, as do the X3 8650/8450 against Intel's E7200. " [AnandTech | AMD's Phenom X4 9950, 9350e and 9150e]
HardwareZone.com tested the Phenom X4 9350e and 9150e , and found them to be 'Energy Efficient'at the expense of performance :
"... we can only think of one scenario where the new Phenom entrants would be of potential value and that's when you consider AMD's balanced system slogan, exemplified by AMD's mainstream Cartwell platform. Such a platform would marry an AMD 780G motherboard with a low TDP quad-core processor like these new Phenoms and make for a powerful, yet compact little system to play your Blu-ray movies or equivalent HD video content, with decent gaming potential thrown in. ... As we found in our real-world games testing, the minute you consider discrete graphics for better game performance, an AMD-based system would only hinder your overall graphics performance. So for the performance-concerned enthusiasts, you would do well to stick with an Intel processor. " [HardwareZone | Energy Efficient CPUs Ahoy!]
If you are looking to build a new quad-core system, and care less with overclocking, the Phenom X4 9950 BE looks to be a good processor, being at par with the Q9300 and Q6600 Intel CPUs.
Tom's Hardware mixed and matched seven (7) graphics cards and four (4) processors:
Graphics cards:
Processors:
"The change to a new generation of graphics card achieves more, but the CPU should still have sufficient brawn to provide the basic level the card requires. Changing from a Geforce 6800 GT to a current Geforce 8800 or 9800 can quintuple the overall results for 3D games. Changing from a Geforce 7950 GT to one of the new G92 graphic chips will at least double the overall results." [Tom's Hardware | GPU vs. CPU Upgrade: Extensive Tests]
As Tom's Hardware states, a system would properly utilize the full 3D potential of GeForce 8 and 9 graphics cards, provided that the processor (CPU) has a speed of 2600 to 3000 MHz.
So what now, brown cow? For practicality, I'd say that upgrading to the most inexpensive processor at the mentioned MHz range (2.6 - 3 GHz) would be the first step. Then, gather enough moolah to snag one of those GeForce 8 or 9 series cards.
Features:
HardwareZone wasn't very pleased with the performance of the new Phenoms:
"... Seriously speaking, there is nothing to look-forward to with the AMD Phenom X4 processors with performance not far off from Intel's dual-core solutions. If you need performance, Intel's Core 2 Quad is the answer and they've got performance better than the entire Phenom series more than a year ago. If you're hoping that the future Phenom X4 9950 to have any positive impact, our testing tells us nothing of that sort. ... Don't misunderstand us; the Phenom X4 processor works fine and all, but it's just not living up to expectations set by AMD nor of any impact/consideration when compared with Intel's offerings . " [HardwareZone | AMD's New Phenom X4 9000 Series]
As of now, the Intel Core 2 Quad is the reigning performance champion in the processor realm. If you are already using an AMD platform rig, and looking to upgrade to a quad core processor, it would be best to wait for the next Phenom series that would hopefully sport 45nm process technology.
