i3+multi-threading vs i5

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
G

Greg55

Honorable
Jun 2, 2013
95
0
10,630
People say that dual core cpus are not a good option for the future because games are going to utilize more cores. Im not sure if i understand how multi-threading works but isn't it supposed to work as artificial cores? so why is there a difference between an i3 which has 2 actual cores and multi-threading against an i5 with 4 actual cores and no multi-threading? assuming both cpus have the same clock speeds.

Same goes for the i7's 4 actual cores+ multi threads against the AMD 8 cored cpus.
 
Solution
D
i5 (haswel, ivb) offers strong per-core performance, single core performance and decent performance in highly threaded tasks that use 7-8 cpu cores and more.
i3 performs worse than i5 because the way ht works is that a core executes 2 threads (very simply put) when it has extra resources available and when the o.s. or software can take advantage of ht. i5 doesn't have that issue since there's no logical division, just discreet cores working. that's why there's virtually no difference in i5 and i7 cpus' performance when a task uses only 4 cores but both work faster than core i3. additionally, core i3 cpus get further crippled in L3 cache and different extension sets and other features thanks to product segmentation. that's why core i3...
Sort by date Sort by votes
burdenbound

burdenbound

Splendid
Aug 9, 2011
3,225
0
22,960
Hyper threading 'acts' like multiple cores in that it can run more than one application at a time but it has shared resources. So if application 1 needs more resources and then application 2 comes along and request resources that app 1 is currently using it has to wait. Where as multiple cores have their own resources and don't run into this problem.

If you have the money I would go with the i5, especially for gaming. The i7 is unnecessary for gaming and the i3 is decent but as time goes by it will continue to lose more ground to a true quad core CPU.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
D

de5_Roy

Splendid
Oct 14, 2011
7,159
0
26,960
i5 (haswel, ivb) offers strong per-core performance, single core performance and decent performance in highly threaded tasks that use 7-8 cpu cores and more.
i3 performs worse than i5 because the way ht works is that a core executes 2 threads (very simply put) when it has extra resources available and when the o.s. or software can take advantage of ht. i5 doesn't have that issue since there's no logical division, just discreet cores working. that's why there's virtually no difference in i5 and i7 cpus' performance when a task uses only 4 cores but both work faster than core i3. additionally, core i3 cpus get further crippled in L3 cache and different extension sets and other features thanks to product segmentation. that's why core i3 now is not a good purchase. these used to be fine before 2012, but not anymore.
what you should consider is how much performance you want for how much money, how much power you're gonna use and how far you're willing to push your pc. it's not a "simple intel vs amd, which one's better" or "i3 vs i5 vs i7 vs fx4/6/8000". any one of those can be suitable for someone. there'ss not universally correct answer for this.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom