I5 is wayyyyy overhyped

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
U

Usacomputer

Reputable
Mar 5, 2014
100
0
4,680
Ok guys there is something that is wrong in the pc community that I've noticed

I've seen a lot and I'm mean a lot of hype for the core i5

I just watched a video where someone put the i5 with a gtx 960...

Now I want to explain why the core i5 is overhyped over used in sooooo many "budget" builds and honestly it's ridiculous how some people are pairing the i5 with an even lower end graphics card like the r9 280 or 750 ti

http://www.techspot.com/review/972-intel-core-i3-vs-i5-vs-i7/page7.html

http://techbuyersguru.com/haswellgaming2.php

If you take a look at these links you will see that something like a core i3 or an fx 6300 equivalent (i3 is slightly faster lol) you will see that for low end to medium range graphics cards and even a freakimg 980 in most games will be enough for a graphics card

And why I want to justify that is this

Let's say you have a budget of around 400-450 on a CPU and gpu

One option to core i5 4460- $190- gtx 960 $200

Or the 13 4160- $100 and gtx 970 $300-320 depends where u shop

Which one would you choose?

And let me tell you something that may blow you out of your chair

The 970 and i3 would destroy and I mean destroy by like 15-20 fps in ALL games excluding metro last light where it's like 10 fps difference at ultra

And the thing that justifies this is that for gaming you always want to put more money in the gpu and NOT a freakimg i5

Now you might be thinking to yourself that the i3 would bottleneck the 970
And your right in some games it actually will but in most it won't

But when you think about you may not be getting the most out of your 970 BUT YOU ARE GETTIG THE MOST FOR YOUR 400 DOLLARS THAT YOU SPENT and this is where budget systems are always miss created

Now I want to point some fingers really quick

Tek syndicate made a video where he paired the fx 6300 and the 970, this was a smart move by him because even tho the fx 6300 is slightly worse than the i3 4160, you can over clock it to make it better than the i3, anyway what he did is a good choice, the fx 6300 won't fully power the 970 but the thing to look at is you are getting the best bang for your buck

Another finger I want to point is

Scatter volt posted a video where he made a budget PC where he paired the i5 4690k to a gtx 960 and called it a gaming build, he has absolutely no idea what he's talking about and he is overhyping the i5 to be so amazing but in reality for gaming it's only helpful WITH HIGH END CARDS In SLI or CROSSFIRE, he also paired an i5 4590 with a r9 280.... Again he thinks the CPU helps in gaming when in reality it doesn't and if he were to switch up the order and paired an i3 with like a 290 or 290x he would have made a much better option so don't listen to scatter volt on his videos where he pairs an i5 to a freakimg 960 that just doesn't make sense unless your doing productivity

So what should you take away from this?

The i5 is overhyped and you should look at the CPU AND GPU performance and compare it to what your paying

 
Sort by date Sort by votes
esco_sid

esco_sid

Splendid
May 11, 2012
2,728
1
21,965
the thing is cpu technology moves a lot slower than GPU usually people upgrade gpu 2-3 times before they replace CPU why would you want to stick in some low end cpu and then when upgrade time comes it will bottleneck your new gpu and you have to replace pretty much half the system.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
plasmastorm

plasmastorm

Distinguished
Oct 18, 2008
726
0
19,160
Certainly nothing wrong with an i3 but sounds like someone either has an i3 and want's to make themselves feel better or has i3's overstocked and wants to get them sold.

I recently replaced my i3 laptop which had a GT640m in it with a laptop that has the SAME gpu and an i5.

The i3 laptop had a 720p screen and ran at around 30-40fps in most games, the new laptop has a 1080p screen and runs about the same, with games at the same settings.
You can't tell me that's not down to the CPU as the GPU in both systems is/was same.

I also use an i5 at home, a 3570k OC'd to 4.5Ghz. I run 2 monitors and generally have a game on the main screen while a film playing on the other with various background programs running.
For tat an i5 or equivalent is essential. I'm not going to get that level of multi tasking from an i3 without dropping FPS in the games due to the cpu not being able to keep up.


Bottom line, if you can afford an i5 over an i3 get it. If not then it's not the end of the world imo.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
RaDiKaL_

RaDiKaL_

Splendid
Apr 17, 2006
3,702
1
26,960
While the i5 will help more in games that are optimized to use 4 cores, when building a gaming pc one should always invest as much as possible on the GPU, then the CPU, if an i5 + GTX 970 is possible then that's the suggestion to give, otherwise its better to drop to an i3 or even an OCed G3258 (or whichever that model is) in order to get the biggest GPU (and appropriate PSU) within the given budget.

As for going with an FX-6xxx/8xxx instead of an i3 / G3258, that would be advisable only to someone that needs to to rendering or virtualization on a budget build, otherwise the Intel route is better since one gets a better upgrade path all the way to an i7 (for rendering and such), whereas with an FX-6300/FX-8350 you're practically at the top of AMD's line.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
delaro

delaro

Judicious
Ambassador
Aug 23, 2011
4,428
250
33,740


Compare FPS across 50 of the most popular titles and comeback and make that same claim. Here is what you will find in performance.

I5>FX>I3

Will a Overclocked FX chip be better than a I3 in some titles? Yes but once again compare it to 50 of the moet popular titles and you will see that is not the case all the time.

You have to remember FX chips were originally targeted to compete with a I5 950 which was already out of production for nearly 2 years before they launched, it took AMD nearly 10 years to get these chips out after to many delays.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
barto

barto

Expert
Ambassador
Apr 20, 2009
5,465
0
27,960
There's one very important factor you're missing, Single Player vs Multi-Player. Single Player games/modes are very scripted. The environment isn't dynamic as Multi-Player games/modes. Multi-Player games are much more CPU taxing. As i7Baby said, BF series and Crysis series there are significant performance differences between an i3 and an i5. I personally don't care for TechSpot reviews. I've always felt they were incomplete and absent of important details.

Videos are also useless. They again never tell the whole story.

BF4 Review:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/battlefield-4-graphics-card-performance,3634-10.html
Core # Review:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7728/battlefield-4-mantle-preview

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/crysis-3-performance-benchmark-gaming,3451-8.html
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
InvalidError

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
May 18, 2007
23,815
5,265
108,890

LGA1150 is practically dead too since Skylake is still scheduled for later this year and it will be on LGA1151.

I personally never consider the "upgrade path" since by the time I will actually need an upgrade, I will be two sockets behind, possibly three for my next PC considering how slow progress has been over the past five years. I simply put a powerful enough CPU in my new builds in the first place so I won't have an itch to upgrade it over the system's foreseeable service life - that's why I picked an i5-3470 instead of an i3 for my current build.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
U

Usacomputer

Reputable
Mar 5, 2014
100
0
4,680


Yes it's better but for the purposes of what your spemding

Ultimatly if you need to spend enough money for an i5 and lower the perfoamance of the graphics card then you would ultimately be getting less performance
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
tical2399

tical2399

Distinguished
Nov 20, 2009
1,081
0
19,460


You assume everybody is going to upgrade yearly. intel only keeps boards the same for two cycles really. If you get a 6300 you might not want to upgrade again until zen. Also if i buy a haswell I'm still stuck on a dead system unless I upgrade the very next year like a moron, because broadwell may use 1150, but skylake and cannon wont. I think for any person with a lick of common sense upgrade path should be the least of your concerns because you shouldn't be upgrading for 3-4 years anyway outside of gpu.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
nokiddingboss

nokiddingboss

Honorable
Feb 5, 2013
671
0
11,160
there is nothing wrong about wanting to save money, but you get what you pay for especially with these low end chips. the i3 and fx are excellent choices for entry level gaming for sure, but not quite like an i5 in terms of performance and consistency. i would still recommend them for budget builds though.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
tical2399

tical2399

Distinguished
Nov 20, 2009
1,081
0
19,460


^^ THIS,. I baffles me how many people on a site that caters to the tech savvy folks still say this nonsense.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
loki1944

loki1944

Distinguished
Oct 31, 2013
1,662
3
20,765
I'd say in terms of gaming on the intel side since i7 920/960 etc. Bloomfield; newer processors are over-hyped to an extent as, when equally equipped GPU wise, they keep up pretty well with newer processors (in games). Obviously there are other things to consider like new stuff available on later boards.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
U

Usacomputer

Reputable
Mar 5, 2014
100
0
4,680


I'd like to think this tech spot review is very complete if you actually took the heart to read it and Austin Evans is repeatable that much for what I'm concerned, and yes the i5 is better but for medium range graphics cards the i3 is fine and more than enough
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
JackNaylorPE

JackNaylorPE

Titan
BANNED
Oct 30, 2004
32,255
14
99,960
Most of my users are keeping their PCs 5-6 years. Maybe not as primary bix but still in functional use. My 2nd oldest son just replaced his 1366 950 build with a 4690k build w/ twin 970s. .... it did all he wanted it to do until about march when one of the games he recently started just wouldn't cut it.... IIRC, it would have been 6 years old in May....he got it in high school now he's graduated college and working.

He has other builds in the house available... (4770k w/ twin 780s .... 2600k w/ twin 560 Tis) but just wasn't worth walking down the hall for him I guess....at least not at 1080p.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
U

Usacomputer

Reputable
Mar 5, 2014
100
0
4,680


I actually just build one I used the i3 4160 and the 280x

Per say I could have gon with an i5 and like a 750 ti but again I would loose over all performance and actually the i3 and 280x are a good combo as the 280x is slightly faster than the 960 and the 280x runs at near 100% with the i3 so over all it's very balanced even with a low end chip
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
tical2399

tical2399

Distinguished
Nov 20, 2009
1,081
0
19,460


Austin Even has no credibility to me. In his $300 (or there about) pc build he suggest a no name unrated psu, and a mobo with a pcie 2.0 4x slot. You never suggest a no name psu, no matter what the expect load is.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
U

Usacomputer

Reputable
Mar 5, 2014
100
0
4,680


Well yes a low need psu would rape the whole system but this is besides the point, I linked multiple reviews and if you want me to I can show you more, the i3 is all you need for a sub 300 dollar card like the 290/280x/960 but if you were to get a 290+ or 290x or 970 then an i5 would be worth it but your wouldn't have to get it

My main point about this is that for the money your spending

An i3 and a 970 would beat an i5 and a 960

And other builds scaled to this such as a

Pentium g with a 750 ti would beat an i3 with a r9 240

You just should always spend more on the graphics card can you at least agree with me on this because it's true m8
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
barto

barto

Expert
Ambassador
Apr 20, 2009
5,465
0
27,960


I've read many of them. What gaming sequence /scene was used for the gaming tests? What mode (single player? multiplayer?)? What settings? What is the test setup (hardware) was used? Where are those details? They're kind of important. Numbers don't hold much value if you don't have a test base to compare them to.

Also, that's your opinion whether or not medium graphics are enough. That's not true for every person.

Edit: I'd also like to add it's far easier to upgrade a GPU than a CPU. While many people may pick an i5 with a 750 ti, they may have intentions to upgrade later in the year to a more powerful and suitable GPU.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
U

Usacomputer

Reputable
Mar 5, 2014
100
0
4,680


They switch around the test bench, at least in the tech spot review they switch CPUs and switch graphics cards, they all use 16 gbs of ram

Nothing outside of the ram gpu and CPU affect the gaming perfoamance

And the techspot review uses single player but there are plenty of multiplayer tested benches but you might need to dig down deeper for those

And yes I know medium graphics are enough for some people but of your building a purely gaming PC then why pair a 750 ti with a core i5 when you could
A. Switch around the build and get a 960 and an i3
B. Save money and go with an i3 and a 750 ti if you just want to play at medium

If your building a strictly gaming PC and want to play at medium settings

Don't even look at an i5 it makes no sense u will get no significant difference whatsoever than if you went with an i3 for a 750 ti
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom