With the same gpu, the 6100 was 1fps behind to 1fps ahead of the 6400. With the same gpu. Op has the choice of a 470 or 1060. For my money, the 6100 with its equitable performance to the 6400 is the better choice, simply because its paired with the 1060. Paired with the 470, the 6400 will be behind the 6100/1060 in every game tested. Imho, the gpu is what makes the difference here. If Op was rendering, using good amounts of productivity software etc, then id go the other way, the 6400/470, but for gaming, no.
quote:
Approaching the i3-6100 becomes a lesson in expectation management. Do you expect a $120 CPU to be proficient at high level workstation-class workloads like HDR rendering and AES decryption / encryption? It’s simply not built for that, nor does it target any professional oriented market niche. You’ll need to upgrade to the i5 for those capabilities. The i3-6100 can certainly provide adequate performance in any of those scenarios but at lower speeds than better equipped and more expensive alternatives. However, where it reigns supreme is in standard usage cases and gaming; you know, the nuts and bolts situations most users encounter every day.
So the question really becomes what's more important, the gaming or the productivity. The 6100 can still do productivity, just takes a little longer, so for occasional use, that's no big deal. Planning on a weekly YouTube channel? Yeah, the i5 would be better, by far.
There is one other thing. At 1080p, there's really no need for anything more than a 1060. So Op is good there for years. With the i3, if Op isn't ok with the results, he can always upgrade to a i5 or i7, if the editing demands increase. Starting out with the i5/470, there really isn't a worthy upgrade path, a 6500 or 6600 isn't that much better, neither is a 480 to the 470. Youd be paying a lot of money for top end parts that will barely be better than what you started with.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram