Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Best Gaming CPUs For The Money: February 2011

Tags:
  • Gaming
  • Intel
  • CPUs
Last response: in Reviews comments
Share
February 23, 2011 4:00:03 AM

February was full of surprises after the fallout from Intel's Cougar Point chipset problem, including retail availability of the Phenom II X4 975 BE and Intel's Pentium E5800 and Core i7-990X Extreme Edition introduction. A handful of prices fell, too.

Best Gaming CPUs For The Money: February 2011 : Read more

More about : gaming cpus money february 2011

February 23, 2011 4:14:36 AM

We are all waiting with bated breath the new updated Cougar Point motherboards...
Score
1
February 23, 2011 5:33:10 AM

Well as you said yourself you're not counting on motherboards to be available for the SB chips until March so I wasn't expecting to see them return for this month's round of Best Gaming CPUs For The Money. I think they should have been left out as this is February's guide. I would agree though that people building now should wait for their return though.

I also think we need some sort of inclusion of typical motherboard cost for each CPU.
Score
2
Related resources
February 23, 2011 5:36:53 AM

I'm almost scared to see what Intel's going to throw at us for the new $750-1000 category. Hexacore or even octacore Intel Extreme-Edition Sandy Bridge? Yowza!
Score
0
February 23, 2011 5:37:55 AM

fstrthnuI'm almost scared to see what Intel's going to throw at us for the new $750-1000 category. Hexacore or even octacore Intel Extreme-Edition Sandy Bridge? Yowza!

Er, that is, their new addition for that price point, not that it's an all-new category. The 980x is still there for whoever's foolish enough to buy it at this point
Score
2
a b 4 Gaming
a b å Intel
a b à CPUs
February 23, 2011 5:49:18 AM

I am not planning to upgrade this year. I have a good system that is definitely more than adequate for the work I do.
Score
1
February 23, 2011 6:17:40 AM

Don Woligroski, please!, please!, when you wrote "we already have a story in the works that should prove this definitively" regarding multi-gpu setups(p67 & NF200), again, please!, include 5670x1080 resolutions, not just single monitor gaming. You know peeps using 2x(22/23/24) 1080p monitors for their gaming. I want to really see benchmarks w/c motherboard will perform better than the others.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
February 23, 2011 6:59:14 AM

Hopefully AMD's Zambezi (Bulldozer) will reach the top of the CPU hierarchy and be at least on equal footing with Intel in the next couple of months.
Sadly only their Phenom II X4 975 BE is on a second tier (and just barely).
Yes,it would be nice to have AMD have a high performance desktop CPU since 2006 even if just for a couple of months time.
Score
2
February 23, 2011 7:38:13 AM

Excellent. I wish the graphics card best of would break down to as few options.
Score
1
February 23, 2011 8:25:57 AM

This is one of the most anticipated articles (along with GPU of the month)
it only needs more info such as:
base clock
multiplier range
base voltage

this is the third time for me to requiest these.
If you have these CPUs during review, why don't u add the info here, it's a necessity for overclockers.

plzthnxbai
Score
0
a b 4 Gaming
a b å Intel
a c 150 à CPUs
February 23, 2011 9:18:16 AM

Where do the i5-2400 and i5-2400S fall on the chart?
Score
-1
February 23, 2011 9:49:26 AM

wow my Phenom II 955 is still on this list :D 
Score
2
February 23, 2011 10:29:08 AM

Umm... why is the Phenom II X4 975 six levels above the 970? There is a whopping 100 MHz difference between the two.
Score
-1
February 23, 2011 10:41:05 AM

It's tough when an i7-930 or similar is no longer on the list. Oh well; it gets the job done and at 4.0 GHz I think it will get it done for some time.
Score
0
a b 4 Gaming
a b å Intel
a c 150 à CPUs
February 23, 2011 10:45:59 AM

That there are so few CPU recommendations is good, and I'm hoping illustrates a point. Concerning GPUs, everyone knows that certain ones are simply not up to the task of running modern games at all, let alone well.
Considering CPUs however, while clearly an i5-2500K will squish an Athlon II (or a C2D), are there any games that the Athlon II simply can't play? There are settings changes that affect how powerful a GPU needs to be, but can anything similar be done to make a game playable on a weak CPU?
Score
0
February 23, 2011 10:46:51 AM

Who cares if AMD is on the top or not. The better the Intel processor is, the cheaper AMD is. We all win. Those who want the best always pay the premium, and those who want the cheapest never get the best. Fanboy shit makes no sense to me, buy the best you can afford. The end.
Score
3
February 23, 2011 10:48:37 AM

wribbsWell as you said yourself you're not counting on motherboards to be available for the SB chips until March so I wasn't expecting to see them return for this month's round of Best Gaming CPUs For The Money. I think they should have been left out as this is February's guide. I would agree though that people building now should wait for their return though.I also think we need some sort of inclusion of typical motherboard cost for each CPU.



I agree with everything you said, except removing Sandy Bridge from the list (at least completely). But I don't agree with the author of the article Don Woligroski either.

The responsible thing to do right now is put all of the Sandy Bridge processors in the Honorable mention section, with a specific note before introducing each processor saying they will regain their recommended position when motherboards are available again.

I mean, you can't seriously recommend a CPU that does not have a motherboard to go with on sale right now, no matter if it is available in 15 days or a month. Imagine Intel discovers another problem (I hope not) and the relaunch has to be delayed again ? These recommendations should be for CPU's on sale now you can actually build a computer with. Sure, you know the performance of Sandy Bridge, but if a week ago AMD had shipped to you a sample of each Bulldozer CPU along with retail price, would you put them up in the recommendations, despite them not being available to the public ?

For all we know, the general public will only have access to the revised Motherboards by the time you write the next article, in a month!

And if the boards arrive sooner, why not just update this article when they do ? What is the problem with that ?
Score
1
February 23, 2011 11:34:19 AM

tpi2007I agree with everything you said, except removing Sandy Bridge from the list (at least completely). But I don't agree with the author of the article Don Woligroski either.The responsible thing to do right now is put all of the Sandy Bridge processors in the Honorable mention section, with a specific note before introducing each processor saying they will regain their recommended position when motherboards are available again.I mean, you can't seriously recommend a CPU that does not have a motherboard to go with on sale right now, no matter if it is available in 15 days or a month. Imagine Intel discovers another problem (I hope not) and the relaunch has to be delayed again ? These recommendations should be for CPU's on sale now you can actually build a computer with. Sure, you know the performance of Sandy Bridge, but if a week ago AMD had shipped to you a sample of each Bulldozer CPU along with retail price, would you put them up in the recommendations, despite them not being available to the public ? For all we know, the general public will only have access to the revised Motherboards by the time you write the next article, in a month! And if the boards arrive sooner, why not just update this article when they do ? What is the problem with that ?


I don't agree. I think that the list is just fine. There is no problem with the Sandy Bridge processors, and performance is as they say. Yes there is the motherboard problem, but that is clearly stated.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
February 23, 2011 11:39:55 AM

You left out the Phenom II X4 820 that is going for $105 on newegg for free ship plus it is a 95w edition. For the same price as many athlon x4 s why bother when you can get this.
Score
0
February 23, 2011 11:58:33 AM

nforce4maxYou left out the Phenom II X4 820 that is going for $105 on newegg for free ship plus it is a 95w edition. For the same price as many athlon x4 s why bother when you can get this.


Phenon II x4 820 don't have L3 cache as the Athlons, so its a matter of clock / prices
Score
-1
February 23, 2011 12:07:18 PM

I also think that the list is fine. We have already seen the final product of SB. They are just fixing an issue. It will be back in no time, and I will be sure to be there to buy it. =D
Score
-1
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
February 23, 2011 12:09:29 PM

I have a silly question: Why recommend the 635 at $98.99 when the 640 gives you a 100 MHz bump for $99.99?
Score
1
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
February 23, 2011 12:20:39 PM

New intels might finnally pull me away from my old X4 940 lol...
AMD... where is this Bulldozer you speak of???
Score
-1
February 23, 2011 12:51:07 PM

Come on Intel! Get your chip-set problem worked out so I can be confident again. Keep your i-7 2500K. A great processor to be sure, but I want the 2600K for my new system... Let's see: a 1000W PSU, blue-ray, a AMD6870; all the top-quality bits. Haven't been this excited about affordable performance since the Q6600 came out...
Score
1
a b 4 Gaming
a b å Intel
a c 150 à CPUs
February 23, 2011 12:56:31 PM

nforce4max said:
You left out the Phenom II X4 820 that is going for $105 on newegg for free ship plus it is a 95w edition. For the same price as many athlon x4 s why bother when you can get this.

AMD calling that chip a Phenom II was dishonest. It has a Propus core, with no L3. A more honest designation would have been Athlon II X4 650.
Score
-2
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
February 23, 2011 1:13:42 PM

What happened with those old price vs performance graphs you used to have? Those really showed the big picture better than reading all this text :) 
Score
1
February 23, 2011 2:01:26 PM

I think the cost of the motherboard should be included in the price comparison. every time Intel bring out a new model it requires a new board to run it on, so this needs to be taken into account.
Score
0
February 23, 2011 2:05:12 PM

ScrewySqrlI have a silly question: Why recommend the 635 at $98.99 when the 640 gives you a 100 MHz bump for $99.99?


The prices changed right after we released the list, probably with the inclusion of the new Phenom II X4 820 (which is actually an Athlon II X4, just renamed to a Phenom)

Yes, the 640 is the way to go.
Score
0
February 23, 2011 3:01:27 PM

hollif50Come on Intel! Get your chip-set problem worked out so I can be confident again. Keep your i-7 2500K. A great processor to be sure, but I want the 2600K for my new system... Let's see: a 1000W PSU, blue-ray, a AMD6870; all the top-quality bits. Haven't been this excited about affordable performance since the Q6600 came out...


Why not go with a 2500K and get yourself a HD6950 2GB? (smarter choice)
Score
0
February 23, 2011 3:14:59 PM

Bulldozer Bulldozer where are you...
Score
0
February 23, 2011 3:18:00 PM

fstrthnuI'm almost scared to see what Intel's going to throw at us for the new $750-1000 category. Hexacore or even octacore Intel Extreme-Edition Sandy Bridge? Yowza!


I am pretty interested in the LGA 2011 processors. I got a i7 920 a few years ago and overclocked it to 3.5GHz. Since then no processor has really seemed like a worthwhile upgrade for gaming while GPUs performance has increased about 2.5x at the same price point.
Score
0
February 23, 2011 3:28:18 PM

you forgot to mention the corei5 2500 (non k version)!
I presume it'd be the main processor for under $200
Score
0
a b à CPUs
February 23, 2011 3:29:08 PM

tsk_cablePhenon II x4 820 don't have L3 cache as the Athlons, so its a matter of clock / prices


Wrong the 820 has a 4mb l3 cache, it is basically a 9xx series with 2mb of l3 disabled.
Score
2
February 23, 2011 3:29:13 PM

CleeveThe prices changed right after we released the list, probably with the inclusion of the new Phenom II X4 820 (which is actually an Athlon II X4, just renamed to a Phenom)Yes, the 640 is the way to go.



Then why don't you change the article ? It's really a no-brainer; you don't have to do redo benchmarks, and it's useful advice more people can get access to if they don't come and read the second page of comments.
Score
0
February 23, 2011 3:30:26 PM

I think SB should be off the list until its functional again.
Score
-1
February 23, 2011 3:30:47 PM

You also forgot to add the core i7 990; which could very well be the fastest processor. Though I could be wrong too.
The 990 was a $1000+ processor.
Score
0
February 23, 2011 3:32:20 PM

Wait how is a 975 better than the 1090T or 1100?
Score
0
February 23, 2011 3:38:17 PM

Pentium E6700 is probably more competitive at $85 than E6800 is at $100.
Score
0
February 23, 2011 4:16:59 PM

nrnx said:
Wait how is a 975 better than the 1090T or 1100?


Because games don't use more than 4 CPU cores. The 975 has a higher clock and performs better when it comes to games. The X6 processors are better for media encoding and other heavily threaded tasks.
Score
0
February 23, 2011 4:18:38 PM

ProDigit10 said:
You also forgot to add the core i7 990; which could very well be the fastest processor. Though I could be wrong too.
The 990 was a $1000+ processor.


Didn't forget, the 990X is mentioned on the first page and the hierarchy chart.

But for gaming, the 2600K is probably better.
Score
0
February 23, 2011 4:22:20 PM

ProDigit10 said:
you forgot to mention the corei5 2500 (non k version)!
I presume it'd be the main processor for under $200


Didn't forget it at all, it's not worth the price difference over the 2400.

If you're going to spend any more, go straight to the 2500K.
Score
0
February 23, 2011 4:22:22 PM

CleeveDidn't forget, the 990X is mentioned on the first page and the hierarchy chart. But for gaming, the 2600K is probably better.

you are right, didn't see it. sorry.
Score
0
February 23, 2011 6:27:46 PM

Cougar Point Problem sounds like a movie title. :) 

I'll be happy to see SB make a full return to the market. Intel really has a winner there. They also seem to finally understand that offering consumers more affordable and yet still high-performing products will increase sales volume.
Score
0
a b 4 Gaming
a b å Intel
a b à CPUs
February 23, 2011 7:41:01 PM

I made up my mind I was not going to upgrade to Sandy Bridge because that also meant purchasing a new motherboard. Then I tell myself that because I have an Intel Core i7 860 system the cpu and motherboard are all I need to upgrade. The next thing I know there is a problem with the motherboards. hew! Survived another urge to buy. Well.....err.....umm....maybe......sometimes I just can't control myself....Tom's Hardware just rescued me with their cpu hierarchy chart. The 860 isn't way down at the bottom of the chart. Thank you THG!
Score
2
February 23, 2011 11:37:03 PM

I love my PII X4 955, I really don't see any reason to upgrade anytime soon.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
February 24, 2011 12:35:27 AM

i observed that intel reduced the price but also reduced the L3 cache memory from 8 MB to 6MB.. sad isnt it? we are actually not getting the real value.. lesser price and same features is different from less price and less features.. :( 
Score
0
February 24, 2011 12:49:02 AM

joshyboy82Who cares if AMD is on the top or not. The better the Intel processor is, the cheaper AMD is. We all win. Those who want the best always pay the premium, and those who want the cheapest never get the best. Fanboy shit makes no sense to me, buy the best you can afford. The end.
I don't think anyone is saying that AMD should be on top. There are just some who are worried that AMD will collapse, and Intel will control a monopoly.
Score
0
February 24, 2011 2:33:37 AM

I love these articles, a good way for me to keep up-to-date even though I don't understand processor architecture that much.

fstrthnuThe 980x is still there for whoever's foolish enough to buy it at this point


Well, that's true. But there'll always be that group of people who want to have the best of the best, regardless of cost. And good for them.
Score
0
February 24, 2011 2:34:21 AM

^ Oops, I guess you meant because the newer chips were coming out, oh well. My point remains semi-valid.
Score
0
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
February 24, 2011 5:36:06 AM

Is it just me or are these articles based solely on opinion without any benchmarks to back them up? What difference is there in playable settings between the recommended cpus, given low, medium, and high end graphics cards at low, medium, and high res settings? How about the best cpu for 720p, 1080p, 2560X1600, and an Eyefinity Setting?
Score
0
      • 1 / 2
      • 2
      • Newest
!