I3 3220 vs Pentium G840

[adf27]

Hi everyone,

I am looking at building a computer for casual gaming and HD video editing, and I was wandering whether an i3 3220 would be any better than a G840 when combined with a HD 6450. I am not bothered about playing games on really high settings, but I want to be able to render HD movies quickly.

Thanks

 

[svengeguttensen]

I would say yes. The 3220 is 500MHz faster (2.8GHz vs 3.3GHz), utilizes Hyper-Threading, and has Quick Sync Video which natively accelerates video transcoding.

Source: Intel ARK Comparison

 

[ASHISH65]

Are you going to do work like rendering etc or just for watching hd videos?

 

[jaguarskx]

As mentioned above, the i3-3220 is better because of the higher clockspeed. The i3 also has Hyper Threading (HT) which is used by some video encoding programs and some video codecs. This can help improve encoding times. Certain codecs supports HT like x.264H, while others do not like XviD.

Quick Sync comes in handy for video encoding, but only if the video encoder supports Quick Sync. It can dramatically improve encoding times, like up to 3x faster. But like I said, you need a program that supports it. Lastly, Quick Sync video quality has been improved in the Ivy Bridge series CPUs (like the i3-3220) over Sandy Bridge CPUs (like the G840).

 

[adf27]

I want to render HD Videos, not just watch them. The i3 is more expensive though.....

 

[jaguarskx]

There is no denying that the i3-3220 is more expensive, but it also performs better. Additionally, Ivy Bridge CPUs are on average 6% more powerful than Sandy Bridge CPUs. That means an i3-3220 @ 3.3GHz is the equivalent of a Sandy Bridge CPU running at 3.5GHz. Granted it is not much, but when encoding video every 100MHz does help since it is a CPU intensive task.

 

[svengeguttensen]

In your case, you truly get what you pay for. There is no less-expensive chip that would meet your needs, so my advice is to suck it up and by the i3-3220. You'll be glad you did.

 

[daswilhelm]

for video encoding, you will want more power than either of those chips offer, why not start out with a pentium g620, and save your pennies for an i5 when you are able.

 

[svengeguttensen]

I think you're missing the point, daswilhelm.

The OP is clearly having a hard time justifying going from $80 to $120 on a single purchase, and you suggest that he spend $80 now for a chip that's wholly unsuitable for his purposes (due to not having Quick Sync) and then spend another $180 later? Granted, if money wasn't an object I'd recommend the i5 as well. Even so, the i3 does have the power/features to do what he needs in a timely fashion and at a relatively affordable (for the OP) price point, if somewhat more slowly than an i5 would.

In short, we shouldn't let "perfect" be the enemy of "good enough"...

 

[Opaz1ka]

Hi everyone,

I am looking at building a computer for casual gaming and HD video editing, and I was wandering whether an i3 3220 would be any better than a G840 when combined with a HD 6450. I am not bothered about playing games on really high settings, but I want to be able to render HD movies quickly.

Thanks

To be able to render HD videos quickly you are gonna want a 3570k/3770k

 

[sheepsnowadays]

FX 6300

 

[$hawn]

^ +1.
For threaded workloads like video encoding/rendering, the FX 6300 will eat the i3 for breakfast
In fact, for such workloads, the FX 6300 comes astonishingly close to the non-K i5 chips, that too for about $70 less !!!
On top of that, it has a unlocked multiplier, so you can always OC a little if you need more speed; and also being an AM3+ chip, you can upgrade to a SteamRoller chip in the future if ever the need arises.

However, if you do have $210 and are willing to spend it on a CPU alone, get the i5, it won't dissappoint you. Keep in mind that the LGA 1155 socket is dead now that Haswell is coming out on a LGA 1150 socket.....but then again, if your not gonna upgrade anytime soon, that should not matter much

 

[pankakes123]

FX 6300

Exactly. Same price as i3 but will destroy it in almost every category. The Intel i5 and i7 are great CPUs but I have always thought the i3 pricing is completely unjust. Intel really should be selling the Pentium for 50 and the i3 for 80 but they aren't so in that case go with the FX-6300.

 

[daswilhelm]

I think you're missing the point, daswilhelm.

The OP is clearly having a hard time justifying going from $80 to $120 on a single purchase, and you suggest that he spend $80 now for a chip that's wholly unsuitable for his purposes (due to not having Quick Sync) and then spend another $180 later? Granted, if money wasn't an object I'd recommend the i5 as well. Even so, the i3 does have the power/features to do what he needs in a timely fashion and at a relatively affordable (for the OP) price point, if somewhat more slowly than an i5 would.

In short, we shouldn't let "perfect" be the enemy of "good enough"...

you can get a g620 for 50 bucks, the i3 is more than twice that price. still leaves him with money left over, and an upgrade path.

 

[adf27]

Ok so general feeling is: Buy an i3 over a G840, buy a FX-6300 over an i3, and buy an i5 over everything?
I'll check my funds and consider my options.
Thanks for all the help.

 

[$hawn]

Price wise, for the video rendering tasks that you need, its more like this,

$200 and above - Intel i5
$140 - FX 6300
$100 - Phenom II x4 965BE
$75 and below - Not really worth spending money on anything here, but if u absolutely have to, a an Athlon II x4 640 anyday over the weak dual cored Intel chips.

 

[iceclock]

simple and short answer. the i3 2300 will blast the g840. and for similar price than the i3 2320 u can buy a fx 4300 or 6300 , and 4cores and 6cores are def better deal than 2 cores for 123$.

 

[Valentin_N]

Pentium 840 vs i3-3220 - Go with the i3.

 

[logainofhades]

FX 6300

^This