While we’ve often seen so-called CPU bottlenecks impeding the performance of our multi-GPU systems, today’s highest-quality gaming test has proven that when it comes to single-GPU systems, even a high-performance card like the Radeon HD 5850 can’t outstrip the capabilities of a modern low-cost CPU.
Average performance differences are small and tend to favor AMD's architecture, which, given the pricing advantages of AMD products, in turn favors mid-budget gamers. Better news for AMD buyers is that even-cheaper Athlon II X3 processors offer similar gaming performance compared to today’s tested Phenom II X3 720, although using one would have prevented us from price-matching today’s configurations.
Moderately lower gaming value won’t prevent some users from buying a Core i3-, i5-, or i7-series processor for Intel’s superiority in many non-gaming applications. The good news for low-budget Intel buyers is that jumping in with the cheapest i3 model yields virtually no performance deficit at the highest gaming details, at least when the system is limited to a single high-end, single-GPU card like the Radeon HD 5850.
Some readers will argue that today’s tests are an exception, that most mid-market builders won’t automatically shoot for the highest gaming details and that most of our own tests have been performed at lower-detail levels that led to far different conclusions. The counterclaim for today’s analysis is that anyone who spends over $300 on a high-end graphics card should expect to be able to play at these high settings and that, with the exception of Crysis, today’s full-detail game settings are completely playable at 2560x1600. Four of today’s titles could even support smooth gameplay at those super-high resolutions and detail settings with AA enabled.
Yet we did approach the limits of playability a few times, and some users are certain to exceed those limits by pushing resolutions even higher with ATI Eyefinity triple-monitor configurations. Having already reached the limits of our graphics card, this can’t be fixed by using a faster processor. Those users will instead be forced to reduce detail levels in exchange for increased pixel counts, but those added pixels still place the bottleneck at the GPU, rather than at the CPU, and a faster processor simply won’t be beneficial.
To push the need for a better processor, it is necessary to go beyond the capabilities of a single GPU and into the realm of CrossFire or SLI. When cost is of the utmost concern, this isn't particularly likely. So, our tests prove that a low-cost CPU will do the job just as well as a high-priced part.
Stay on the Cutting Edge
Join the experts who read Tom's Hardware for the inside track on enthusiast PC tech news — and have for over 25 years. We'll send breaking news and in-depth reviews of CPUs, GPUs, AI, maker hardware and more straight to your inbox.
Excellently done. Thanks a lot THG!Reply
It should also take GTA IV (which is CPU intensive game and can utilize four cores) into consideration, although most games don't behave similar today. In addition, I would expect more and more to-be-released games to be able to utilize the full potential of quads.Reply
However, I do admit that i3's performance is really impressive!Reply
all similar fps results usually means one of two things... either youre gpu limited or those results are accurate (meaning you didnt ever become cpu limited ... which I thought was the point of this review). Please redo the test with a 5970 to see if the rankings change. Plus if youre saving money on your cpu you can spend it on the gpu ;)Reply
On the "Is Overclocking Needed" I think you forgot a few fours. A voltage of 1.72 would probably fry the processor quite quickly. You had it right later one with 1.472, but it shocked a me a bit at first to see such a high number, haha.Reply
shin0bi272, correct me if I'm wrong, but the point of this article was to see how much the CPU really matters when paired with a reasonable single GPU. I think the result--that it doesn't much matter--is pretty good to know.Reply
If a super high end GPU was used, it wouldn't be relevant to gamers looking at CPU performance.
For me personally though.... I'll stick with my i7. Beats any i3 at mental ray rendering any day.
If the user has money for Super high end GPU why would he look at an i3 processor?
Looks like some gamers will not have to spend as much money for a new cpu.Reply
I wonder who will buy such an exclusive separated Graphics card with the core-i3 processor. cause most of the core-i3 buyers don't want to waste money on a separated GPU.others will just keep their core-2(specially quad series) processor because they're better than core-i3 processors(According to 3D-Mark Result).Reply
We need more articles like this! A million better than a standard review.