Best Gaming CPU: $200 And Up
Best gaming CPU for $220:
Core 2 Quad Q9550
| Core 2 Quad Q9550 | |
|---|---|
| Codename: | Yorkfield |
| Process: | 45nm |
| CPU Cores: | 4 |
| Clock Speed: | 2.83 GHz |
| Socket: | LGA 775 |
| L2 Cache: | 2 x 6MB |
| Front Side Bus: | 1,333 MHz |
| Thermal Envelope: | 95W |
Intel brings home the $220 price point with its Core 2 Quad Q9550 CPU. Armed with four cores, a whopping 12MB of L2 cache, and a respectable 2.833 GHz clock speed, the Core 2 Quad Q9550 is a powerful contender.
Best gaming CPU for $280:
Core i7-920 (Check Prices)
| Core i7 920 | |
|---|---|
| Codename: | Nehalem |
| Process: | 45nm |
| CPU Cores: | 4 |
| Clock Speed: | 2.66 GHz |
| Socket: | LGA 1366 |
| L2 Cache: | 4 x 256KB |
| L3 Cache: | 8MB |
| QuickPath Interconnect (QPI): | 4.8 GT/s |
| Thermal Envelope: | 130W |
Intel's Core i7 has proven itself to be the most powerful gaming CPU option available based on the data we have available. The Core i7-920 is a great choice for systems coupled with multiple graphics cards in an SLI or CrossFire configuration. The motherboards and DDR3 RAM that the i7 architecture requires will bring the total platform cost higher than other systems, but the resulting performance should be worth the purchase price.
Past the Point of Reason:
With rapidly-increasing prices over $300 offering smaller and smaller performance boosts in games, we have a hard time recommending anything more expensive than the Core i7-920. This is especially the case since the Core i7-920 can be overclocked to great effect if more performance is desired, easily surpassing the stock speed of the $1,000 Core i7-975 Extreme.
Then again, while we recommend against purchasing any CPU that retails for more than $300 from a value point of view, there are those of you for whom money might not be much of an object and who require the best possible performance money can buy. If you're using dual Radeon HD 4870 X2s or a trio of Nvidia's fastest cards in SLI, we recommend the following CPUs:
Best gaming CPU for $1,000:
Core i7-975 Extreme (Check Prices)
| Core i7 975 Extreme | |
|---|---|
| Codename: | Nehalem |
| Process: | 45nm |
| CPU Cores: | 4 |
| Clock Speed: | 3.33 GHz |
| Socket: | LGA 1366 |
| L2 Cache: | 4 x 256KB |
| L3 Cache: | 8MB |
| QPI: | 6.4 GT/s |
| Thermal Envelope: | 130W |
This is the big kahuna, the fastest gaming CPU currently available for purchase, as our game tests show. Is it worth $1,000? If you have money growing on trees, are afraid to try to overclock the Core i7-920, want the overclocking headroom that the Extreme Edition's unlocked multiplier provides, and are willing to pay for the bragging rights, then it just might be. Otherwise, the Core i7-975 Extreme is a hard sell from a value standpoint.
Latest CPU News
- 10/02 – CPU Performance Boosted 20% When CPU, GPU Collaborate
- 10/02 – Leaked Slide Shows Intel Haswell Set for March-June 2013
- 09/02 – $100,000 If You Can Prove Quantum Computers Impossible
- 09/02 – AMD Adds FM1 CPUs Athlon II X4 638 and Athlon II X4 641
- 08/02 – Raspberry Pi Scheduled to Launch This Month
I have an E8500. Nothing wrong in an 'old fashioned' quick processor. When I bought it I couldn't justify the price increase for a 3Ghz+ quad core. I use it for simulating the physics of electrical components and systems as part of my uni work. These programs are old, referencing ‘cards’ and ‘stacks’ in the error codes, so have never heard of multi-threading. The E8500 provides a large amount of required brute force for those applications. It does see its fair share of gaming too! No complaints about the performance there either. Best of all, while going flat out on both cores, it won’t try to melt its way through the floor. (that could be because I threw the stock cooler away??)
Yes, you can buy a better/newer/expensive cpu but unless you really have to have the 4 cores I don’t think the expense is justified (yet). Especially for me when upgrading to Intel’s latest offering will mean a whole new motherboard and memory too. I’ll have to stick with the E8500 for a few more years.
It would take a Lottery win for a £300+ cpu.
Great review. I just bought a x2 5200+ for a client and I have no complaints whatsoever. I'd also like to add that despite a thermal pad, the retail cooler does an awesome job..it's barely even warm under load and you can hardly hear it. Couldn't ask for more.
Note: The Athlon II X2 250 is incorrectly listed as 2.8GHz in the chart, instead of 3GHz
Sorry to be pedantic, but I think some more data is wrong for the following CPU's:
Athlon II X2 250
. 2x 128K L1 cache (not 2x 64K)
Phenom II X2 545
. 2x 128K L1 cache (not 2x 64K)
. 2x 512K L2 cache (not 2x 1MB)
And the new X4-945 revision has been out for a while, so all the ones on the shelves currently are 95W TDP units, not 125W!
Funny how there are no "unfortunate mistakes" with the Intel CPU listings! Given Don did this article methinks one of the Intal-sponsored editors went around the article with the bullshitometer!
Not a bad article at all. I'm personally very happy with my Q6600 (B3, not G0 unfortunately), which is sitting at 3.2 GHz. I know the i7-920 could beat it at about 2.8GHz, maybe lower, but not by enough to justify the cost of an upgrade from my X48-based system.
I personally need a multi-core PC for 3D rendering that I let my flatmate do while I'm in work, and for my own personal Flight Sim enjoyment. Maybe I'll upgrade to an 8-core i9 someday.
Another good article Don. I think your def the best reviewer here now and the unbiased careful language you use is a big plus.
You could also do an article on the best cpu for the buck in terms of raw overclocking (that's doable, stable and on the stock cooler though)for gaming.
My thoughts are the E5xxx and low end Q9xxx series are probably the best bang for the buck in that department as I would leave out the 65nm parts are they are getting harder to get now.
Possibly the triple core 45nm AMD parts would also give them a run for the money with the extra core ... based on price / performance.
I'd concentrate on three games only and average the scores, and pick a few dual, triple and quads, and compare the 45nm penryn, 45nm AMD dual, triple and quad, and throw in a couple of i7's.
This should keep you busy in the lab and it would be a great little piece I think.
Probably need some charts and stay well below 4Ghz where the thermals become an issue for cooling ... remember stock coolers !!
I think it would be a shootout between the dual core 45nm E5's and the AMD tripples ... just a prediction.
The E5200 might just get there ?
Work on $ per frame eh?
I think this article fails to mention one thing about the e8500, when ran at stock, expect temperatures of 80-90+ celcius. Seriously, the thing comes with a non copper heatsink, and was running at 90+ celcius. Im sure some people have a lot better cooling setup inside, but for a HTPC, im not so sure, because if you have to get a 3rd party heatsink and fan, goodluck fitting it inside one of those machines
what about the athlon 7750 be , I got mine for under £50 brand new and it outperforms the 5200 on nearly everything at stock and it overclocks to 3 ghz easily
Prices in $ and link to price comparison is to a US version.
Really starting to give up on THG. Bit-tech is far far superior at the moment.