Download the Tom's Hardware App from the App Store
The reference for current tech news
Yes No

Who's Got Game? Twelve Sub-$200 CPUs Compared

by

Today we're putting the latest sub-$200 CPUs into a cage match armed with nothing but the latest DirectX 11 games (plus a helping of StarCraft 2) to see how they fare. Can AMD's familiar Athlons and Phenoms stand up to the new Sandy Bridge-based CPUs?

Intel’s Sandy Bridge architecture has received a lot of attention since its introduction in early January, first for its impressive performance, and more recently for the P67/H67 chipset’s 3 Gb/s SATA performance degradation problem. Despite this hiccup, Intel representatives tell us that the B3 stepping of Cougar Point is already being shipped to vendors and should emerge sooner than originally expected. The new architecture is here to stay and could potentially impact every desktop CPU price point it touches.

Intel is being a lot more aggressive with those price points, too. The lowest-priced Lynnfield-based CPU with a true quad-core architecture (that’s the Core i5-750) starts at about $200. But the Sandy Bridge-based Core i5-2300 can be purchased for $185. This means that Intel’s newest quad-core processors are no more expensive than AMD’s premium Phenom II X4 970.

And what about the $100-to-$150 market? When the dual-core Hyper-Threaded Core i3-2100 and -2120 finally make their way to market, we expect them to be available in that strategically-priced range. Preliminary testing from our launch coverage, Intel’s Second-Gen Core CPUs: The Sandy Bridge Review, showed us that the new Core i3 CPUs have tremendous gaming potential, and might even be able to challenge AMD’s quad-core flagship in this arena.

Indeed, game performance is what this article is all about. Up until now, AMD's Pentium II X4 and Athlon II X3/X4 processors have vigorously defended their status as value-packed engines in inexpensive gaming systems using sub-$200 price tags. Between June of last year (Game-Off: Seven Sub-$150 Processors Compared) and now, we've seen AMD add a couple hundred megahertz to each price point. Yes, we like more performance without a corresponding rate-hike. But the company is competing with architectural updates that make a far more profound impact on performance. Will incremental speed bumps be enough to help the company defend its position in the sub-$200 market, or will the least-expensive Sandy Bridge-based processors steal the spotlight?

We’re comparing the relevant sub-$200 CPUs; 12 models in total. Before we talk about the contenders, let’s address the processors not being included. We’re leaving out the Core i5-750, as we’ve already proven that the Sandy Bridge-based Core i5s are faster gaming processors. We’re not including dual-core processors without Hyper-Threading because we’ve shown that modern games require a minimum of three threads to demonstrate the best possible performance. LGA 775 did not make our list either, because it’s now three generations old.

Even after trying to narrow down the field, we have a lot of CPUs to test. The Clarkdale-based Core i3-550 and Core i3-560 are known decent products, and the Core i3-2100 and Core i3-2120 will show us what Intel’s newest dual-core Hyper-Threaded offerings can accomplish. The Sandy Bridge-based Core i5-2300 and Core i5-2400 represent true quad-core performance. Three quad-core models and the hexa-core Phenom II X6 1075T represent AMD's highest-end processors. On the lower end of the spectrum, we have the fastest quad- and triple-core AMD processors available for under $150: the Athlon II X4 645 and the Athlon II X3 455.


AMD Athlon II X3 455AMD Athlon II X4 645AMD Phenom II X4 925
Intel Core i3-550
Intel Core i3-2100AMD Phenom II X4 955
Codename: RanaPropusDenebClarkdale
Sandy Bridge
Deneb
Process: 45 nm 45 nm45 nm 32 nm 32 nm45 nm
Cores (Threads): 3442 (4)
2 (4)4
Clock Speed: 3.3 GHz
3.1 GHz2.8 GHz3.2 GHz
3.1 GHz
3.2 GHz
Interface: AM2+/AM3AM2+/AM3AM2+/AM3LGA 1156LGA 1155AM2+/AM3
L3 Cache: N/A
N/A
N/A4 MB3 MB
6 MB
Thermal Envelope:
95 W
95 W
125 W73 W
65 W125 W
Online Price:
$88.99
$118.99
$124.99
$124.99
$135 (est.)
$144.99

Intel Core i3-560Intel Core i3-2120AMD Phenom II X4 970Intel Core i5-2300AMD Phenom II X6 1075TIntel Core i5-2400
Codename: ClarkdaleSandy BridgeDenebSandy BridgeThubanSandy Bridge
Process: 32 nm 32 nm45 nm32 nm45 nm32 nm
Cores (Threads): 2 (4)
2 (4)4464
Clock Speed: 3.33 GHz
3.3 GHz3.5 GHz2.8 GHz
(3.1 Turbo)
3.0 GHz
(3.5 Turbo)
3.1 GHz
(3.4 Turbo)
Interface: LGA 1156LGA 1155AM2+/AM3LGA 1155AM2+/AM3LGA 1155
L3 Cache: 4 MB
3 MB
6 MB6 MB6 MB6 MB
Thermal Envelope:
73 W
65 W
125 W95 W125 W95 W
Online Price:
$149.99
$150 (est.)
$179.99
$184.99$194.99$189.99
Share:
13
Comments
X
Submit

Comments
Read the comments on the forums
aje21 01/03/2011 10:08
Hide
-3+

Two comments:
1) While I understand using a high-end GPU to try to remove it as a limiting factor, the chances of paring a low-end CPU with a high-end GPU are slim. What would be interesting is to know which CPUs are limiting the performance of a mid-range GPU.
2) As I've said before, comparing the value of CPUs without taking account of the m/b cost is pointless - in fact, following on from my comment above it would be fairer to compare the performance of CPU+m/b+GPU given a fixed budget (so the more expensive the CPU+m/b the weaker the GPU will end up).
Still, interesting article and having competition at the low end of the market is what will help most people.

noble 01/03/2011 11:58
Hide
-1+

How about a price/performance or value chart based on actual prices ? Just by having the most expensive at top and saying its 48% more average gps than the basis athlon x3 doesn't make it clear that you get 48% fps more for 300% price premium.

aje21 01/03/2011 14:32
Hide
-1+

What happened to the comment I wrote earlier? (I'm not going to bother repeating it if it will just disappear again.)

aje21 01/03/2011 14:33
Hide
-1+

What's going on with the comments?

mosox 01/03/2011 20:58
Hide
-3+

So, lemme see if I got this right:

- The $195 Intel Core i5-2400 is slightly better (17%) than the $140 Phenom II 955 which is a generation older? And we don't even consider that the Phenom is a better overclocker.

Intel Has Game indeed. They gamed us.

mosox 01/03/2011 21:02
Hide
-1+

Double post.

blubbey 01/03/2011 21:59
Hide
-1+

I didn't expect to see those results..... I hope AMD can provide a good answer to Intel soon. Competition is ofcourse always great for the consumer ;)

Silmarunya 02/03/2011 13:15
Hide
-1+

While it wouldn't make a massive difference, it would we worthwhile comparing the cost of the CPU + a compatible motherboard. AMD offers excellent motherboards at compelling prices, unlike Intel.

It won't tip the scales in AMD's favour at all price points, but might add some additional food for thought.

daglesj 03/03/2011 14:28
Hide
-1+

Indeed some folks seem to not notice that AMD can still show a decent set of results from what is effectively an obsolete 8 year old design compared to Intel's supposedly new cutting edge design.

Way to go Intel. Not impressed.

psiboy 05/03/2011 09:30
Hide
-1+

Would have been interesting if the F1 2010 benchmark included an intel hexacore... just to see if is the number of core is the issue..... To round out the Objectivity a bit more :)

wild9 07/03/2011 05:36
Hide
-0+

Tom's, you've listed the AMD Phenom II X4 925 as having no L3 cache, I believe it should be 6MByte :)

wild9 07/03/2011 05:41
Hide
-0+

I'd be interested in seeing some GTA IV benchmarks..I reckon this game would favour AMD's real cores over Intel's Hyper-Threading.

Best offers

Newsletters


OK