Who's Got Game? Twelve Sub-$200 CPUs Compared
Table of contents
- 1. The Sandy Bridge Factor
- 2. Test System And Benchmarks
- 3. Benchmark Results: Metro 2033
- 4. Benchmark Results: Lost Planet 2
- 5. Benchmark Results: Aliens Vs. Predator
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 455 | AMD Athlon II X4 645 | AMD Phenom II X4 925 | Intel Core i3-550 | Intel Core i3-2100 | AMD Phenom II X4 955 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Codename: | Rana | Propus | Deneb | Clarkdale | Sandy Bridge | Deneb |
| Process: | 45 nm | 45 nm | 45 nm | 32 nm | 32 nm | 45 nm |
| Cores (Threads): | 3 | 4 | 4 | 2 (4) | 2 (4) | 4 |
| Clock Speed: | 3.3 GHz | 3.1 GHz | 2.8 GHz | 3.2 GHz | 3.1 GHz | 3.2 GHz |
| Interface: | AM2+/AM3 | AM2+/AM3 | AM2+/AM3 | LGA 1156 | LGA 1155 | AM2+/AM3 |
| L3 Cache: | N/A | N/A | N/A | 4 MB | 3 MB | 6 MB |
| Thermal Envelope: | 95 W | 95 W | 125 W | 73 W | 65 W | 125 W |
| Online Price: | $88.99 | $118.99 | $124.99 | $124.99 | $135 (est.) | $144.99 |
| Intel Core i3-560 | Intel Core i3-2120 | AMD Phenom II X4 970 | Intel Core i5-2300 | AMD Phenom II X6 1075T | Intel Core i5-2400 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Codename: | Clarkdale | Sandy Bridge | Deneb | Sandy Bridge | Thuban | Sandy Bridge |
| Process: | 32 nm | 32 nm | 45 nm | 32 nm | 45 nm | 32 nm |
| Cores (Threads): | 2 (4) | 2 (4) | 4 | 4 | 6 | 4 |
| Clock Speed: | 3.33 GHz | 3.3 GHz | 3.5 GHz | 2.8 GHz (3.1 Turbo) | 3.0 GHz (3.5 Turbo) | 3.1 GHz (3.4 Turbo) |
| Interface: | LGA 1156 | LGA 1155 | AM2+/AM3 | LGA 1155 | AM2+/AM3 | LGA 1155 |
| L3 Cache: | 4 MB | 3 MB | 6 MB | 6 MB | 6 MB | 6 MB |
| Thermal Envelope: | 73 W | 65 W | 125 W | 95 W | 125 W | 95 W |
| Online Price: | $149.99 | $150 (est.) | $179.99 | $184.99 | $194.99 | $189.99 |
Latest CPU News
- 24/05 – Nvidia to Push Tablet Prices to $199 With Kai Platform
- 23/05 – AMD Backing Out of CPU Speed Wars Against Intel
- 22/05 – AMD Hitting The Casino Floor With Embedded R-Series
- 22/05 – Does Your AMD FX Platform BSOD with Steam? Read This.
- 20/05 – Intel To Support Cheap Ultrabooks With Low-Cost Celerons
Latest CPU reviews
- 24/05 – Overclocking Core i7-3770K: Learning To Live With Compromise
- 22/05 – Core i5-3570K, -3550, -3550S, And -3570T: Ivy Bridge Efficiency
- 15/05 – AMD A10-4600M Review: Mobile Trinity Gets Tested
- 14/05 – Core i7-3720QM: Ivy Bridge Makes Its Mark On Mobility
- 23/04 – Intel Core i7-3770K Review: A Small Step Up From Sandy Bridge

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.
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.
What happened to the comment I wrote earlier? (I'm not going to bother repeating it if it will just disappear again.)
What's going on with the comments?
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.
Double post.
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
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.
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.
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
Tom's, you've listed the AMD Phenom II X4 925 as having no L3 cache, I believe it should be 6MByte
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.