Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Best Gaming CPUs For The Money: October 2012

Best Gaming CPUs For The Money: October 2012
By

Finally, we're seeing channel availability of AMD's Trinity-based APUs, and we consider which models might be attractive. We also discuss the upcoming Athlon X4 750K, AMD's Vishera-based FX, and an unusually high number of price changes this month!

If you don’t have the time to research benchmarks, or if you don’t feel confident enough in your ability to pick the right processor for your next gaming machine, fear not. We at Tom’s Hardware have come to your aid with a simple list of the best gaming CPUs offered for the money.

October Updates: AMD

First up, let's talk Trinity. AMD's next-generation (now current-gen) APUs launched in the channel earlier this month, and they generally serve up better application performance and they definitely come armed with better graphics performance. We're even impressed that AMD is pricing the APUs aggressively.

Unfortunately, they sport the same 100 W thermal ceilings as their Llano-based predecessors, creating a tough comparison against 55 W Intel Core i3s, particularly for folks most concerned about efficiency. Moreover, after just one product generation, AMD's Socket FM1 interface is being retired in favor of the Socket FM2 required by Trinity-based APUs. The company tells us that this socket will stick around for at least one more architecture update, at least.

By now, Trinity's strengths and weaknesses are no secret. We covered the mobile launch back in May (AMD A10-4600M Review: Mobile Trinity Gets Tested) and followed with a pre-launch desktop preview right after Computex (AMD Trinity On The Desktop: A10, A8, And A6 Get Benchmarked!), a gaming performance comparison (Gaming At 1920x1080: AMD's Trinity Takes On Intel HD Graphics), and even an analysis of efficiency (AMD's Trinity APU Efficiency: Undervolted And Overclocked).

In case that was all too much information for you, we'll summarize: the Trinity design improves on Llano using AMD's modular Piledriver architecture, an updated VLIW4-based graphics implementation, and improved power gating for better performance per watt. And, as we mentioned earlier, the company is pricing its new chips more aggressively than it did when Llano-based APUs first emerged. Let's talk about the specific models we've found for sale.

We'll start at the bottom with AMD's A4-5300. Armed with a single Piledriver module (consisting of two integer clusters, but lots of other shared resources, so not quite what we'd consider a dual-core CPU), the processor operates at 3.4 GHz, but can accelerate up to 3.6 GHz by virtue of Turbo Core technology. It also includes 128 shader cores operating at up to 724 MHz. And it's priced at £40, making the A4-5300 AMD's lowest-end Trinity-based APU.

The A6-5400K is up next, also equipped with one Piledriver module. It runs at a baseline 3.6 GHz, though, and can speed-up to 3.8 GHz in lightly-threaded applications. A 192-shader graphics engine is more performance-oriented, as is a 760 MHz peak graphics frequency. Selling for £50, this APU is more interesting to us because of its unlocked ratio multiplier.

AMD's new A8 and A10 families include a pair of Piledriver modules capable of working on four threads at a time, though they feature different graphics specifications. The A8-5600K offers a 3.6 GHz base frequency that scale up to 3.9 GHz. Its 256 shaders operate at 760 MHz, and it sells for £75. It has an unlocked multiplier as well. Finally, the A10-5800K is selling for £90 with a 3.8 GHz base frequency and 4.2 GHz maximum Turbo Core clock rate. It includes a more compelling 384-shader engine running at 800 MHz. It's overclockable as well.

Are AMD's new APUs worth building into a budget-oriented gaming platform? The A10s might be, though we suspect that even at the budget of our bottom-end System Builder Marathon configuration, discrete graphics will prove a smarter choice. Will you see APUs start showing up in our gaming CPU recommendations? We'll have to consider factoring them in over the next month or two as we run additional tests. But it might be that APUs make more sense in our Best Graphics Cards For The Money column. Until we have more time for creating comparisons (and until we can get our hands on a Piledriver-based FX processor with discrete graphics), we're holding off on recommending Trinity-based APUs.

As far as pure CPUs go, there is one interesting Trinity-derived processor that AMD claims should be available, but still isn't: the Athlon X4 750K. Based on the company's information, we expect it to sell for somewhere between the A6-5400K and the A8-5600K. It's essentially an A10-5700 APU with its SIMDs disabled. Consider its unlocked multiplier, though, and the overclocking potential it might have without a graphics engine sucking down power. The Athlon X4 could be interesting. We don't have access to one yet, but we'll be testing it as soon as we do.

Aside from its new products, AMD's pricing continues to shift slightly. The A6-3500, Athlon II X4 640, FX-6100, and FX-6200 all dropped by a few quid since last month, along with the Athlon X4 641.

Intel

Intel also introduced new processors over the past month, though all of them employ different clock rates and feature adjustments as existing models. For example, the £40 Celeron G555 is 100 MHz faster than the Celeron G550. The £55 Pentium G645 is a Pentium G850 limited to 1033 MT/s memory. The £110 Core i3-3240 is a 100 MHz-faster Core i3-3220. The £140 Core i5-3350P is a Core i5-3450P running 100 MHz slower by default and up to 200 MHz slower at its highest Turbo Boost speed.

Although the new models aren't particularly interesting, Intel's price shifts are. The Core i3-2130 and Pentium G850 are a bit cheaper. As a result, the Pentium takes a recommendation this month. The Pentium G870, Core i3-2125, Core i5-3330, Core i7-2600K, and Core i7-3770K also dropped in price.

We're not certain if the slight tweaks are intended to put pressure on AMD's latest efforts, but the timing makes us wonder. After seemingly ignoring AMD ever since its Sandy Bridge-based CPUs started shipping, strong graphics performance from Trinity-based APUs and better application performance may be forcing Intel to acknowledge the competition in the sub-£90 segment.

Some Notes About Our Recommendations

This list is for gamers who want to get the most for their money. If you don’t play games, then the CPUs on this list may not be suitable for your particular needs.

The criteria to get on this list are strictly price/performance. We acknowledge that there are other factors that come into play, such as platform price or CPU overclockability, but we're not going to complicate things by factoring in motherboard costs. We may add honourable mentions for outstanding products in the future, though. For now, our recommendations are based on stock clock speeds and performance at that price.

Cost and availability change on a daily basis. We can’t offer up-to-the-minute accurate pricing information in the text, but we can list some good chips that you probably won’t regret buying at the price ranges we suggest (and our PriceGrabber-based engine will help track down some of the best prices for you).

The list is based on some of the best US/UK prices from online retailers. In other countries or at retail stores, your mileage will most certainly vary. Of course, these are retail CPU prices. We do not list used or OEM CPUs available at retail.

Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the UK Article comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

Display 3 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
  • -1 Hide
    Anonymous , 18 October 2012 04:56
    CPU power in game rigs is irrelevant, Ive done research into many top end game engines and NONE use the cpu anywhere near to full use, For example Cryengine 3 running with a 12 core Top end cpu and 3 Nvidia SLI cards uses abount 20-25% od the CPU power (explanation from crytek the CPU has nothing to do, even if you have 3 (£700 worth) GPU's then usage will never pus high unless stupid use of the Physics systm (which in my opinion should be GPU based anyway). Ive tried to make the point that the ballance of GPU to CPU performance needs to reworked as who's going to bother buying new CPU tech if it makes no possitive impact on performance on the pricy game rigg. CPU manufactrers should be breathing down the necks of game companys to update engine code to more fully use the power of the cpu as the gaming market has always been a driver in top CPU sales, if this market is no longer relevant CPU's have no true value in a modern system and users have no reson to buy new CPU/Motherboard/Mem platforms, It all just comes down to GPU power.
  • 0 Hide
    bemused_fred , 18 October 2012 13:43
    "CPU power in game rigs is irrelevant"

    That's all I need to know about how well-crafted your argument is, right there.

    Good article, BTW, Tom's.
  • 0 Hide
    MajinCry , 18 October 2012 17:53
    Actually, last time I checked, you can get a 965 BE for £70 including shipping, so...Yeah.