Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Best Gaming CPU: Entry-level

Best Gaming CPUs For The Money: March 2013
By

Best Gaming CPU for £55:

Athlon II X4 640

Athlon II X4 640
Codename: Propus
Process: 45 nm
CPU Cores/Threads: 4
Clock Speed (Max. Turbo): 3.0 GHz
Socket: AM3/AM3+
L1 Cache: 4 x 128 KB
L2 Cache: 4 x 512 KB
Thermal Envelope:
95 W

With modern games often able to take advantage of more than two processing cores, AMD's old quad-core chips (like the Athlon II X4 and Llano-based A6 and A8 APUs) look better now compared to Intel's dual-core models than they did before.

As a result, I cut the Pentium G860 from our recommendation list. The Athlon II X4 640 takes its place. Running at 3 GHz, this CPU performs roughly on par with the A8-3870K for less money. Use the savings on a discrete graphics card.

Read our review of the Athlon II X4 CPUs here.

Best Gaming CPU for £85:

Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition

Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition
Codename: Deneb
Process: 45 nm
CPU Cores/Threads: 4
Clock Speed (Max. Turbo): 3.4 GHz
Socket: AM3/AM3+
L1 Cache: 4 x 128 KB
L2 Cache: 4 x 512 KB
L3 Cache:
6 MB
Thermal Envelope:
125 W

In Gaming Shoot-Out: 18 CPUs And APUs Under £160, Benchmarked, the Phenom II X4 made a significant comeback compared to its competition, since many of the newer titles we tested are able to utilize multiple threads.

Sporting 6 MB of L3 cache and an unlocked ratio multiplier, AMD's Phenom II X4 965 is a solid performer at its stock clock rates, and it has some room to scale up with overclocking, too. Thanks to the Socket AM3/AM3+ interface's long life, you can buy this chip today and then upgrade to an FX model down the road (though we don't really see much reason to do so, based on the FX's relative gaming performance). 

Read our review of the Phenom II X4 965 CPU here.

Ask a Category Expert

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

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

Display all 8 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
  • -2 Hide
    MajinCry , 20 March 2013 21:20
    "benchmark data makes it clear that the company's Hyper-Threading technology is effective in helping improve the performance of a dual-core CPU in threaded games. " Err. What? This line sounds as if it was sponsored by intel.

    HT-ing, if anything, decreases performance in games. You might get a gain in programs, but not in games.
  • 0 Hide
    bemused_fred , 21 March 2013 06:40
    MajinCry"benchmark data makes it clear that the company's Hyper-Threading technology is effective in helping improve the performance of a dual-core CPU in threaded games. " Err. What? This line sounds as if it was sponsored by intel.HT-ing, if anything, decreases performance in games. You might get a gain in programs, but not in games.


    Yes, except completely wrong.

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/far-cry-3-performance-benchmark,3379-7.html

    Look at those performance gains over the pentium in a quad-core-utilizing game. That's not just a few extra megahertz and slightly more efficient architecture. That's hyper-threading for you.
  • 1 Hide
    Dave Diddly , 21 March 2013 10:05
    Excluding all the Sandybridge and Ivybridge Pentiums and Celerons is a bit of a oversight and makes this article a bit of a joke, especially as they are some of the best value processors that can run modern games quite well.
  • 1 Hide
    brianthesnail , 21 March 2013 13:05
    couldnt agree more with dave diddly... the pentiums both sandybridge and ivybridge are exceptional processors that are becoming more popular with budget minded gamers... were as the athlon II x4 640 is a joke compared to them .... its old hat and with a 95w tdp compared to 55w on the ivybridge pentiums the ivybridge pentiums are by far the better entry level cpu,s ..
    quad core is still a bit of a con for gamers .. with the exception of battlefield 3 mp most games are designed to run on dual core ( no HT ) and the pentiums deliver this at low power
  • 1 Hide
    chriss000 , 21 March 2013 22:54
    My E6600 even at stock played fallout3 GOTY, Bioshock 2, no probs.
    I am only now thinking of an upgrade.
    Much is made of new hardware before its needed.
    Hang back and play out the games that become cheap i say.
    It plays STO like a demon.
    (DAMON?)
    i Bet a g pentium duo would give plenty entertainment.
    If you want to spend a pile to play 2 new games see the chinese Dr
    for a bump feel session.
    The gen after this yrs stuff will always be cheaper.
  • 1 Hide
    blazorthon , 22 March 2013 06:17
    brianthesnailcouldnt agree more with dave diddly... the pentiums both sandybridge and ivybridge are exceptional processors that are becoming more popular with budget minded gamers... were as the athlon II x4 640 is a joke compared to them .... its old hat and with a 95w tdp compared to 55w on the ivybridge pentiums the ivybridge pentiums are by far the better entry level cpu,s .. quad core is still a bit of a con for gamers .. with the exception of battlefield 3 mp most games are designed to run on dual core ( no HT ) and the pentiums deliver this at low power


    Actually, most DX11 games scale very well on quad-threaded CPUs and several scale well across even six or eight threads.

    TDP is not relevant at all. It's not even directly comparable to power consumption and even that still has no bearing on performance.

    Athlon II x4 and especially Phenom II x4 beat the Celerons and Pentiums in most modern games. From the recent games, it's just stuff such as SC2 that still doesn't scale across even four threads properly.

    Furthermore, there are much newer CPUs such as the FX series and Trinity which, although not record breakers like Ivy Bridge in energy efficiency, are a lot more energy efficient than Athlon II and Phenom II.

    Even the i3s beat the Pentiums and Celerons significantly in most games and that the i5s oftentimes significantly beat the i3s makes this even more obvious.
  • 0 Hide
    blazorthon , 22 March 2013 06:19
    Dave DiddlyExcluding all the Sandybridge and Ivybridge Pentiums and Celerons is a bit of a oversight and makes this article a bit of a joke, especially as they are some of the best value processors that can run modern games quite well.


    No, it doesn't. They simply don't compete as well in a price/performance standing compared to some quad-threaded parts at similar price points anymore since most games nowadays can quite well take advantage of four threads. The cheaper models are still able to compete effectively. For example, the Celeron 1610 at around $50 is probably unbeatable at its price point. However, a little more expensive are some quad core parts and they do beat it handily in most modern DX11 games.
  • 0 Hide
    david cassar , 11 April 2013 19:41
    why dont they put the athlon ii x4 750k which is 65 pounds