Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Best Gaming CPU: Mid-range

Best Gaming CPUs For The Money: March 2013
By

Best Gaming CPU for £95: Tie


FX-4300

FX-4300
Codename: Vishera
Process: 32 nm
CPU Cores/Threads: 2/4
Clock Speed (Max. Turbo): 3.8 GHz (4.0 GHz)
Socket: AM3+
L2 Cache:   2 x 2 MB
L3 Cache: 8 MB
Thermal Envelope:
95 W

At stock clock rates, AMD's FX-4300 is able to keep up with the Phenom II X4 965 and just about reach the Core i3-3220. However, its TDP is 35 W lower than the Phenom, and an unlocked multiplier is an advantage over the Core i3.

Read our review of the Vishera-based FX CPUs here.

Best Gaming CPU for £95:

Core i3-3220

Core i3-3220
Codename: Ivy Bridge
Process: 22 nm
CPU Cores/Threads: 2/4
Clock Speed (Max. Turbo): 3.3 GHz
Socket: LGA 1155
L2 Cache:   2x 256 KB
L3 Cache: 3 MB
Thermal Envelope:
55 W

Intel's Ivy Bridge-based CPUs are very capable gaming processors, though we're increasingly seeing dual-core derivatives of the design lagging behind in our favorite titles. Conversely, 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.

Although a locked multiplier limits overclocking to a few-megahertz bump in BCLK frequency, we still consider Intel's Core i3-3220 to be a good starting point for gamers who might upgrade to a faster LGA 1155-based processor in the future.

Read our review of the Ivy Bridge-based CPUs here.

Best Gaming CPU for £140:
Core i5-3350P

Core i5-3350P
Codename: Ivy Bridge
Process: 22 nm
CPU Cores/Threads: 4
Clock Speed (Max. Turbo): 3.1 GHz (3.3 GHz)
Socket: LGA 1155
L2 Cache:   4 x 256 KB
L3 Cache: 6 MB
Thermal Envelope:
69 W

Intel's Sandy and Ivy Bridge-based Core i5 processors are well-known for their gaming prowess at reasonable prices, and the Core i5-3350P is a particularly interesting option at £140.

The P suffix is an indication that Intel disables its HD Graphics engine, but we're perfectly alright with such a decision. If you're buying a gaming processor, you're going to want discrete graphics anyway. Consequently, this CPU ducks in under 70 W.

Read our review of the Ivy Bridge-based CPUs 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