Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Best Gaming CPU: High-end

Best Gaming CPUs For The Money: March 2013
By

Best Gaming CPU for £190:

Core i5-3570K

Core i5-3570K
Codename: Ivy Bridge
Process: 22 nm
CPU Cores/Threads: 4
Clock Speed (Max. Turbo): 3.4 GHz (3.8 GHz)
Socket: LGA 1155
L2 Cache: 4 x 256 KB
L3 Cache: 6 MB
Thermal Envelope:
77 W

The Core i5-3570K's base clock rate is only 300 MHz faster than the Core i5-3350P's. However, the K-series' unlocked ratio multiplier is a must-have for overclockers looking to unleash significant performance improvements. It is for this reason alone that you'll want to consider shelling out an additional £50 beyond Intel's more entry-level Core i5. After all, the pricier chip's HD Graphics 4000 engine is inconsequential to us.

If you don't plan to overclock, then there's little reason to spend any more than £140 on the Core i5-3350P.

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

Diminishing Returns Kick In:

CPUs priced over £180 offer rapidly diminishing returns when it comes to performance in games. As such, we have a hard time recommending anything more expensive than the Core i5-3570K, especially since this multiplier-unlocked processor is easy to tune up to 4.5 GHz or so with the right cooler. Even at stock clocks, though, it matches or beats the old £800 Gulftown-based Core i7-990X Extreme Edition in game tests.

We have seen a small handful of games benefit from Hyper-Threaded Core i7 processors, though. Because we believe this is a trend that will continue as developers optimize their titles, we're including the Core i7-3770K as an honourable mention for £270. In a vast majority of games, the Core i7 won't demonstrate any advantage over the Core i5. But if you're a serious enthusiast who wants some future-proofing and values highly-threaded application performance, this processor may be worth the extra money.

In addition, now that LGA 2011 is here, there's certainly an argument to be made for it as the ultimate gaming platform. LGA 2011-based CPUs have more available cache and as many as two more execution cores than the flagship LGA 1155 models. Additionally, more bandwidth is delivered through a quad-channel memory controller. And with 40 lanes of third-gen PCIe connectivity available from Sandy Bridge-E-based processors, the platform natively supports two x16 and one x8 slot, or one x16 and three x8 slots, alleviating potential bottlenecks in three- and four-way CrossFire or SLI configurations.

Although they sound impressive, those advantages don't necessarily translate into significant performance gains in modern titles. Our tests demonstrate fairly little difference between a £170 LGA 1155 Core i5-2500K and a £800 LGA 2011 Core i7-3970X, even when three-way graphics card configurations are involved. It turns out that memory bandwidth and PCIe throughput don't hold back the performance of existing Sandy Bridge-based machines.

Where we do see the potential for Sandy Bridge-E to drive additional performance is in processor-bound games like World of Warcraft or the multiplayer component of Battlefield 3. If you're running a three- or four-way array of graphics cards already, there's a good chance that you already own more than enough rendering muscle. An overclocked Core i7-3970X or -3930K could help the rest of your platform catch up to an insanely powerful arrangement of GPUs.

To summarize, while we generally recommend against purchasing any gaming CPU that retails for more than £180 from a value point of view (sink that money into graphics and the motherboard instead), there are those of you who have no trouble throwing down serious money on the best of the best, and who require the fastest possible performance available. If this describes your goals, the following CPUs may be for you:

Best Gaming CPU for £270: None

Honourable Mention:

Core i7-3770K
Codename: Ivy Bridge
Process: 22 nm
CPU Cores/Threads: 4/8
Clock Speed (Max. Turbo): 3.5 GHz (3.9 GHz)
Socket: LGA 1155
L2 Cache:   4x 256 KB
L3 Cache: 8 MB
Thermal Envelope:
95 W

The Core i7-3770K only enjoys a 100 MHz-higher clock rate than the Core i5-3570K. Its real advantage is an extra 2 MB of L3 cache and Intel's Hyper-Threading feature.

Neither of those extras have a big impact on gaming, but there is a small number of titles (like Crysis 3) that take advantage of extra resources, translating to a performance increase. Having said that, this is still rare, and the Core i7-3770K will be more useful to power users who want better performance in well-threaded apps, in addition to the best frame rates in games.

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

Best Gaming CPU for £460: (or for any price)

Core i7-3930K
Codename: Sandy Bridge-E
Process: 32 nm
CPU Cores/Threads: 6/12
Clock Speed (Max. Turbo): 3.2 GHz (3.8 GHz)
Socket: LGA 2011
L2 Cache:   6x 256 KB
L3 Cache: 12 MB
Thermal Envelope:
130 W

Take the £800 Core i7-3970X, remove 3 MB of L3 cache, and drop the base clock rate by 300 MHz. What do end up with? Three hundred pounds and change left over, and an Intel Core i7-3930K.

The 300 MHz difference in clock rate is hardly relevant, given unlocked multiplier ratios benefiting both CPUs. And you'd be hard-pressed to quantify the advantage of 15 MB of shared L3 cache over 12 MB. Moreover, a greater-than-£300 savings lets you buy a nice motherboard and cooler, while still getting the same four-channel memory subsystem and 40-lane PCI Express 3.0-capable controller.

Read our review of the Sandy Bridge-E 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