Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Best Gaming CPUs For The Money: September 2014

Best Gaming CPUs For The Money: September 2014
By

This month reveals a wealth of new processors including Intel's eight-core beast, the Core i7-5960X. We also look at other Haswell-E options and consider AMD's new 95 W, eight-core FX processors, the 125 W FX-8370, and other new models and price changes.

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.

September Updates: 

We didn't have a lot to talk about in last month's CPU update, but we more than make up for it this time around.

Let's start with the big news: Intel's first eight-core desktop processor, capable of scheduling up to 16 threads concurrently with Hyper-Threading enabled. Based on the Haswell-E architecture, Core i7-5960X features 20 MB of shared L3 cache and a relatively low 3 GHz base clock rate able to hit 3.5 GHz by virtue of Turbo Boost. As our coverage shows, this is the new high-water mark for applications optimized for parallelization. It sells for a hefty £800 price tag, though.

The Core i7-5930K and -5820K are both six-core derivatives that employ the same die with two cores and 5 MB of last-level cache disabled. But they operate at higher frequencies able to partly offset the loss in compute resources. Intel's -5930K has a 3.5 GHz base clock rate that accelerates as high as 3.7 GHz, and the -5820K starts at 3.3 GHz, ramping up as high as 3.6 GHz. All three CPUs are rated for 140 W and drop into the LGA 2100-v3 interface, which isn't compatible with LGA 2011. Because they come armed with a DDR4 memory controller, you'll also need new RAM. Intel further sets the Core i7-5820K apart by giving it 28 lanes of third-gen PCI Express, while the pricier models include 40 lanes.

The Core i7-5820K currently offers the best price/performance ratio in the Haswell-E-based line-up. If your application calls for as much PCIe bandwidth as possible, however, the Core i7-5930K could be a better choice. I'm picking this mid-range processor as our replacement for the Core i7-3930K, making it the fastest recommended gaming processor for any price. To read more about the Haswell-E's capabilities, check our Chris Angelini's analysis:Intel Core i7-5960X, -5930K And -5820K CPU Review: Haswell-E Rises. For those of you interested in the server implementation of Haswell-E, check out Patrick Kennedy's Intel Xeon E5-2600 V3 Review: Haswell-EP Redefines Fast.

Of course, AMD didn't want to be left out of the fun. It introduced the FX-8320e, -8370e, and -8370. All three processors are based on the same Piledriver architecture first seen two years ago. The two models with the 'e' suffix are energy-efficient options; they're the first 95 W eight-core FX models available outside of Asia. Now, owners of low-cost motherboards with limited thermal ceilings can upgrade to host processors with eight cores. That wasn't possible previously. For reference, the £105 FX-8320e has 3.2 base clock rate able to stretch up to 4 GHz through Turbo Core, while the £145 FX-8370e starts at 3.3 GHz and jumps as high as 4.3 GHz. Given that both models are unlocked, the lower-priced chip is the easier choice.

As for the £145 FX-8370, it is simply an FX-8350 with the same 125 W TDP and 4 GHz base clock. However, it offers a 100 MHz-higher Turbo Core frequency that hits 4.3 GHz. Its thermal envelope is identical, so we don't think it's worth a £20 premium over the FX-8350. If you're interested in learning more, check out AMD Updates Desktop FX Processor Line With Three New CPUs, Price Cuts

Those are the new CPUs, but some previously-announced APUs also made it to retail, such as AMD's A6-7400K, the only dual-core offering with 256 shaders. The quad-core/384-shader A8-7600 is also now available, as is the quad-core/512-shader A10-7800.

Intel also released a few new Haswell-based models in the Celeron and Core i3 families, such as the Pentium G3460 at 3.5 GHz, the Core i3-4160 at 3.6 GHz, and the Core i3-4370 at 3.8 GHz. All of these new processors represent the highest clock rates in their respective families.

Speaking of Intel, we saw a significant number of price adjustments, which is unusual. The Celeron G1840, Core i3-4130, Core i5-4590, and Core i7-4790 all shed a little weight off their prices as did the Core i5-4430, which now makes our recommendations list. The Core i7-4770 also dropped quite a bit in the United States.

As for AMD's price changes, we saw the FX-4300 and FX-6350 both drop by a small margin, as did the A4-6320, the A8-5600K, the FX-6300, the A10-5800K, the A10-6800K, the FX-8320, the FX-8350, and the FX-9370.

On a final note, we learned a lot more about Intel's Broadwell-Y-based Core M processors over the last month, and even got to play with some pre-release hardware at IDF 2014. For general information, check out Intel's Broadwell Core M Processor: New Details, SKUs and Specifics.  And, if you'd like some hard numbers, look for our recent news piece: Intel's Broadwell Core M-5Y70: The First Benchmarks

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 honorable 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.               

Add a comment
Ask a Category Expert
React To This Article

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

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

Display all 21 comments.
  • 3 Hide
    ruban71 , 8 March 2014 09:36
    For consistency with the Best Graphics Cards For The Money: March 2014 you should give the A10-7770/7850k mention alongside the entry level. Whilst it's not a cost effective chip to pair up with a high end GPU it is a consideration for anyone looking for modest gaming. Specifically if you look at both round ups and conclude that a x4 750k and R7 240 is what you need.

    Article is looking a little out of date in places. i5-3350 could be replaced with the i5 4440 which is actually cheaper in the UK
  • 1 Hide
    Nicku , 8 March 2014 21:51
    On page: 4. Best High-End Gaming Processors, the Core i7-4930K is definitely a Ivy Bridge-E processor manufactured at 22nm. It also has a 3.4GHz base core and a 3.9GHz turbo (see the table). Getting lazy?!?
  • 0 Hide
    Nicku , 8 March 2014 21:53
    And there's no edit button? Above I meant 3.4GHz base "frequency", not core. Sorry!
  • 0 Hide
    victordrake , 20 March 2014 12:21
    Let people know: I have just composed this rig: Intel I7-4930K, MSI Big-bang Xpower II, G.skill F3-19200CL10Q-32GBZHD (4*8gB sticks), Sapphire R 290 Tri-X OC, 840 pro 512 Gbsize, WD 4tb Hyb, Power supplier Sapphire 1050 Pure, case Nox-Hummer Zero white, (altogether for more than € 2000).Well, (but I need to say very bad...), infact all this hdw (on first boot) is ABSOLUTELY NOT (reapeat) NOT working, giving each time a dull code 67 (or L9 if read upside-down), like it'ld be impossible to initialize CPU!My direct answer is: how can serious trade marks allow this shame?? Investigation are open on different fronts, completing saying already tried with a different video ad., Sapphire 5870, with same result! Good luck to others customers...
  • -3 Hide
    Moisey80 , 21 March 2014 10:24
    fuck you that there were paid for by Intel so compare fx-83 series c I3 .. fuck you that very ebanulsya FX-8350 get away I7 3770k not speak about I5 and I3! your brains quite propudrili intel!!! you finish up this garbage suffer: (
  • -2 Hide
    Moisey80 , 21 March 2014 10:24
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neeL3zymT_o
  • 0 Hide
    TheyreAllDeadDave , 4 April 2014 22:23
    I'd rather get the Athlon X4 760K.
  • 1 Hide
    paulbatzing , 16 April 2014 08:11
    The high end i5 and i7 have LGA1155 specified in your listing. It should be LGA1150
  • 2 Hide
    guanyu210379 , 8 May 2014 14:40
    No E3-1230V3? Why?
    E3-1230V3 is a good alternative for those who like i7 4770k but do not want to OC, do not want to use the iGPU and are willing to pay only the price of a i5 4670k.
    This processor belongs to the best gaming processors too.
  • -2 Hide
    Ammi6543 , 9 May 2014 17:12
    FX-8320 should've taken the £150 catergory.
    It performs as well as an i5 in games. Put it on any task like photoshop or video encoding, or even just having a bunch of programs open, and it will beat the i5, they can even perform as well as Ivy-Bridge Socket 1155 i7s.
  • 0 Hide
    Krister Arvesen , 11 May 2014 00:14
    Am I the only one thinking that AMD should be represented here? the FX-8350 is cheaper than the i5 4570 and it beats both the i5 4670K and the i7 4770K in some games... atleast I would say that's worth mentioning :p 
  • 1 Hide
    Gragiulo2000 , 28 May 2014 20:52
    The FX-6300 outperforms the i5-4430 in raw benchmark data.
    go see the passmark website
  • 0 Hide
    Alpha3031 , 4 July 2014 04:46
    Many typos this month :) 
  • 0 Hide
    Alpha3031 , 4 July 2014 04:46
    Many typos this month :) 
  • 0 Hide
    RobTHUK , 4 July 2014 17:58
    The title in Honourable mention for the i7-4790K Devil's Canyon calls it an "Core i5-4790K"
  • 0 Hide
    Twirlz , 15 July 2014 22:51
    I think the AMD 6300 should have been listed in the mid range section. Compared to an i3, which is similar in price, it offers pretty good performance on newer titles.
  • 1 Hide
    parrot1553 , 18 August 2014 21:39
    you have wrote
    Honourable Mention:

    Core i5-4790K its supposed to be i7 :)  also,I want to ask,what about the i5 4690?? where I live its about the same price as the i5 4590
  • 1 Hide
    parrot1553 , 18 August 2014 21:42
    you have wrote
    Honourable Mention:

    Core i5-4790K its supposed to be i7 :)  also,I want to ask,what about the i5 4690?? where I live its about the same price as the i5 4590
  • 0 Hide
    tea urchin , 18 September 2014 13:36
    The i5 4430 should have been given a spot months ago. It has actually been replaced by the 4440 and I believe the 4430 is end of line. (Logically..)However. I have been using a 4430 for 6 months,and the retail price has dropped as low as £116 at reputable Etailers as it became outdated. There is no competitive or sensible alternative for those who want 'enough' gaming power without expensive boards and coolers.
    I note (again) that there is no mention of this processors 4600 igp on Tom's graphics card hierarchy chart,despite it being hailed as 30 to 60% better than the hd4000. Though being fair its not important for a proper games machine.
  • 0 Hide
    tea urchin , 18 September 2014 13:39
    The i5 4430 should have been given a spot months ago. It has actually been replaced by the 4440 and I believe the 4430 is end of line. (Logically..)However. I have been using a 4430 for 6 months,and the retail price has dropped as low as £116 at reputable Etailers as it became outdated. There is no competitive or sensible alternative for those who want 'enough' gaming power without expensive boards and coolers.
    I note (again) that there is no mention of this processors 4600 igp on Tom's graphics card hierarchy chart,despite it being hailed as 30 to 60% better than the hd4000. Though being fair its not important for a proper games machine.
Display more comments
React To This Article