Is G3220 good for gaming?

[AtenRa]

@SPBHM


So, now you compromise on both the CPU and GPU. You are getting a locked lower base frequency CPU that could very well be too little for games two years down the road (2016) and you are also having lesser GPU unable to game at Ultra settings.

Also, the graphs you are quoting are with a TITAN and that is not a GPU someone with a low budget will even consider to buy.

Im sorry but as a gamer I buy the hardware that gives be the best visuals possible for the price I can spend to play my games TODAY. For my perspective Haswell core i3 is enough to drive the GTX760 or R9 280 and that is what I would choose. Feel free to recommend anything else, I just don’t compromise my visuals. Two years from now I could even consider changing the entire Platform and move to 16nm and DDR-4. I always buy my hardware to play games TODAY, two three years from now things may be completely different and a low frequency Quad core may not be enough.

 

[crashtech]

The problem with these discussions is that it's difficult to get exact comparisons of the scenarios being proposed, so there are assumptions being made that may or may not pan out in reality. In particular, tests of a low-end i5 with a midrange GPU seem in short supply.

The benchmarks I found which included some data close to the scenarios being discussed were immediately dismissed because they happened to agree with my premise.

 

[2is]

The problem with these discussions is that it's difficult to get exact comparisons of the scenarios being proposed, so there are assumptions being made that may or may not pan out in reality. In particular, tests of a low-end i5 with a midrange GPU seem in short supply.

The benchmarks I found which included some data close to the scenarios being discussed were immediately dismissed because they happened to agree with my premise.

It's becoming quite clear that you take personally when people disagree with you. We aren't trying to hurt your feelings, really. We just don't want to make decisions that will keep us from playing certain games.

If anyone reading is ok with buying a brand new setup and knowing there WILL be games that already exist where your recommendation will not allow for playable performance, but will allow for slightly higher IQ in other games that it can run well, then by all means, they should take your advise.

If however people are looking into building a system that will not have any issues whatsoever getting good performance in any game they choose to play, but may have to reduce IQ slightly in more GPU demanding games, they should avoid your advise.

You really can't argue against this since by your own admission, the options your pushing result in borderline performance in BF4 and unacceptable performance in Watch Dogs.

 

[crashtech]

But little objective evidence has been supplied to support the presumed superiority of low-end i5s paired with midrange GPUs over an i3 with a higher-end GPU. If I missed the actual evidence, point out the post number or link to it.

Tests of low-end i5s with high-end cards don't count.

BTW, either budget scenario will result in games you "can't" play. at higher resolutions and quality settings. It should be a given that in either case, playable settings can be achieved.

 

[2is]

But little objective evidence has been supplied to support the presumed superiority of low-end i5s paired with midrange GPUs over an i3 with a higher-end GPU. If I missed the actual evidence, point out the post number or link to it.

Tests of low-end i5s with high-end cards don't count.

BTW, either budget scenario will result in games you "can't" play. at higher resolutions and quality settings. It should be a given that in either case, playable settings can be achieved.

"can't play at higher resolutions and quality settings" is a lot better than "can't play" and there's been plenty to show that. You're the one that provided the borderline performance of BF4 and you've seen the unacceptable performance with WD. I'm not sure how you can claim that you haven't seen it.

 

[crashtech]

Yet you won't link to the evidence. Does it really exist? Or is it constructed of inferences and opinions? I don't see a test where low-end i5s with midrange GPUs defeat high-end i3s with higher-end GPUs under identical conditions. Just tests that might infer something about something that wasn't actually tested, and we are drawing different conclusions.

 

[2is]

Yet you won't link to the evidence. Does it really exist? Or is it constructed of inferences and opinions? I don't see a test where low-end i5s with midrange GPUs defeat high-end i3s with higher-end GPUs under identical conditions. Just tests that might infer something about something that wasn't actually tested, and we are drawing different conclusions.

Refer to your own link. 27 min for the fastest i3 vs 47min for an i5. If you lack the deductive reasoning skills to conclude that the 780 used in that test isn't being pushed at all when using an i3 then you lack the knowledge, and based on the ongoing debate despite the evidence right in front of you, the ability to gain the knowledge to continue the discussion.

I'm not trying to personally attack you, but that's the reality. It's either that or you're intentionally being dense because you don't like being disagreed with. Neither of witch are conducive to further the debate. All the info you need is here, your inability and/or refusal to processes it is another matter entirely.

 

[crashtech]

Refer to your own link. 27 min for the fastest i3 vs 47min for an i5. If you lack the deductive reasoning skills to conclude that the 780 used in that test isn't being pushed at all when using an i3 then you lack the knowledge, and based on the ongoing debate despite the evidence right in front of you, the ability to gain the knowledge to continue the discussion.

I'm not trying to personally attack you, but that's the reality. It's either that or you're intentionally being dense because you don't like being disagreed with. Neither of witch are conducive to further the debate. All the info you need is here, your inability and/or refusal to processes it is another matter entirely.

Obviously a dual-core is going to have shortcomings. But so is a midrange GPU, and that's the part you consistently leave out. Referring back to post 98, there is at least some indication that an i5 with a midrange card might not be all that great of a proposition. I would encourage anyone interested to actually look at the results for themselves instead of heeding your inaccurate representation of it.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=36445292&postcount=98

I don't care about any personal aspect at this point. Provide real proof of your assertions instead of attacking my methods and motivations.

 

[2is]

Obviously a dual-core is going to have shortcomings. But so is a midrange GPU, and that's the part you consistently leave out. Referring back to post 98, there is at least some indication that an i5 with a midrange card might not be all that great of a proposition. I would encourage anyone interested to actually look at the results for themselves instead of heeding your inaccurate representation of it.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=36445292&postcount=98

I don't care about any personal aspect at this point. Provide real proof of your assertions instead of attacking my methods and motivations.

I didn't leave it out at all. I've said on more than one occasion that concessions to IQ might need to be made in some games. That's the down side, the up side is you will be able to play any game out there with good performance.

Like I said, your inability or refusal to process information is another matter entirely. Work on that, and lets continue. Proof has been provided. (by you in fact) If you can't see it, well... YOU can't see it.

 

[crashtech]

Wow, your inability to refute my claims without getting personal sure is getting tiresome.

If a gamer has a certain amount of money, it's best to put the bulk of it into the GPU for best performance. This is not controversial. An i3 can be swapped out for a 4670K or 4690K later for a net cost of between $100 and $150, counting the resale of the i3. This IS costlier than just spending the money for the high-end i5 off the bat, but meanwhile the user will have better performance than if the same amount of money was spent on two mediocre parts instead, trying to achieve some mythical "balance" that is, what, aesthetically pleasing but doesn't work as well? Most people build on limited budgets. It is OK for them to allocate it where it will do the most good.

 

[2is]

To say you're unable to see the evidence when, in fact, you are unable to see the evidence isn't an insult. Saying the same thing that started this debate isn't going to change that.

 

[crashtech]

You haven't presented the specific evidence that is relevant to the scenarios being discussed. I'm the only one who has done that.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=36445292&postcount=98

 

[2is]

Refer to your own link. 27 min for the fastest i3 vs 47min for an i5. If you lack the deductive reasoning skills to conclude that the 780 used in that test isn't being pushed at all when using an i3 then you lack the knowledge, and based on the ongoing debate despite the evidence right in front of you, the ability to gain the knowledge to continue the discussion.

I'm not trying to personally attack you, but that's the reality. It's either that or you're intentionally being dense because you don't like being disagreed with. Neither of witch are conducive to further the debate. All the info you need is here, your inability and/or refusal to processes it is another matter entirely.

Pretty sure we've been through this before. like 5 minutes ago...

Go ahead and post the same thing for a 4th time.

If you're under the impression that the processor you're suggesting, getting 20fps less minimums (making the game largely unplayable) than the one I'm suggesting is somehow not relevant. You're only proving your lack of credibility.

 

[crashtech]

Still no link to a test where a low-end i5 with a midrange GPU will beat an i3 with a high-end card, got it. Bit hubristic to quote yourself, don't you think?

 

[2is]

Still no link to a test where a low-end i5 with a midrange GPU will beat an i3 with a high-end card, got it. Bit hubristic to quote yourself, don't you think?

I was quoting myself as to not type out the same reply to your link that you posted 3 times, that I've already addressed. I thought it was obvious? But then again, 47 minimum fps is obviously better than 27 minimum fps and you haven't been able to grasp that either...

 

[crashtech]

Here's what looks to be a fairly GPU bound scenario, shows i3 in the mix just below the big boys:

 

[crashtech]

I was quoting myself as to not type out the same reply to your link that you posted 3 times, that I've already addressed. I thought it was obvious? But then again, 47 minimum fps is obviously better than 27 minimum fps and you haven't been able to grasp that either...

But anyone who actually views the images will see that you are... mistaken. I'm sure you would not deliberately misrepresent it.

 

[2is]

http://pclab.pl/zdjecia/artykuly/chaostheory/2014/05/watch_dogs/charts/wd_cpu_r.png

I'll just keep that there without representing or misrepresent it. You just need to know how to count.

 

[2is]

Here's what looks to be a fairly GPU bound scenario, shows i3 in the mix just below the big boys:

/snip

Lets cut the BS and I'll ask a simple question... What do you consider acceptable performance?

 

[toyota]

a gpu is a hell of lot easier to upgrade than the cpu though so if strapped for cash then go with a good platform first and get a better gpu later. a good cpu/mobo/ram setup will last MANY years and prices stay about the same where as gpus drop in price. if you cant justify an extra 100-150 bucks for a cpu that you will keep for at least 2-3 years than you are doing it wrong.


that said if you dont have enough money to buy BOTH a good cpu and decent gpu then perhaps pc gaming should be the least of your priorities.

 

[AtenRa]

http://pclab.pl/zdjecia/artykuly/chaostheory/2014/05/watch_dogs/charts/wd_cpu_r.png

I'll just keep that there without representing or misrepresent it. You just need to know how to count.

Ok, now link to a graph with entry Core i5 and mid-end graphics card(R7 270) to compare against that Core i3 and R9 290X you just quoted. Same settings

 

[2is]

Ok, now link to a graph with entry Core i5 and mid-end graphics card(R7 270) to compare against that Core i3 and R9 290X you just quoted. Same settings

Why, when that's not the point I and others have been making?

Try and keep up, the entire point is that with a better CPU and mid range gpu you can still get good performance by way of LOWERING IQ. This has been stated multiple times in this thread already. Conversely, if you're CPU bound as is the case with an i3 in this game, lowering settings regardless of weather you have a mid or high end GPU won't do much to increase those horrible minimum FPS since it clearly isn't the GPU that's causing it. If it were, all the processors would have virtually identical performance.

 

[toyota]

so get a crappy gpu and higher end cpu and run lower IQ settings or buy a modest cpu and high end gpu but get the actual performance of a mid range gpu due to bottleneck.

for long term use either scenario is asinine.

 

[AtenRa]

a gpu is a hell of lot easier to upgrade than the cpu though so if strapped for cash then go with a good platform first and get a better gpu later. a good cpu/mobo/ram setup will last MANY years and prices stay about the same where as gpus drop in price.

And that is because what ??? you have a BGA CPU ?? It only takes one or two minutes to replace the CPU.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bf5La099urI

that said if you dont have enough money to buy BOTH a good cpu and decent gpu then perhaps pc gaming should be the least of your priorities.

So, in order to play games on the PC you have to buy a Core i5 + $200-300 GPUs and up ??? Are you kidding me ??

I can show you countless games where a Core i3 + $150-200 GPU can be very satisfactory for gaming. How many games can you show me that a Core i3 + R9 280 cannot game at high IQ settings ??

 

[2is]

so get a crappy gpu and higher end cpu and run lower IQ settings or buy a modest cpu and high end gpu but get the actual performance of a mid range gpu due to bottleneck.

for long term use either scenario is asinine.

Agreed