For office, home or gaming computer It's not that difficult to choose the right processor. You just need to decide on your needs, orient yourself a little in the characteristics and price ranges. There is no point in thoroughly studying the smallest nuances if you are not a “geek,” but you need to understand what to pay attention to.
For example, you can look for a processor with a higher frequency and cache memory, but without paying attention to the core of the chip, you can get into trouble. The core, in fact, is the main performance factor, and the rest of the characteristics are plus or minus. In general terms, I can say that the more expensive the product in the line of one manufacturer, the better, more powerful, and faster it is. But AMD processors are cheaper than those from Intel.
- The processor should be chosen depending on the tasks at hand. If in normal mode If you have about two resource-intensive programs running, then it is better to buy a dual-core “stone” with high frequency. If more threads are used, it is better to opt for a multi-core processor of the same architecture, even with a lower frequency.
- Hybrid processors (with a built-in video card) will allow you to save on the purchase of a video card, provided that you do not need to play fancy games. That's almost all modern processors Intel and AMD A4-A12 series, but AMD has a stronger graphics core.
- All processors marked “BOX” must be supplied with a cooler (of course, a simple model, which will not be enough for high loads, but is just what is needed for operation in nominal mode). If you need a cool cooler, then .
- Processors marked “OEM” are covered by a one-year warranty, while processors marked “OEM” are covered by a three-year warranty. If the warranty period provided by the store is shorter, it is better to think about looking for another distributor.
- In some cases, it makes sense to buy a percentage from hand, this way you can save about 30% of the amount. True, this method of purchase is associated with a certain risk, so you need to pay attention to the availability of a guarantee and the reputation of the seller.
Main technical characteristics of processors
Now about some characteristics that are still worth mentioning. It is not necessary to go into it, but it will be useful to understand my recommendations for specific models.
Each processor has its own socket (platform), i.e. the name of the connector on the motherboard for which it is intended. Whatever processor you choose, be sure to look at socket matching. At the moment there are several platforms.
- LGA1150 – not for top processors, used for office computers, gaming and home media center. Entry-level integrated graphics, except Intel Iris/Iris Pro. Already going out of circulation.
- LGA1151 is a modern platform, recommended for future upgrade to newer hardware. The processors themselves are not much faster than the previous platform, i.e., there is little point in upgrading to it. But there is a more powerful built-in graphics core of the series Intel Graphics, DDR4 memory is supported, but it does not provide a significant performance gain.
- LGA2011-v3 is a top-end platform designed for building high-performance desktop systems based on the system Intel logic X299, expensive, outdated.
- LGA 2066 (Socket R4) - socket for HEDT (Hi-End) Intel processors of Skylake-X and Kaby Lake-X architecture, replaced 2011-3.
- AM1 for weak, energy-efficient processors
- AM3+ is a common socket, suitable for most AMD processors, incl. for high-performance processors without an integrated video core
- AM4 is designed for microprocessors with Zen microarchitecture (Ryzen brand) with and without integrated graphics, and all subsequent ones. Added support for DDR4 memory.
- FM2/FM2+ for budget versions of Athlon X2/X4 without integrated graphics.
- sTR4 is a connector type for the HEDT family of Ryzen Threadripper microprocessors. Similar to server sockets, the most massive for desktop computers.
There are outdated platforms that you can buy in order to save money, but you need to take into account that new processors will no longer be made for them: LGA1155, AM3, LGA2011, AM2/+, LGA775 and others that are not on the lists.
Kernel name. Each line of processors has its own kernel name. For example, Intel currently has Sky Lake, Kaby Lake and the newest eighth generation Coffee Lake. AMD has Richland, Bulldozer, Zen. The higher the generation, the more high-performance the chip, with lower energy consumption, and the more technologies are introduced.
Number of Cores: from 2 to 18 pieces. The bigger, the better. But there is such a point: programs that do not know how to distribute the load across the cores will work faster on a dual-core with a higher clock frequency than on a 4-core, but with a lower frequency. In short, if there is no clear technical specification, then the rule works: more is better, and the further, the more correct it will be.
Technical process, measured in nanometers, for example – 14nm. Does not affect performance, but does affect processor heating. Each new generation of processors is manufactured using a new technical process with a smaller nm. This means that if you take a previous generation processor and a new one that is approximately the same, the latter will heat up less. But, since new products are made faster, they heat up about the same. That is, improving the technical process allows manufacturers to make faster processors.
Clock frequency, measured in gigahertz, for example - 3.5 GHz. Always the more the better, but only within one series. If you take an old Pentium with a frequency of 3.5 GHz and some new one, then the old one will be many times slower. This is explained by the fact that they have completely different kernels.
Almost all “stones” are capable of accelerating, i.e. operate at a higher frequency than that specified in the specifications. But this is a topic for those knowledgeable, because... You can burn the processor or get a non-working system!
Level 1, 2 and 3 cache size, one of the key characteristics, the more, the faster. The first level is the most important, the third is less significant. Directly depends on the kernel and series.
TDP– dissipated thermal power, or how much at maximum load. A lower number means less heat. Without clear personal preferences, this can be ignored. Powerful processors consume 110-220 watts of electricity under load. You can see a diagram of the approximate energy consumption of Intel and AMD processors under normal load, the less the better:
Model, series: does not relate to the characteristics, but nevertheless I want to tell you how to understand which processor is better within the same series, without delving too much into the characteristics. The name of the processor, for example "Intel i3-8100", consists of the "Core i3" series and the model number "8100". The first number means the line of processors on a certain core, and the next ones are its “performance index,” roughly speaking. So, we can estimate that:
- Core i3-8300 is faster than i3-8100
- i3-8100 is faster than i3-7100
- But the i3-7300 will be faster than the i3-8100, despite the lower series, because the 300 strongly more than 100. I think you get the idea.
The same goes for AMD.
Will you play on the computer?
The next point that you need to decide in advance is the gaming future of the computer. For “Farm Frenzy” and other simple online games, any built-in graphics will do. If buying an expensive video card is not part of your plans, but you want to play, then you need to buy a processor with a normal graphics core Intel Graphics 530/630/Iris Pro, AMD Radeon RX Vega Series. Even modern games will run in Full HD 1080p resolution at minimum and medium graphics quality settings. You can play World of Tanks, GTA, Dota and others.
Comments (233)
- In contact with
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
-
Answer
Answer
-
Elena Malysheva
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Basil
Feb 25, 2020Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
iUnhead
Feb 10, 2020Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Sergey
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
-
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
-
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
-
Answer
-
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Gregory
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
-
Answer
-
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Leonid
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
-
Answer
-
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Alexander
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
-
Answer
Andrey
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Alexander
Answer
-
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
-
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
-
Alexander S.
Answer
Newbie
Answer
Newbie
Answer
-
Answer
Newbie
Answer
-
Alexander S.
Answer
-
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
-
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
-
Alexander S.
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Leonid
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Victor
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Apr 19, 2019Answer
Minsk Repairman
Answer
BRedScorpius
Answer
aleksandrzdor
Answer
Dmitriy
Answer
Answer
Answer
Answer
Answer
Leonid
Answer
Leonid
Answer
Sergey
Answer
Answer
Stanislav
Answer
Vladislav
Answer
Answer
Alexander
Answer
Alexander
Answer
Igor Novozhilov
Answer
Answer
Answer
Answer
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Answer
Answer
Answer
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Answer
Vyacheslav
Answer
Dmitriy
Answer
Answer
Konstantin
Answer
Vitaly
Answer
Answer
Dmitriy
Answer
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Answer
Leonid
Answer
Answer
Vladimir
Answer
Answer
Seryoga
Answer
Answer
Leonid
Answer
Natalia
Answer
Andrey
Answer
Andrey
Answer
Andrey
Answer
Andrey
Answer
Andrey
Answer
Andrey
Answer
Andrey
Answer
Andrey
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Andrey
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Andrey
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Andrey
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Andrey
Answer
Andrey
Answer
Alexander
Answer
Answer
Answer
Maksim
Answer
Andrey
Answer
Andrey
Answer
Andrey
Answer
Answer
Alexey Vinogradov
Answer
Dmitriy
Answer
Maksim
Answer
Alexander
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Answer
Answer
Dmitriy
Answer
Answer
Answer
Alexander S.
Answer
Answer
Answer
Answer
little ducalis
Answer
Newbie
Answer
Answer
Konstantin
Answer
Answer
Iskandar
Answer
Answer
Answer
Vladimir
Answer
Answer
Andrey
Answer
Answer
Answer
Sergey
Answer
Leonid
Answer
Victor
Answer
Tatiana
Jan 04, 2019
Answer
Victor
Apr 19, 2019
Answer
A
Jul 12, 2019
The year 2013 is the year of the great 22nm breakthrough
Autumn is inevitably followed by winter, winter is followed by spring, and with the same inevitability we need to return to budget families of Intel processors for the LGA1155 platform. The inevitability is dictated by the fact that since late autumn (when we last dealt with this issue), although not revolutionary, but very serious changes have occurred in this market segment. Nothing unpredictable - if back then we saw the first Pentium on Ivy Bridge, now the new microarchitecture has become firmly established not only in the Pentium line, but also in Celeron. Moreover, the company’s pricing policy, traditionally, leads to the fact that the purchase of previous models by trade organizations loses all meaning: new ones are shipped at the same prices. Moreover, the process turned out to be so rapid that one model managed to disappear from the horizon altogether, almost never reaching Moscow retail.
| $42 | Celeron G550 | Celeron G1610 |
| $52 | Celeron G555 | Celeron G1620 |
| $64 | Pentium G645 | Pentium G2020 |
| $75 | Pentium G870 | Pentium G2120 |
| $86 | Pentium G2120 | Pentium G2130 |
To make it clearer, we decided to present such a unique table, which only needs a brief explanation: the first column is the “standard” price levels of processors in the budget segment, the second is the best that “lived” on them at the time of the material mentioned above, and the third is what “lives” there now. As you can see, models with four-digit numbers occupied all the “standard” niches, and similar processes were taking place in the area of the “energy efficient” T-family. In fact, the last bastion of Sandy Bridge remained the single-core processors of the Celeron G400 line, but they were not of particular interest to the retail buyer before.
As for the usual models of the G500, G600 and G800 families, they remain in the wholesale price list, but cost like new. However, they can still be considered as candidates for purchase (as well as the quickly flying by Pentium G2010), but only due to the peculiarities of the retail market, which is updated with a noticeable delay. Accordingly, the inventory of the “old guys” must be sold off somehow, and the only way to attract attention to them is through price. Previously (when new models differed from old ones only in clock speed), this sometimes allowed for serious savings - as we already wrote, the opportunity to find an “old” Pentium G630 in stores at the price of a “new”, but slower Celeron G555 was quite real, and not hypothetical . But now it’s worth thinking carefully before taking such a step, taking into account in advance what you will have to lose. Those planning to use integrated graphics are generally better off not thinking about Sandy Bridge without a serious discount from the seller: we also compared HD Graphics of the second and third generations in the fall - with a devastating result for the first. And what has changed in terms of processor performance, which is more interesting to many (after all, despite all the progress, Intel’s integrated graphics can still be called a gaming solution only out of politeness)? We already know that Ivy is faster than Sandy “all other things being equal”, as well as the magnitude of this increase, but the massive arrival of the new microarchitecture in Celeron has led to the appearance of “not equal” ones. And what will be the final result? Today we will study this issue.
Test bench configuration
| CPU | Celeron G1610 | Celeron G1620 | Pentium G2020 | Pentium G2120 | Pentium G2130 |
| Kernel name | Ivy Bridge DC | Ivy Bridge DC | Ivy Bridge DC | Ivy Bridge DC | Ivy Bridge DC |
| Production technology | 22 nm | 22 nm | 22 nm | 22 nm | 22 nm |
| Core frequency std/max, GHz | 2,6 | 2,7 | 2,9 | 3,1 | 3,2 |
| 2/2 | 2/2 | 2/2 | 2/2 | 2/2 | |
| L1 cache (total), I/D, KB | 64/64 | 64/64 | 64/64 | 64/64 | 64/64 |
| L2 cache, KB | 2×256 | 2×256 | 2×256 | 2×256 | 2×256 |
| L3 cache, MiB | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| UnCore frequency, GHz | 2,6 | 2,7 | 2,9 | 3,1 | 3,2 |
| RAM | 2×DDR3-1333 | 2×DDR3-1333 | 2×DDR3-1333 | 2×DDR3-1600 | 2×DDR3-1600 |
| Video core | HDG | HDG | HDG | HDG | HDG |
| Socket | LGA1155 | LGA1155 | LGA1155 | LGA1155 | LGA1155 |
| TDP | 55 W | 55 W | 55 W | 55 W | 55 W |
| Price | $44() | $48() | $63() | N/A() | N/A() |
This is what almost the entire line of junior representatives of the Ivy Bridge microarchitecture looks like today - only the Pentium G2010 is missing, the reasons for its absence were given above. What you should pay attention to? Firstly, as it was easy to guess, the increase in clock frequencies continues - there is much more time left before the transition of Celeron and Pentium to LGA1150 than before the appearance of the new platform, so this extensive version of a creeping increase in performance “for the same money” was and remains main Secondly, as before, there are three lines of processors under two names, differing in the capacity of the third level cache and supported RAM frequencies. But if the L3 capacity has not changed, then the RAM has grown by one step: the G2100 family officially supports DDR3-1600, and the younger ones got DDR3-1333, which was previously the prerogative of only the Pentium G800. This is official, but in practice the situation is more interesting. Firstly, many motherboards based on “overclocker” chipsets allow you to set memory frequencies higher than the official ones. Secondly, even on non-overclocking models, the restrictions are more or less strictly observed for the G2000, but not the G1600: our “old lady” on the H67, for example, offered DDR3-1600 among the acceptable options for the latest line. Apparently, the origins of this confusion must be sought somewhere in the depths of Intel, where they decided to make an easing for Celeron - they are already “offended” by L3 capacity and frequencies, so additional restrictions may be less stringent. However, we have already studied the issue of performance gains when increasing the memory frequency from 1066 to 1333 MHz, which resulted in an estimate of 2%, and between 1333 and 1600 MHz the difference is even smaller, so this issue is only relevant when using an integrated video core. For now (in tests using the current version of the methodology) we use frequencies no higher than 1333 MHz for all LGA1155 processors.
| CPU | Celeron G555 | Pentium G645 | Pentium G870 |
| Kernel name | Sandy Bridge DC | Sandy Bridge DC | Sandy Bridge DC |
| Production technology | 32 nm | 32 nm | 32 nm |
| Core frequency std/max, GHz | 2,7 | 2,9 | 3,1 |
| Number of cores/threads | 2/2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| L1 cache (total), I/D, KB | 64/64 | 64/64 | 64/64 |
| L2 cache, KB | 2×256 | 2×256 | 2×256 |
| L3 cache, MiB | 2 | 3 | 3 |
| UnCore frequency, GHz | 2,7 | 2,9 | 3,1 |
| RAM | 2×DDR3-1066 | 2×DDR3-1066 | 2×DDR3-1333 |
| Video core | HDG | HDG | HDG |
| Socket | LGA1155 | LGA1155 | LGA1155 |
| TDP | 65 W | 65 W | 65 W |
| Price | N/A() | N/A() | N/A() |
Who should we compare the new processors with? Since no global changes in technical characteristics have occurred, we decided to limit ourselves to “intraspecific” competition, once again taking the “tops” of the three families of dual-core Sandy Bridge. It seems to us that this will be enough - AMD in this price class offers processors that are slightly different in organization, which, naturally, both overtook and will overtake the “classic” dual-core Intel processors where they could. And they will continue to lag behind them where they lagged behind :) In general, we will not give unnecessary reasons for continuing holy wars between fans of both companies, but will simply see what the new microarchitecture gives in this particular class of processors.
Testing
Traditionally, we divide all tests into a number of groups and show on diagrams the average result for a group of tests/applications (you can find out more about the testing methodology in a separate article). The results in the diagrams are given in points; the performance of the reference test system from the 2011 sample site is taken as 100 points. It is based on AMD processor Athlon II X4 620, but the amount of memory (8 GB) and video card () are standard for all tests of the “main line” and can only be changed within the framework of special studies. For those who are interested in more detailed information, again, it is traditionally proposed to download a table in Microsoft Excel format, in which all the results are presented both converted into points and in “natural” form.
Interactive work in 3D packages
Note that the processors are lined up in the form of a neat ladder, despite the similarity in performance characteristics (and the G1610 has a slightly lower frequency than the G555) - there is a certain increase from the change in microarchitecture. But there is nothing new in this - this was clear from the previous article. We remind you that the prices remain the same. Or even formally decreased.
Final rendering of 3D scenes
Another illustration of creeping progress while maintaining positions. The only interesting thing is that the Pentium G2130 has already almost achieved a result of 100 points. Let us remember that the “scale unit” is the Athlon II X4 620, equipped with four computing cores. However, this processor is very old, and at one time it was far from the fastest quad, but the result is still interesting. If only because the dual-core, but four-threaded (also old, by the way) Core i3-530 from 2010 was slower.
Packing and Unpacking
The greater growth in the younger families and the almost complete lack of progress in the older ones is largely due to the fact that we limited ourselves to DDR3-1333 memory for all processors.
Audio encoding
Pure mathematics, and even algorithms that have not been updated for a long time - it is clear that “classic” dual-core processors have nothing special to catch here. On the other hand, at the same frequency, Ivy is about 5% faster than Sandy, which, given the similarity of the test subjects, allowed the Celeron G1620 to almost catch up with the Pentium G645 - which has a higher clock frequency and in general... Pentium at least, and not some Celeron.
Compilation
And again, no changes. However, those who are counting on them, we think, have already quickly moved to conclusions :) From a more or less curious point, the G2020 is almost catching up with the G870, despite the 200 MHz difference in clock frequency.
Mathematical and engineering calculations
And here not only the G2020 is capable of such “feats,” but also the G1620, which is as close as possible to the G645. In general, despite the fact that the main changes during the transition from Sandy Bridge to Ivy Bridge are not concentrated in the processor cores, sometimes they lead to a quite visible effect. Relatively visible, of course.
Raster graphics
Repetition of what has been covered. Actually, it couldn’t be otherwise - the processors are very similar. Despite the difference in microarchitecture, names and positioning. Once again, the most interesting thing is that, in general, the practical difference between the Celeron G555 and Pentium G2130 is about 25% - in this situation, looking for differences between models that are closer to each other is, naturally, a thankless task.
Vector graphics
Video encoding
We didn’t comment on the previous diagram because we were tired of it, but this one is perhaps the most interesting of all. In any case, it differs from the rest: the advantages of Ivy Bridge over previous models are almost visible to the naked eye. In fact, the Celeron G1620 managed to not only catch up, but also overtake the Pentium G645, and the Pentium G2020 exactly repeated the results of the G870, i.e., the new microarchitecture made it possible to compete on an equal footing with higher-frequency processors from families positioned higher. And, by the way, a result of 100 points (i.e., the level of the Athlon II X4 620) has already been achieved by two dual-core Intel processors, and two more completely exceed this level.
Office software
It was faster than necessary, but it became even faster - what can I add? :)
Java
Another case when the “younger new” catches up with the “older old”, but otherwise there is traditionally nothing interesting: after all, all the tested processors are very similar to each other, differing only in small things.
Games
The superiority of the new microarchitecture over the old one is relatively great - even the lack of cache memory (which is very important here) did not interfere. However, the superiority is due, in fact, to one single game: F1 2010. Which “slows down” on all low-threaded processors, but slows down on Ivy Bridge to a lesser extent than on Sandy Bridge. As we have already written, all other things being equal, this “handbrake release” increases the frame rate by as much as 30% or more, which significantly exceeds the average increase in Ivy over Sandy. But where there are enough computing threads (Core i3 and higher), the absolute level of performance itself is much higher, but such breakthroughs are not observed. In general, as we can see, architectural improvements can work differently in different programs and on processors of different classes, so they need to be assessed as a whole, and not based on one example (whatever it may be).
Multitasking environment
Dual-core - it is dual-core. Any progress is observed only in younger families, i.e. where productivity was lacking to the maximum extent. Why is this interesting? And the fact that the frequencies of younger Celeron/Pentiums are comparable to the frequencies of mobile and (to an even greater extent) ultramobile processors. And it is precisely in such conditions that microarchitecture optimizations have the greatest impact. That is, the thesis is once again confirmed that Ivy Bridge is primarily for mobile market. That’s why the older models looked so pale a year ago compared to their predecessors - the latter were already doing well. But lower power consumption and higher operating efficiency at low clock speeds in low-end processors are what laptops need. And, of course, the dramatic improvement in the built-in video core is from the same area: a desktop user is free to choose a video card, but in a more compact systems using anything powerful is already problematic.
Total
Of course, the final summary chart looks exactly like most of the ones in this article, but... Doesn't quite paint the picture. Simply because in all “three-digit” lines we took the older models, i.e., the latest ones at the time of the official transition of these lines to Ivy Bridge. However, they appeared as a result of more than a year of development of the corresponding families, and not all at once, so in retail you can also stumble upon older representatives - up to the Celeron G530 and Pentium G620. Therefore, let's try to take a look at the general state of affairs in the camp of old and new budget processors.
In general, it is indicative: at equal frequencies, Pentium is always better than Celeron of its generation, but the new Celeron is better than the old Pentium. And among the various sub-lines of the latest family, the transition to a new architecture also provides more than extensive little things, such as a slight increase in memory speed. And at the very top of the segment, everything is also clear: the transition to a new microarchitecture provided a greater increase than a simple increase in clock frequency, but Intel did not abandon the latter either. Moreover, Ivy Bridge is more economical than Sandy Bridge, so the only thing that can restrain creeping progress is the reluctance to arrange intra-company competition with more expensive families. But as clock speeds increase in expensive models, it is possible to move forward in the budget segment.
Actually, this is what modern price reductions look like “Intel’s way.” In the summer of 2011, 110 final points (Pentium G840) of our method were estimated at $75 wholesale, but now the Celeron G1620 gives almost the same amount with a wholesale price of $52 (well, we can already conclude that after the release of the G1630, inevitable as the collapse of capitalism, this processor will displace the G1610 from the $42 price bracket). Moreover, if we talk about the cheapest computers, then they involve the use of an integrated video core, and in this area the advantage of the third generation HDG over the second is generally noticeable to the naked eye. It is clear that this still does not make integrated Intel graphics a gaming solution, but the user will experience less inconvenience. In general, in a nutshell, the situation can be characterized as follows: it has become a little better and a little cheaper. There are no hints of revolution, but no one promised it.
After the announcement of the LGA1155 platform, Intel is methodically updating its processor lines. Starting with top-end CPUs, the manufacturer is moving to Sandy Bridge and more affordable solutions - Core i3 and Pentium. The latter are intended for entry-level and mid-level systems. Models costing “about $100” have always been objects of close attention from users who are accustomed to looking for the best options when completing a system. Often people who choose a processor from this price category, approach this issue even more responsibly than those who are ready to pay any price for maximum performance. Let's see what the new Intel products are capable of in comparison with their predecessors and alternative solutions from their main competitor.
From a technical point of view, the most important difference between the Core i3 and the Core i5/i7 chips is that they are initially based on a dual-core crystal, and not a quad-core one with deactivated computing units. That is, no tricky tricks with unlocking will work here, however, Intel chips have not provided such an opportunity before. The area has decreased from 216 to 131 mm2, therefore, significantly more workpieces are obtained from one silicon wafer, and the cost of their production is lower. Accordingly, Intel has a chance to offer interesting retail prices, continuing to make money even on budget processors.
What changes have occurred in terms of functional equipment? The amount of L1 and L2 cache memory is identical for all models on Sandy Bridge (64 KB and 256 KB per core), but the third level buffer in the Core i3 has decreased in proportion to the number of cores - from 6 to 3 MB. The compact crystal, made using 32-nanometer technology, allows you to count on good power consumption indicators. The TDP for the second generation Core i3 is 65 W, while for predecessors from the Clarkdale family this parameter was within 73 W.
| 3DMark 06, CPU test, scores |
| System energy consumption, W |
 |
| PCMark 7, Computation scenario, points |
 |
| Fritz chess Benchmark 4.2, thousand nodes/c |
 |
| x264 HD Benchmark 4.0, fps |
 |
| WinRAR 4.0, KB/s |
 |
| CineBench 11.5, points |
 |
| Resident Evil 5, 1920×1080, DX9, average quality, fps |
 |
| Colin McRae: DiRT 3, 1920×1080, medium quality, fps |
 |
| Far Cry 2, 1920×1080, medium quality, fps |
 |
The chip integrates Intel HD Graphics 2000 with 6 computing units. The standard frequency of the video core is 850 MHz, while during operation it can dynamically increase to 1.1 GHz. Support for Quick Sync, a powerful tool for video transcoding, is retained. Another advantage of the Core i3 is Hyper Threading technology, which adds a couple more virtual cores to two physical cores. In multi-threaded applications, this function sometimes plays a very important role, allowing you to use CPU resources more efficiently. We also note that the processor has the ability to execute instructions from the AVX (Advanced Vector Extensions) set, which, with the proper degree of optimization, will help speed up floating-point calculations, which are actively used in multimedia software.
Alas, Core i3 does not support technologies for dynamically increasing the frequency of processor cores Turbo Boost, which is to some extent compensated by high standard values. Given the positioning of the CPUs of this family, there are also no AES encryption instructions here.
The current line of processors consists of four models. The younger Core i3-2100 with a clock frequency of 3.1 GHz is offered for $117. The Core i3-2120 operates at 3.3 GHz and costs $20 more. Intel has also included a cost-effective version of the i3-2100T with a TDP of 35 W. As a rule, it is possible to reduce CPU power consumption by reducing the operating clock frequency and supply voltage. On motherboards ah, allowing the user to independently perform downclocking and reduce the voltage below the recommended values, it is often possible to achieve similar results. But in cases where this is not possible, purchasing energy-efficient models will be justified. The Core i3-2100T operates at 2.5 GHz, and the graphics unit frequency is reduced from 850 to 650 MHz, while it can dynamically increase to 1.1 GHz.
Chips with reduced power consumption will be in demand for systems with compact cases that have a small volume and, accordingly, limited options for choosing a cooling system.
The Core i3-2105 stands out in the series. This model has identical clock speeds to the i3-2100, but differs from other devices in the family in the use of more powerful Intel HD Graphics 3000 graphics. Returning to the topology of the crystal, we note that the graphics component occupies a significant part of it - about a quarter. In turn, the lion's share of space is allocated computing units. Therefore, taking into account the fact that in the majority budget models HD Graphics 2000 will be built in with 6 blocks, not 12, Intel developers rightly considered that simply deactivating half of the computers is not a completely rational solution. Therefore, from a technological point of view, it turned out to be more profitable to have two designs of dual-core crystals. The version with more powerful graphics has a slightly larger area (149 mm2), but in terms of power consumption it also falls within 65 W. As we could see earlier, the performance of HD Graphics 2000 and 3000 is noticeably different: depending on the tasks, the latter is 1.5–2 times faster, while being a serious competitor to budget discrete video cards. An overpayment of $14 for a modification with faster graphics will make sense if you are determined to use integrated video, and the capabilities of HD Graphics 2000 seem insufficient for the intended tasks.
Unlike mobile solutions, where even dual-core processors can be offered under the Core i7 brand, among desktop Core models with Sandy Bridge architecture there is currently a fairly clear segmentation by the number of computing units (physical and virtual): Core i7 - 4 cores and Hyper Threading, Core i5 - 4 cores without HT, Core i3 – 2 cores and Hyper Threading.
Pentium
If you move down conditional scale differentiation of current Intel processors, Core i3 is followed by Pentium chips. With the advent of the Core architecture, without exaggeration, the legendary brand was used to designate fairly affordable CPUs with a traditionally good price/performance ratio. Modernization of this line has been asking for a long time. IN Lately It was no longer easy for models for the still relevant LGA775 platform to hold back the onslaught low-cost solutions from AMD, especially to compete on equal terms with the tri-core Athlon II X3, which often offered higher performance at a similar price. Pentium based on the Clarkdale core for the LGA1156 socket have not gained significant popularity. The market situation at the time of the release of this platform was such that it was primarily positioned by Intel as a solution for mid- and high-end systems. Therefore, even after expanding the initial range of processors, the minimum cost of admission here remained quite high. The retail price of the most affordable Pentium G6950 is about $100, which is a bit expensive for an entry-level PC. It is easy to assume that Pentium for LGA1156, combining two crystals (CPU and GPU), has a higher cost. Therefore, it is quite difficult to seriously reduce the price of these processors. Moreover, in this case we are talking about budget chips of mass production. And boards cheaper than $80–90 for LGA1156 actually appeared only after the announcement of Sandy Bridge.
The updated Pentium modifications were the result of a simple simplification of the dual-core chips used for the Core i3. First of all, Pentium lost Hyper Threading technology, as well as the ability to execute AVX instructions. At the same time, the cache memory volumes are identical to those for the Core i3. The new Pentium family chips also use Intel HD Graphics 2000, although with a number of restrictions regarding support for proprietary technologies. In particular, Quick Sync, the Intel Clear Video HD visual enhancement function and stereoscopic image output (Intel InTru 3D) do not work here.
At the initial stage, the line includes four models: Pentium G850 (2.9 GHz), G840 (2.8), G620 (2.6 GHz) and G620T (2.2 GHz). As you might guess, the latter refers to economical modifications, the energy consumption level of which does not exceed 35 W. In addition to the clock frequency reduced to 2.2 GHz, like the energy-efficient Core i3-2100T model, it also has a reduced graphics core frequency to 650 MHz with a limit value of 1.1 GHz.
As you can see, the new Pentium processors, compared to the Core i3, are mainly lighter in terms of functionality, while the basic characteristics should provide a decent level of performance. The Sandy Bridge microarchitecture used promises a good increase in performance, which we will try to verify during practical tests. As for the price, in wholesale quantities the cost of the CPU family lies in the range of $64–86. The retail price will be slightly higher, but it is obvious that Pentium will be cheaper not only than the Core i3, but also its predecessors with the Clarkdale core.
The updated Pentium models were presented quite recently - at the end of May. And almost immediately they appeared in retail sales in Ukraine. Intel has a good practice of bringing its products to market when they become available to customers either simultaneously with the global presentation or as soon as possible after it.
| Model | Core i3-2120 | Core i3-530 | Pentium G620/G850 | Pentium G6950 | Athlon II X3 455 | Phenom II X4 955 |
| Codename | Sandy Bridge | Clarkdale | Sandy Bridge | Clarkdale | Rana | Deneb |
| Number of cores (threads), pcs. | 2 (4) | 2 (4) | 2 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
| Clock frequency, GHz | 3,3 | 2,93 | 2,6/2,9 | 2,8 | 3,3 | 3,2 |
| L3 cache size | 3 | 4 | 3 | 3 | – | 6 |
| Integrated graphics (core frequency) | Intel HD Graphics 2000 (850/1100) |
Intel HD Graphics (733) |
Intel HD Graphics 2000 (850/1100) | Intel HD Graphics (533) |
– | – |
| Technology production, nm |
32 | 32 + 45 | 32 | 32 + 45 | 45 | 45 |
| CPU socket | LGA 1155 | LGA 1156 | LGA 1155 | LGA 1156 | AM3 | AM3 |
| Power consumption (TDP), W | 65 | 73 | 65 | 73 | 95 | 125 |
| Recommended price, $ | 138 | ~105* | 64 | 87 | 76 | 117 |
| * According to the Hotline.ua catalog | ||||||
Overclocking
Overclocking is a fairly popular pastime for many enthusiasts. Someone is trying to increase system performance in this way in the hope of delaying the next upgrade. For some, it is a hobby, a sport, or a way to satisfy idle curiosity by exploring the capabilities and hidden potential of the CPU.
Unfortunately, those who like to experiment with overclocking will be a little disappointed this time. Considering the specifics of the clock generator in the new platform and the locked processor multiplier of the chips reviewed, it is obvious that the room for maneuver here is seriously limited. Even despite the relatively high multiplication factors (+100–150 MHz), this is all that can be squeezed out after increasing the carrier bus to 103–106 MHz, at which current motherboards maintain stable operation. Of course, these are not the indicators that we would like to get, especially considering that older Sandy Bridge models often reach frequencies of 4500 MHz and higher even in the air. Alas, new Pentiums and Core i3 are absolutely not designed for overclocking. You will have to come to terms with this fact and take it into account when purchasing. At the same time, it is also important not to forget that these chips, even in normal mode, are noticeably more productive than their predecessors, which can even out the difference in frequencies.
In our opinion, you can’t expect modifications with unlocked multipliers among Core i3 and Pentium. Models with the K index, so beloved by overclockers, will be available only in the more expensive Core i5/i7 lines.
Results
As the test results demonstrate, the new Intel processors in the mid-price category have a noticeable performance advantage over their predecessors in terms of performance. Under conditions of good multi-threaded program optimization, AMD chips with a large number of physical computing units can sometimes provide serious resistance. For example, if you look at the performance of the Athlon II X3 455 and Pentium G620, which are now offered at approximately the same price, then a triple-core CPU in applications where calculations can take place in parallel has a definite advantage. Even though the core performance per megahertz of AMD products with K10.5 architecture is noticeably lower than that of Intel chips on Sandy Bridge, such software often “ brute force" is quite effective, although this is achieved by increasing energy consumption by one and a half times. However, we must admit that this is an ideal case when all processor cores are used as efficiently as possible. In real applications, this does not happen often, unfortunately. In games, new Intel solutions have unconditional superiority. As we have already seen, the Sandy Bridge microarchitecture copes well with such loads, and the gap between both its predecessors and competitor models is maximum.
New Pentiums are on average 20% more productive than CPUs of the same name for LGA1156 and compete almost equally with Core i3 on the Clarkdale core, which are noticeably more expensive. Simplification of the functional part of these chips did not greatly affect their speed performance. Therefore, these models can be recommended for creating universal systems and gaming platforms primary class. In turn, the second generation Core i3 also noticeably accelerated. Of course, it’s difficult for them to compete with quad-core Core i5s, but high clock speeds and support for Hyper Threading technology allow them to demonstrate very decent results, including in applications with multi-threaded optimization. Well, in games they sometimes look preferable to the quad-core AMD Phenom II X4. Considering that these processors have retained the functionality of older models, they may be interesting for creating both mid-level gaming PCs and powerful multimedia systems.
This time, Intel has done everything to make the LGA1155 platform truly universal. The existing infrastructure allows you to create both a top-end system and an inexpensive entry-level PC. For powerful configurations, there are enough motherboards on the market based on Intel Z68 and P67 chips, and for the most affordable solutions, it is quite possible to use models based on Intel H61. Processor Intel line it looks very smooth now. There are no distortions or obvious competition between solutions from different families. So far, one brick is missing - the most affordable CPU models. Soon, Celeron is also planned to be transferred to the 32-nanometer process and a progressive microarchitecture. Presumably, these chips will appear in the third quarter of this year, at which time the range of other lines on Sandy Bridge will be expanded.
| Revoltec, www.revoltec.com.ua | |
| Inno3D | Inno3D, www.inno3d.com |
| Intel | Intel, www.intel.ua |
Loading...
