Unlocked i3
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
Why doesn't Intel sell an unlocked i3 for overclocking priced in between the i3 and i5?
An overclocked i3 would still not perform as well as an i5 6500 but would be immensely popular for the value it offers.
For example, in Australia the i3 6100 retails at around 170, the i5 6500 retails around $290.
Why not sell the unlocked i3 for $200 or $210?
>>53843234
>theoretical scaling from FX6300 to FX8350 should be 43.8%
>actual scaling in this benchmark is 37.5%
daaaamn that is well parallelized
Probably mostly float ops though. Hyperthreading don't work too well on float, and Piledrivers float implementation was notoriously shit.
>>53843234
Because they want to make money.
A OCs i3-6100 is able to beat the i5-6400 easy in most stuff.
>>53843234
An OC'd i3 would kill the i5 market
>>53843234
>2666mhz ddr4
>with an i3
So you are saying that your ram costs 300$ just to get your cpu to perform the same as a 150$ cpu paired with 50$ ram?
>>53845763
You also need an expensive motherboard that supports that RAM speed
>>53845800
that as well...
Im not completely familiar with intel's prices, as my current intel build was mostly pulled from the trash, but whe i had an 8320 in 2013, it was rather cheap.
8320 - 150$
good-ish am3+ motherboard - 80$
16gb of 1866 mhz ram - 80$
and the cooler that came with the 8320 was actually kinda good.
Because AMD makes it easy for Intel to not have to do it.
![66038[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/NIz8HPI.png "66038[1].png")
>>53845763
>>53846024
The FX-8350 is pretty consistently on par with an i3 in gaming. Even the 5 GHz version isn't really any better. Intel doesn't have an overclocked i3 because they're not even trying at this point. They're more worried about competing with themselves than with AMD.
>>53845738
It'll still be 2 cores vs 4
>>53846798
ya but anyone who needs CPU performance would get an i7, and for people who are just gaming the i3 would be perfect if it can OC
>>53846288
f1 2013 is massively singlethreaded.
No shit a dual core will perform similar to a 4*2 core
>>53846288
Fx 8350 can actually match an i5 4460 in multithreaded titles.
![66043[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/5lDUB2L.png "66043[1].png")
>>53847955
>>53850062
Here's a game that supports up to 256 cores or some shit.
>>53843234
bad goy!
>>53850101
Lol
>>53846288
>>53843234
if these charts show anything it is how little cpu bound games are these days.
The price difference currently between the 4790 and the 6100 is 300% yet the performance difference is barely 25%. And the 4790 is already two generations old.and was a lot more expansive (probably 400%) when it came out.
Furthermore with dx12/vulkan reducing even more stress on the cpu I see even less need for investing into a new cpu if you upgraded in the last 4 years.
Seeing how minuscule the impact of the cpu is even the fx-8350 is decent enough to last for the next 1+ year.
>>53850267
I'm on an 8320, personally I see no reason to upgrade for a few more years as more of my processors potential is being released in newer programs so it's not falling to shit like older intels would.
Outpacing an i5 3470 in dx12 titles and having the option to overclock, feels good man.
>>53843234
I would buy the fuck out of an unlocked i3!
