Quick check on upgrade - i7 860 to i3 6100

[LHN91]

Hi all,

Considering an upgrade from an old i7 860 on an OEM motherboard (so no overclocking) to an i3 6100.

From some research, the i3 is faster up until you get using more than 4 threads - all I'm doing on this machine is basic desktop use and gaming with an R7 265, but the old setup is limiting my external drives to USB 2.0, my SSD to SATA2, and the DDR3 to 1333 Mhz.

Any insight?

Thanks,

 

[frontier204]

I like my computer with the i3 6100. In the 1-2 thread bound games that I have, it beats out or performs as well as my i5 2500k at 3.8 GHz, and my GeForce 660Ti is easily the bottleneck for any games. One thing I noticed going from i5 to i3 was that I couldn't game while running BOINC or F@H because the crunching clashes with the game. (On an i5 the crunch threads would be low priority and are therefore pushed aside by the game, while on the i3 the game and 2 of the crunching threads are still going.)
The computer is almost silent at full CPU load because the i3-6100's TDP is less than 45W.

For basic uses, an SSD is the thing you'll notice the most.

Most of the games that actually have a performance boost with 4 cores vs 2C/4T are usually console ports that would destroy an R7 265, but you may want to check that you don't have a game in mind that actually needs an i5 or other processor with 4 actual cores.

 

[LHN91]

Surprisingly enough even with the R7 265 on the i7 860, I can manage near 30 fps in Witcher 3 at native 2048x1152 at mid-high settings - it's more a problem of low minimums and my current SSD not being used to its full potential

The idea is to clean up the low minimums and end up with a more modern platform. Maybe in a year or so upgrade the GPU.

Edit: Also after reviewing GPUs again, the R7 265 got a relative bump up the naming chain as the R7 370. Seems that it's still the same basic price I paid 18 months ago. Might almost be better off upgrading the GPU, though a 960 is only a 10-20% jump, really.

 

[Tyrann]

I have a i7 860 and had it paired with a Radeon 5850. It was fine till last year when i couldn't play new releases anymore above 30fps. So i got a used 660ti last Feb/2015 here on this site and was able to play Witcher 3, HotS and Overwatch again above 60 fps (1080p). I'm also still on a WD black 1TB and will save the SSD upgrade for when i build a completely new system later this year. My build has lasted me since 2009 so i got my use out of it

 

[Bond007]

I think it's going to be a matter of what you prioritize more. If you want to get all the new MOB features and connectivity more, then go for the platform swap...if gaming is the priority a new gpu will breath new life into your rig (maybe a perfect case for one of AMD Polaris GPUs soon to be announced). As you mentioned, the i3 is going to be faster in day to day tasks, but likely loose out in threaded tasks/games.

 

[MARSTG]

I think socket AM4 deserves a solid consideration as well. 50% more performance then Kaveri is quite something not to mention that it could be easily swappwd later on with a Zen sku. I am also using a Clarkdale and wondering the answer to the same questions, so i will wait for AM4. The SSD part could easily be solved using a M.2 adapter on pcie x4, but it looks the limiting factor is the old architecture.

 

[Fudd Rucker]

I swapped out my x58 gaming rig for a z97 setup just to use a few parts I had acquired. TBH, in gaming ive noticed zero change. But the platform upgrade was worth it for native mobo features. It did hurt parting with a 64 lane PCIe setup though compared to my expansion starved setup I have now.

 

[THS]

I wouldn't be getting a 2 core CPU now.

I know it performs well in gaming but with Vulcan / DX12 coming soon....

Personally I think 4 cores should be the minimum now....for some future proofing.

The i5 is a good deal imho.

I'm keeping my 6 core Xeon X5670 @ 4.2 and Rampage 2 Extreme X58 mobo for a year or two. Until the next generation architecture comes along. Something game changing like Nehalem was.