Steam telepítése
belépés
|
nyelv
简体中文 (egyszerűsített kínai)
繁體中文 (hagyományos kínai)
日本語 (japán)
한국어 (koreai)
ไทย (thai)
Български (bolgár)
Čeština (cseh)
Dansk (dán)
Deutsch (német)
English (angol)
Español - España (spanyolországi spanyol)
Español - Latinoamérica (latin-amerikai spanyol)
Ελληνικά (görög)
Français (francia)
Italiano (olasz)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonéz)
Nederlands (holland)
Norsk (norvég)
Polski (lengyel)
Português (portugáliai portugál)
Português - Brasil (brazíliai portugál)
Română (román)
Русский (orosz)
Suomi (finn)
Svenska (svéd)
Türkçe (török)
Tiếng Việt (vietnámi)
Українська (ukrán)
Fordítási probléma jelentése
but a skylake i3 or ivy+ i5 will be better for gaming
http://www.techspot.com/review/991-gta-5-pc-benchmarks/page6.html
It's not the best cpu but it does manage and if it's just lying around use it until you get something better.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFLAicd1c0A
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_9ib2o8Eao
Ps, ya it's still viable.
Just look at the physics testing between the 1090t and the fx9590 which is the CPU test of the bunch... If you go with AMD then stick with the 1010t and you'll be fine. Don't waste money on a faildozer!
Also notice how the 3 gen old Intel competes (by almost doubling it's score...) with the best AMD has to offer... It's not that the 1010t is bad, far from it, its just that AMD hasn't improved much since then that bugs me.
So either get something from Intel or keep your 1100T and wait half a year+ for Zen and maybe upgrade then?
Seem like Witcher 3 can be one rare possible exception (if overclocked):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5ejBlynOV8
But i3-6100 has 300MHz more than i3-4130 and very slightly (i bet, 5-7%) better IPC.
While FX-6300 runs at 3.5GHz (400MHz less than FX-6350).
I compare both CPU at stock speed. In other case we should consider possibility to overclock i3-6100 to 4.4-4.8GHz (I never did that myself, however).
Anyway the i3 is the better pick for a gaming PC anyhow.