Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
3770k is around 20% faster in than 3570k multithread
https://www.cpu-world.com/Compare/583/Intel_Core_i5_i5-3570K_vs_Intel_Core_i7_i7-3770K.html
about another 10% overall
It doesn't matter if the weak CPU you have now vastly slows it down in the meantime. That doesn't hurt anything.
Now if you're asking this because you're actually not sure if/when you'll upgrade the platform, I suggest forgetting the graphics card entirely and prioritizing it the other way. In a year, Windows 10 loses support, and anything pre-8th generation is not supported by Windows 11. So unless you want to deal with an unsupported OS (meaning running Windows 10 out of support, or running Windows 11 in an unofficial fashion), or pay for upgrades for Windows 10 each year, I suggest spending your money in a more worthwhile way and getting something from this decade, rather than something in the middle of a decade and two old.
Yes, the GTX 1060 (especially the 3 GB part) is a bit limiting for newer stuff, but the platform is just as much, if not more so. It needs changed first, so if you're not even sure you'll do it in half a year, skip the graphics card and focus on that. Any reasonable graphics card upgrade from that is going to cost close to as much as a budhet platform (motherboard + CPU + RAM) anyway, so if you can afford one, you can at least save for, if not affor outright, the other.
The internet doesn't go from struggling on four cores (that's a new one) to not struggling on the same four cores with hyper-threading. There was some other variable(s) at play.
Why don't you look into buying a used motherboard/ram/cpu combo? You can get pretty good deals on stuff that's like 3-4 years old. Your CPU is over 12 years old. It's ancient.
I'm planning on selling my old AMD R5 3600 + CPU Cooler + B450 Motherboard + 32GB of DDR4 for $100. If you pair that with like an RTX 3070 that would make for a pretty decent gaming PC.
This or something similar for something more recent
As someone that upgraded from a 2500k to a 3770k a few months ago youd be surprised how helpful Hyperthreading can actually be when youve never had it before, i also happen to use a 1070.
So I'll wait for a full upgrade, okay.
smart move....what you have is so behind what is out there a 5600 none X AMD CPU would be such a massive upgrade.....if you want to work on building a cheap replacement we could start there....
man they already sold out of them.....Newegg had great black friday deals with things like a 5600x with a free 16gb memory kit for 140.....220 would have gotten you CPU memory and motherboard upgrades......
Plenty of people still running quad cores.
They are atill more than good enough for browsing the internet.
Another one of those games is Final Fantasy Ⅶ Remake Integrade where minimum spec. is i5 3330 with an RX480, but that's an even weaker processor and my understanding the RX 480 likely isn't going to be much stronger than the GTX 1060 3 gig. Recommended spec. for Final Fantasy Ⅶ Remake Integrade is more along the lines of a 3770 with a GTX 1080 or an RX 5700.
In terms of modern G.P.Us. with modern features the closest equivalent to either of those is an Arc A750, but despite being a 16 lane card Arc would take a significant perf. hit due to the lack of resizable bar (intel) or smart access memory (A.M.D.) An Arc card will work on older systems without those features mind you, but just not to its fullest capacity.
In terms of keeping your build balanced, I'd imagine you're pretty much where you are already need to be at with your current C.P.U. Most games still even list the GTX 1060 as the minimum requirement, and relatively few dip minimums as low down as third gen i5. You're more likely to see a 4th gen. i5 listed as the minimum requirement. 4670 or 4690.
Diablo Ⅶ recommended settings are a 4670k (stronger than your processor) with a GTX 970, which is approximately where the GTX 1060 is at anyway.
I wouldn't be surprised if the GTX 1060 is already bottlenecked by the 3570k, so I don't think you're getting anything better on your current computer without creating a bottleneck unless you at least invest the scant little money a used 3770k might cost, and even that will only get you so far. It might just be strong enough to match the 4690k listed in some games' minimum requirements.
Plus even the 4690k is on the lower end of the spectrum of C.P.Us. you might match with a GTX 1060 based on listed system requirements. 1060 is also often paired with 6600k or 6700k. Street Fighter 6 lists an i5 7500f with a GTX 1060 6 gig. as minimum reqs.
Simply put, I think you're already where you need to be at. Besides, insofar as bottlenecks go, I think you're putting the cart before the horse here. It makes more sense to balance your next G.P.U. around your next C.P.U. than your current one.
Quadcore with hyperthreading is basically an octacore and that is very important, at least in games that can use all the cores, which are most games these days.
Pretty sure there are games that work just fine on quadcores with hyperthreading, but dont even boot on quadcores without hyperthreading.
What SMT methods (which is what Hyper-threading is) do is split execution resources of a physical processor core between multiple logical processors. To my understanding, a single thread exclusively running on a core can result in a lot of "idle" time in the pipeline, which represents extra potential performance, and so the purpose of SMT methods is to try and take advantage of that, but you're still not gaining additional full core resources, so the gain is nowhere near as many cores as there are threads.
A 4/8 CPU can be slower than a 6/6 CPU, so saying it's "basically an octo core" is being generous. Especially when you realize the vast majority of modern octo cores will also have SMT methods.
That sounds like you're not familiar with any? I'm not familiar with any games refusing to start if there's a lack of cores/threads either. This isn't to say there are none, but it would be extremely uncommon (especially outside intentionally trying to run a game on something well below minimum requirements). What I am familiar with is games that have less performance if cores/threads are in short supply though, and that is the more likely result when trying that.
4 cores/8 threads is below desirable if you want to ensure you'll have the fewest scenarios where you have to worry about core/thread resources. If not for that alone, then also for the fact that many of those quad cores are also slow in per core performance too, so both factors are limiting them in the heavier titles. They're fine on older games, or lighter newer games, but they're no longer what is desirable. The "minimum ideal" is basically recent-ish hex cores now (I'd personally put this around Zen 2 or Comet Lake, or newer), and octo cores are the sweet spot but often unecessary. Quad cores still actually work a lot of the time (with or without Hyper-threading), though with reduced results in many newer, heavier games.