Pentium-AE Is A Processor We Want, But Not The Processor We Need

Testing the Pentium G3258 has been fun. There was a well of nostalgia in me that was particularly excited to get the processor in and get a chance to play with the overclocking potential. Even though this does not seem to be a fully-fledged member of the Devil’s Canyon cohort, Intel should receive kudos for providing the ‘cheap and cheerful’ unit which might instill a new wave of overclocking enthusiasts.

While the performance at stock is nothing to shout about, the feel of the processor in its overclocked mode was fast – even faster than the top tier processors. That is benefit afforded by an overclocking platform - web browsing and any other simple operation that needs a single thread will be as quick as you can get it. The downside occurs if anything CPU-limited or multi-threaded attempts to push its workload through the system. If the software can take advantage of hyperthreading very easily, then no matter how high the Pentium-AE is overclocked, the i3 will win every time.  As we move into the future, software is becoming more adept at using these extra threads.

Intel had several choices when it came to providing a cheaper overclocking processor. It had to come with appropriate branding (20+ years of Pentium), but also not be instantly recognizable (Pentium G3258 sounds generic) and it must not interfere with their high end product lines when going for full-out performance. Unfortunately, those last two points are just some of the reasons that a gaming enthusiast might want a nicely performing system on the cheap and why the Intel Pentium-AE is not the right processor to do it with.

To start, Intel missed a trick by not calling it a K processor, but if you want a processor to not take much of the spotlight, it gets a generic name. The specifications of the processor at stock leave cause for concern. Intel could have chosen a DDR3-1600 model for unlocking, but it chose the DDR3-1333 model instead. While one could postulate that this would offer more dies to sell (by being a lower classification, more dies would fit into this bracket overall), I doubt that Intel is stretching to fill die quotas at this low end of the spectrum. The other concern comes back to the fact that Intel wanted to leave a big enough gap between the Pentium-AE and the i5/i7-K processors, so fitting the CPU with a low amount of L3 cache and DDR3 support would help in this context.

Certain games get a boost with the Pentium-AE overclocked, such as F1 2013 and Company of Heroes 2, but the overclocking is more important when it comes to multiple GPU scenarios. The downside of that conclusion is that an i3 is better at multiple GPU scenarios right off the bat, and for single GPU gaming the trend is towards games that can use the threads. This is a big discrepancy between when we used to overclock older CPU and today – the games today can use multiple cores. Having a lack of cores can really damage frame rates in some titles, especially when the amount of GPUs starts to rise. Unfortunately the only way to get more cores is to buy a better processor, or buy one that unlocks cores. The former reason in the last sentence is what helps Intel in the long run from the Pentium-AE cannibalizing i5 and i7 sales.

This review ends not so much on a conclusion, but more of a request. But given what we have seen thus far when discussing the place of the G3258 with everything else, it might be a fruitless request, but I would like to try.

Please Intel, create an i3 overclocking processor.

An i3-K Would Complete the Set

If the overclocking community is to grow, there needs to be some positive encouragement, rather than an ecosystem where a user can buy an overclocked Pentium-AE gaming machine and it is beaten by an extra $45 which might have been spent on a good cooler enabling the overclock. Having the extra power of the i3 might, in time, encourage users to expand their remit and purchase the i5/i7 and overclock it further, with a potential route to the enthusiast X-series processors over time. The dual core Pentiums are limiting the potential of discrete graphics now that gaming can take advantage of processor cores. As long as an i7-K and i5-K processors are released at the same time, an overclockable i3-K would give you the trifecta of K processors that becomes instantly marketable, along with growing and creating communities around them.

Discrete GPU Gaming
Comments Locked

96 Comments

View All Comments

  • Computer Bottleneck - Tuesday, July 15, 2014 - link

    FWIW, On my stock cooler 4.6 Ghz open-air Prime 95 stability test (in-place large FFTs, maximum power consumption) and Battlefield 3 64 player I used Speed fan 4.49 to monitor temps. However, I did notice MSI Afterburner v3.0.1 and HWiNFO64 v4.40 were recording temps 10 to 15 C higher than Speedfan 4.49.

    With that mentioned, I did not notice any throttling during my 4.6 Ghz stock cooler (open air environment) Prime 95 stability test. Nor did I see this during BF3 64 player gameplay.
  • tuxRoller - Tuesday, July 15, 2014 - link

    It supports ecc ram.
  • Hardball - Monday, July 14, 2014 - link

    What type of cooling was used/is recommended in order to get a G3258 to 4.5GHz+? If you need high end air or AIO water ($80-120), it kind of runs counter to the idea of building the cheap, high performing system.
  • Ian Cutress - Monday, July 14, 2014 - link

    If you cheap on everything, then it won't ever be high performing. I used a Corsair H80i for these numbers during a nice warm British summer. The best place to start for overclocking would be a cooler with at least four copper heatpipes and a decent fan, then go from there.
  • smunter6 - Monday, July 14, 2014 - link

    Can you run power draw numbers for this system? Starting TDP for the Pentium is 53 W, I don't think it would run much above 100-150 W overclocked. Stock Intel cooler is rated for 95W, and even your cheapest aftermarket cooler should be good for much more than that.
  • Ian Cutress - Monday, July 14, 2014 - link

    System power draw numbers are in the overclocking chart, first page. You probably scrolled past them in order to comment :D

    With my inefficient setup, it registered 93W at peak load at stock, moving up to 131W overclocked to 4.7 GHz.
  • smunter6 - Monday, July 14, 2014 - link

    My bad...should have re-read. Performing some terrible math here, but if we assume 53W at stock speeds, then that's 40 W system overhead. At 131W at 4.7 GHz, approx. 93W for the CPU. On the edge for Intel's cooler, but definitely doesn't require anything that fancy to cool. An AMD A10 is around 100W TDP. And if you're willing to drop a point or two to 4.5 or 4.6 GHz, the power draw is even less.
  • Samus - Monday, July 14, 2014 - link

    The stock cooler is rated at 95w for how long? Because my experience, even going back to the i7-920, is the stock cooler can't keep a chip running at default frequency/voltage for more than a few hours at full load without throttling. Those coolers were supposedly rated at 130w, just like the CPU. But as the surface area heats up across every mm of fins and the ambient case temp jumps just a few degrees, the performance dips.

    Top-down coolers are a 20th century thing.
  • smunter6 - Monday, July 14, 2014 - link

    the i7-920 is a 130W TDP part. The Pentium is 53W, and even when at max overclock, the total system power draw is only 131W. Totally different ball game.
  • extide - Tuesday, July 15, 2014 - link

    Are you kidding me? ALL stock intel CPU fans will allow the cpu they come with to run at 100% load 24/7 without throttling. If you are having problems making that happen, you are doing something wrong.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now