Overclockable Pentium Anniversary Edition Review: The Intel Pentium G3258
by Ian Cutress on July 14, 2014 10:00 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
- Intel
- Pentium
- Overclocking
- Pentium-AE
- G3258
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.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
96 Comments
View All Comments
yhselp - Monday, July 14, 2014 - link
It would be interesting to see how a hypothetical i3-K would perform. Perhaps it's possible to test with an i7-K at around 4.5 GHz and two cores disabled?Also, it'd be interesting to see benchmarks with the type of games mentioned in the beginning of the review (and a low-mid range GPU) - DOTA 2, League of Legends, Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, popular MMORPGs, Minecraft, etc.
HanzNFranzen - Monday, July 14, 2014 - link
Yes, I agree totally. I think that the i3-K would the modern day version of the old Celerons because of the fact it is 4 threads. Ian did a great job in this article to show that we are past the point of '2 threads is enough' and a maxed out dual core isn't giving you the same extra free performance like over clocking did in the old days (because of todays low end of 4 thread processors). But as far as gaming is concerned, we have been to that point of '4 threads is enough' as seen by the i5 being the sweet spot for gaming for a couple years now. So a highly overclocked i3-K does fit into that scenario nicely. Perhaps Intel already knows this, and perhaps it fits a little TOO nicely that it would cut too far into i5 sales, and this is the reason they have not made one? So instead they chose to put out the Pentium-AE fully knowing it wouldn't cut into their i3 sales because the performance isn't there.Also, I second the request for a hypothetical i3-K test that yhselp proposed!
yhselp - Monday, July 14, 2014 - link
Indeed, but remember that we're talking about a specific set of games that aren't very demanding to begin with; in my mind, this Pentium-K or even a hypothetical i3-K would never be enough for proper high image quality gaming with the latest games, however, it might be very well-suited for DOTA/LoL/CS, etc. The source engine, especially with Valve games, is terribly single-threaded so I wouldn't be surprised if an OC'd G3258 actually pulls ahead of stock i3 under certain circumstances with these games. Unfortunately, that's one set of benchmarks we didn't get.eanazag - Monday, July 14, 2014 - link
The problem with using the i-7's and down clocking to simulate lower tier processors is that the L3 cache is still there at 8MB, where those lower tier processors are severely castrated in that department. You can get the memory simulated and thread counts can kind of be controlled.Samus - Monday, July 14, 2014 - link
Just makes no sense. Overclocking is generally targeted at gamers and data crunchers. The Pentium AE does neither because it has no hyper threading and no AES. Even at 5GHz this thing couldn't touch a stock i3 in gaming or data crunching. The salt on the wound is the i3 can be had for $40 more, and you can SAVE $40 opting for a non-overclocking motherboard chipset.So basically for the same price, you can get an i3 platform with superior performance. This thing is literally just for "fun" but once reality sets in and you consider the facts, fun turns to regret.
I feel as if this chip is simply a delivery platform for high-end Intel chipsets to people who would otherwise get an H-series.
If you want a real overclocking platform, just spend the extra $100 and get an i5-4690k. If you want a quality gaming CPU or need modern multithreaded performance (and practically all apps/games are multithreaded now, BF4 practically requires quadcore) get an i3 for $40 more and save $40 on the fancy motherboard, breaking even compared to a Pentium AE.
formulav8 - Monday, July 14, 2014 - link
Typical Intel gimmicks and some its seems think they are doing us a favor or whatever.I was actually quite interested with and tinkering with a Pentium K until it was clear Intel makes you by a stinking Z board. Yeah Intel, a real Pentium celebration, for you.
Computer Bottleneck - Monday, July 14, 2014 - link
You don't need a Z board to overclock Pentium G3258.Also Intel supplies a beefy 95 watt cooler with Pentium G3258.....so no need buy aftermarket HSF unless a person is trying to squeeze out the last 200 Mhz of the overclock.
Samus - Monday, July 14, 2014 - link
Since only Z boards are firmware-ready for the G3258, unless you have a first-gen Haswell lying around along with a 80-series "new stepping" H81 or better, your stuck with a Z97 or "compatible" H97 (again, read firmware update required.)All the launch boards/combo's for G3258 aren't Z97-chipsets by mistake. It is essentially required at this point. It will change as time goes on, but that doesn't change the fact you are better off with an i3+H81 for the SAME PRICE as a G3258+Z97. The G3258 is such a weak multithreaded performer (having two physical cores with no hyper-threading) that if you are looking to spend that little on some fun, you're actually just better off with an AMD platform.
And the cooler is still shit. Nobody has had their G3258 run for 24 hours at STOCK speed without throttling. STOCK. How do you think 1" of tiny fins and a 1200RPM fan is going to dissipate 50w of heat? Notebook heatpipes are more effective and they only need to dissipate 15-35w of heat.
Anybody who actually buys this platform is misinformed. The writing is on the wall. No reviewers can morally recommend this chip unless you just like the "fun" of overclocking. Beyond that, its a bad investment. An i3 platform with a more basic chipset will be faster for the same price, or less.
Computer Bottleneck - Monday, July 14, 2014 - link
Why don't you like the stock 3258 cooler? It is the same cooler that cools a Haswell i7 quad core, yet the 3258 even when OC consumes only a modest amount of extra power (see system power consumption chart on page 1 of this review).Zap - Tuesday, July 15, 2014 - link
"And the cooler is still shit. Nobody has had their G3258 run for 24 hours at STOCK speed without throttling. STOCK."I see plenty of reports in the forums of people using the STOCK cooler that came with the G3258 to hit 4.5GHz running 100% load in the 60-70°C temperature range, without being super noisy either. These are first-hand reports from those who have actually tried it.
Here is one such thread:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=23910...
Also, cheap non-Z motherboards can overclock this CPU:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=23899...
(Thanks Computer Bottleneck for the links)
But you go believe what you want, and if you have proof please post links. Potentially there is a huge conspiracy with a bunch of people posting that the stock cooler works fine when it really doesn't. I do not discount that possibility, however unlikely.