Intel i3 processors, what are they good for?

Maeldun

Australia169 Posts

July 09 2014 05:45 GMT

I'm looking at the list of CPUs on a hardware site and I see the i3 range of CPUs. As a gamer I have always gone for the highest end processor that I can afford/makes sense. What is the niche that the i3 range of processors fills?

The back story is that I'm looking at building a very lite computer for my grandma. She uses:
- Internet Browsing
- Skype
- Word processing

So I was hoping that the on board graphics in a good CPU will be good enough for skype/youtube. Comparing the i3 4150 to the 4360, the 4150 seems to have better on board graphics? (Intel HD 4400 vs 4000) I don't know if there are any other major differences apart from .2 Ghz.

http://www.pccasegear.com/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=187_1490

Can anyone give me some insight as to whether a build around an i3 and no GPU would be a nice budget build for the above? Budget is sub $500.

skyR

Canada13817 Posts

July 09 2014 05:46 GMT

There is no need for a Core i3 for a basic computer, all you would need is like a ~$50 Pentium.

Maeldun

Australia169 Posts

July 09 2014 05:51 GMT

So this is good enough to run Skype/Youtube? It has on board graphics?

skyR

Canada13817 Posts

July 09 2014 05:58 GMT

Yes and yes, like 99% of current Intel consumer processors have on board graphics.

Maeldun

Australia169 Posts

July 09 2014 06:14 GMT

Thanks for the info. Am I doing something wrong with this build?
http://www.pccasegear.com/sc/xEW

skyR

Canada13817 Posts

July 09 2014 06:31 GMT

You need a SFX power supply and you should probably just throw in a 64GB SSD instead of a slow 500GB HDD.

Maeldun

Australia169 Posts

July 09 2014 07:12 GMT

Ah I see thanks. I agree with the SSD, but will have to ask grandma what would be better for her.

[F_]aths

Germany3947 Posts

July 09 2014 08:06 GMT

The i3 range fills the gap of Celerons to i5 CPUs. Generally speaking, an i5 is already a powerful (gaming-capable) CPU.

Compared to a Celeron, the i3 usually comes with higher clock rates, and offers Hyperthreading as well as more cache. Those features enable to CPU to perform better if you run many applications at the same time.

Just for browsing, an HD 4000 is enough. If you use apps like Google 3D, a 4400 is better.

If you want smooth operation (fast loading) go for an SSD. If you use Windows, a 64 Gig SSD might be too small. (The Windows folder increases as new updates are installed. It is advised to leave 25% of the SSD free to allow the SSD controller to distribute write accesses.)

n0ise

3452 Posts

July 09 2014 11:17 GMT

On July 09 2014 17:06 [F_]aths wrote:
If you want smooth operation (fast loading) go for an SSD. If you use Windows, a 64 Gig SSD might be too small. (The Windows folder increases as new updates are installed. It is advised to leave 25% of the SSD free to allow the SSD controller to distribute write accesses.)

This. Having a SSD is great but if your whole storage space would have to be 64gb, I'd definitely recommend going for the 500gb hdd instead.

Cyro

United Kingdom20284 Posts

July 09 2014 13:05 GMT

#10

For many games, the fast dual cores of current architecture (Haswell pentium/i3) are significantly better processors than say i5/i7 of previous gen, they just lack the extra cores to hold up as well as i5 of the same generation for tasks that can get good performance gains from 3-4+ cores. For desktop use, browsing, a ton of games and then even the stuff that would run up to twice as fast on a quad core processor, they're still useful and pretty awesome processors, way better than what was available at the price point 5 years ago

Please or register to reply.

Intel i3 processors, what are they good for?

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming