Gadgetory

hey guys welcome back to harbor unboxed now if you're as old as I am you might remember the good old days of overclocking I'm talking about the days when you could purchase a relatively inexpensive processor and overclock it to achieve flagship level of performance take the Celeron 300 a for example now this is a processor I have very fond memories of I use this in the first computer I ever built back in my high school days and the reason I use this protester was because it could be overclocked with a few minor adjustments in the BIOS it could run as fast as the much more expensive Pentium 3 4 50 megahertz processor well roughly 20 years after releasing the first-ever Pentium processor intel decided to create the Pentium anniversary edition shipped back in mid 2014 which we now know as the G 32 58 this was an unlocked budget processor and it was the first time we'd seen a sub $200 processor from Intel that could be overclocked in quite some time in a way the G 32 58 was a small nod back to the days when Intel overclocking was fun and wasn't exploited for profit as good as an unlocked as well Joule core was back in 2014 for just $70 u.s. it was after all still just a dual-core with support for only 2 threads at the time we dreamt of a similar core i3 chip and was eventually rewarded with this 73 50k almost three years later actually rewarded is probably the wrong word to use but anyway Intel 7th generation Core i3 range looks pretty lackluster even with an unlocked core i3 at the head of the family the same thankfully can't be said for the new hyper threading enabled Pentium lineup these new cable 8 processors look really good well at least the $64 g45 6 years anyway out of the box the G 45 60 comes clocked at a respectable 3.5 gigahertz of course while this is 300 megahertz high in the G 32 50th anniversary edition this older unlocked Pentium processor can easily hit frequency such as the 4.6 gigahertz that I tested up that has the older Pentium processor more than a 30% clock speed advantage so it can hyper-threading really make up the difference this is the question a lot of G 32:58 owners have been asking me over the past few weeks so I decided to find out I'm not going to bother testing the G 32:58 at its stock out of the box frequency I can't imagine anyone who bought this chip knowing that it is unlocked would do so also I won't be using the GTX 1080 or Titan XP for testing rather than more modest RX 470 will be used this should give us a good idea of how these CPUs compare under realistic conditions so with that let's get to the results first that we have battlefield one and not a lot needs to be said here the G 4560 does a great job with the RX 470 while the G 32:58 performs horribly even though you do see a 37 FPS average with frame rates constantly dipping below 20 fps the game with a stutter II mess much the same with in at 1440p and although the RX 470 does limit performance in the higher-end CPUs the G 32 58 is still in no way comparable given what was just seen when testing with battlefield 1 I was shocked to see such strong performance from the overclocked G 32 58 in the CPU intensive Civilization 6 apparently two cores will work just fine here as long as they are cropped I enough similar margins of Sena 1440p and again the overclocked Anniversary Edition ship pulled ahead of the G 45 60 and I have to say gameplay was very smooth the performance when playing deus ex man kind of either was very similar to that of battlefield 1 though not quite as bad still with an average of 50 FPS those dips down below 30 FPS were very noticeable when they occurred at 1440p we see a 5 FPS difference between the minimum and average frame rates on the processors with 4 threads or more the G 32 58 on the other hand had an 11 FPS variation and again this was noticeable due to the stuttering effect that it created even if one 2016 saw the framerate drop as low as 30 FPS with the G 32 58 and this limited the average frame rates are just 49 fps this meant the G 45 60 was over 30% faster and able to maintain much more consistent performance once again we find that even at 1440p the anniversary edition ship is severely lacking in terms of performance when paired with the RX 470 usable for might be a DirectX 12 title but it didn't help out Intel's dual-core budget processor from 2014 again the G 32 58 is considerably slower than G 45 60 despite a massive clock speed advantage the 1440p results didn't look too bad but again with a larger frame rate variation between the minimum averages the G 32 58 didn't provide the same smooth experience performance for the G 32 58 in grand theft auto 5 was very similar under work was experienced in battlefield 1 in other words it was pretty much unplayable and a complete stutter fest moving to 1440p things got even worse and despite the 54 FPS average for the most part I was watching a slideshow the original South Park series offered smoother animation although frame rates were down the Hitman the GCD 258 didn't play that poorly in fact the game was very playable that's it with the RX 470 taking care of rendering performance was considerably better with the G 45 60 the margins closed up at 40 and 40 P and here the G 32 58 isn't terribly different to the higher-end CPUs thanks to the GPU bottleneck mafia 3 plays like rubbish on most high-end systems so unsurprisingly it's not a fan of the dual core Anniversary Edition processor like that'll still won and Deus Ex mankind divided we find unplayable performance even at 1080p things don't improve in 1440p and that 11 FPS minimum really says it all I actually expected Mirror's Edge catalyst to play quite well in the dual core performance was extremely choppy just as I'd experienced previously and a few modern titles such as battlefield 1 there obviously wasn't much point going on in testing 1440p but I did so anyway just quickly here the results not much else needs to be said really so let's move on again I was a bit surprised to find that even our overwatch bot test hammered the G 32 58 so hard despite its 4.6 gigahertz clock speed that said the bot test is a very CPU intensive test so the results shouldn't be entirely surprising moving to 1440p we still see a massive difference between the average and minimum frame rates when using the g3 258 quantum break was playable using the g3 258 but as you can see this processor loses serious ground to the G 45 60 even at 1440p the average frame rate is in the RX 470 as well down with the dual-core processor rise of the Tomb Raider around horribly using either Intel Pentium processor when paired with the RX 470 despite the positive looking average frame rate the minimum led to stuttering issues this is of course also seen at 1440p and this is one of the few games where I previously found the g4 560 to perform much better with the GTX 1050 TI than it did the RX 470 finally have total war Warhammer and here we see despite being slower the g3 258 did deliver play will perform still this title really calls for a quad-core at least a hyper threading enabled dual-core with a hefty operating frequency the numbers do even up at 1440p as the game becomes more GPU bound thanks to the use of the rx 470 well at this point I'm not even sure you need me to summarize the results or give you my opinion but as always you're going to give it anyway the Pentium g3 258 didn't cut the mustard in 2016 and it's certainly not going to in 2017 for modern gaming the dual core is well and truly dead if you're playing games such as rocket League than something like the G 32:58 will work fine but for games like Battlefield ones not so much importantly I should also note the games such as Far Cry primal Tom Clancy's the division titanfall 2 Call of Duty infinite warfare and doom will all remove from testing as none of these games played nicely with the dual core they either failed to load crashed in the game or performed so poorly I wasn't able to run my tests meanwhile games such as battlefield one day u6 mankind divided grand theft auto 5 mafia 3 Mirror's Edge catalyst and rise of the Tomb Raider were all unplayable using the G 32:58 although I didn't look at power consumption for this comparison I can assure you that an overclocked G 32:58 consumes considerably more power than the G 4560 so that's another nail in the anniversary edition processors coffin then overclocking the penny mg 32:58 anniversary edition ship was fun while it lasted but I think it's now time to move on the G 45 60 is the new kid on the block and I have been hyping the health out of this thing for the last few weeks at $64 u.s. or seventy eight dollars Aussie there's no denying it tastes seriously goodbye and with the ability to upgrade to a more capable core i5 processor or perhaps even a core i7 down the track makes it a safe investment I just wonder though that if in a month's time we'll still be singing the praise of the G 4560 things move pretty quickly and with what's happening next month it may not be the case but we'll just have to wait and see on that note science meted out of here and back to some more benchmarking I'm your host Steve I'll see you again soon you