# Gaming benchmarks: Ivy Bridge Core i3 vs Core i5



## Artas1984 (Jan 4, 2016)

With my last benchmark being about Ivy Bridge Core i7 HT performance in games, and the future one being Skylake Core i7 HT performance in games, ive decided to run something of the ordinary, and yet refreshing. Time to time a acquire different processors, since i am assembling computers for selling (this is not my job). I've got a Core i3 3240 and Core i5 3570 atm. I've decided to compare these two and see how much of a bottleneck does Core i3 make for high-end gaming when compared to the Core i5.

TEST SETUP

Intel Core i3 3240 3.4 GHz
Intel Core i5 3570 3.4 - 3.8 GHz
Asus P8Z77-V LX
Crucial 2X8 GB DDR3 1600 MHz C8
Crucial M500 120 GB Windows drive
WD RE4 1 TB game drive
Gigabyte GeForce GTX980 G1 4 GB

Core i3 has speedstep and C1E enabled, thermal throttling disabled.
Core i5 has speedstep, C1E and turbo boost enabled, thermal throttling disabled.

Windows 7 Pro 64 bit
NVIDIA Forceware 355.82

All settings set to max at 1920x1200. No AA is used.

VIDEO PRESENTATION

Let's begin!

*Alan Wake American Nightmare *





There ain't nothing between the 2 processors. This is somewhat consistent as in one of my older benchmarks made 3 years ago Pentium G2020 smashed Core 2 Quad Q9650 by some 20 %.

*Arma 3 *





AA or no AA, low or high settings, this game just chokes GTX980.. But Core i5 is significantly ahead of Core i3.

*Batman Arkham Origins *





I did not include the maximum frame rates, since they were not consistent - 250 FPS in one instance, 450 FPS the next and so on...

*Battlefield 4*





Here is a game that likes cores... I can bet that if i did not include this game in the list, i would have been slapped in the face.

*Bioshock Infinite Burial at Sea*





Core i5 distinguishes itself in Rapture with a 5 % lead over Core i3.

*Call of Duty Advanced Warfare*





I can not speak for multi-player, but in single-player there is nothing between Core i3 and Core i5 in this so much revered game.

*Company of Heroes 2*





It's one of the most demanding RTS games for processors and video cards, hence the 23 % average lead for Core i5.

*Crysis 3*





An appropriate name for this game should be "Crysis in your computer" - and where Core i3 scores maximum FPS, Core i5 just begins with the minimum FPS.

*Dragon Age Iquisition*





Yes i know, how-come i did not include an Elder Scrolls game? But Valina Skyrim is so well bench-marked, one should be looking for the benches of the most popular mods of it. Therefore we have another major, a bit more conservative RPG title Dragon Age.

*F1 2015*





Since 2014 F1 cars have new V6 turbo engines, and F1 2015 game has got a new graphics engine as well! It makes life easy for Core i3 and Core i5 if you have got the VGA to back it up.

*Far Cry 4*





We have got a chunky 21 % lead for Core i5 here in minimal FPS. I miss the trigens.. Perhaps not...

*FEAR 3*





A walk in the park with Pointman and Fettel. No fear for the processors...

*Hard Reset*





It's a hard reset for your computer if you do not own a Core i5. 30 % lead in minimal frame rate is the biggest Core i5 gain over Core i3 in the whole benchmark! By the way, AMD FX-6300 is absolutely horrible in this game compared to any 2-3-4 gen. Core i5 (don't know about AMD FX-8350 though).

*Hitman Absolution *





Core i5 25 % lead over Core i3 in minimum FPS.

*Max Payne 3*





Take no prisoners Max.

*Metro Last Light Redux*





Metro 2033 Redux and Metro Last Light Redux are re-releases of the original games, and they smoothen the performance, yet make the game look even better than before! While still being one of the most demanding FPS games to this day, it's surprising that Metro Last Light Redux allows Core i3 to score the same amount of FPS like with Core i5.

*Rainbow Six Siege*





I've decided to run my own benchmark instead of the given game benchmark in the menu, since it displayed very different results each time...  This is obviously an excellent performance example for the Core i3. It might be different in online multiplayer...

*Serious Sam 3 BFE*





There is an option in this game to run CPU settings at ultra and so i did. Given the heavy toll in processors and lots of physics options, the Core i3 delivers well.

*StrarCraft 2 Legacy of the Void*





Not much to say... I might actually do a CPU benchmark in the map where you literally have to be annihilated by 2500 Zerg and hold the Protoss base as long as you can. That might be fun...

*Tomb Raider*





You should be looking at the excellent Core i3 performance, not elsewhere! 

*Watch Dogs*





Why not Watch Chimps?

*Witcher 3 Wild Hunt*





Wow! Core i3 beats Core i5! WTH! Out of all the games no way in hell did i expect this to happen in Witcher 3! This absolutely makes no sense! Made 10 benchmarks in a row with the same outcome! Disabled speedstep, C1E and turbo boost on the Core i5 - nothing! You always wanted to play Witcher on a budget PC? Well, then the Core i3 is your excellent start for such a PC! Just make sure you have a video card no less than GTX960 or R9 280.

*CONCLUSIONS*

Core i5 beats Core i3 by 11 % at minimal frame rates. The difference varies from 0 % to 30 %.


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Jan 4, 2016)

Nice post, The newer i3's trounce older quad cores (Q series from Intel/Phenom iix4) in pretty much everything so results are not surprising maybe apart from the last which might be an anomaly? you can see in the most CPU reliant titles the i5 definitely shows it's prowess over the i3 and I'm thinking you would see more of a difference in heavy AI multiplayer maps in some games. But yes, i3's are known to be very capable gaming processors


----------



## ...PACMAN... (Jan 4, 2016)

Where do you get 355.81 drivers from...can't seem to find them?


----------



## jboydgolfer (Jan 4, 2016)

nice thread.
I used a 4160 to build a gaming PC for one of my nephews, and it is a beast. I paired it with a 7870Ghz originally, and it handled ALL games perfectly fine.

im no professional , so i cant say if its the 4 threads, or just the 2 physical cores that are turning out to be enough, but it certainly holds its own. im actually starting to consider just buying i3's from now on instead of i5's , and i7's. time will tell. But my wallet could definitely use the break.

out of curiosity, i wonder which is the strongest/ most capable i3 CPU.....hmmm

it looks like the i3 4370 is the one to get for this application "this application" meaning a PC that has a dGPU, and doesnt rely on a iGPU.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jan 4, 2016)

...PACMAN... said:


> Where do you get 355.81 drivers from...can't seem to find them?



They are way back from August 2015, I think they were a very short lived Beta driver before 355.82 WHQL came out.


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Jan 4, 2016)

But what if the i3 was overclocked?


----------



## Artas1984 (Jan 5, 2016)

...PACMAN... said:


> Where do you get 355.81 drivers from...can't seem to find them?



Thank's for noticing. I've corrected. It's 355.82. Yes, i am using the previous drivers, since i still need to do some tests on them before going to 361.43



FreedomEclipse said:


> But what if the i3 was overclocked?



Which games would benefit most from oc?


----------



## a_ump (Jan 5, 2016)

i knew the i3 would perform plenty enough. but i am a little surprised at how close/even it is in some games....its 2016 and back when crysis came out(07?) we were hearing "get a quad, games will be utilizing all 4 cores soon and you'll miss out with a duallie" lol.

I also had an ivy bridge celeron g1610 before i got my 3570k. Obviously the i5 is much better, but i was still shocked i could play Crysis 1 at ~30 FPS with it paired to 4gb ddr3 and a GTX 560. course the i5 bumped that to more around 39FPS avg. But still....the need to purchase superior hardware is still getting ever slower, lets hope something drastic happens with DX12 and games to actually require an upgrade.


----------



## GoldenX (Jan 5, 2016)

Isn't that a little bit too much consumerism? Is great that cheap hardware can be 70% of the expensive options, good for us living in poor economies.
Becoming more efficient and reducing costs is a good thing. DX12 and Vulkan seem to help in that direction.


----------



## Ferrum Master (Jan 5, 2016)

I want to see GTA5(a lot of stuff) and Witcher 3(because it does physx mostly CPU) here actually. There should be the 10FPS diffence also... and 10FPS for the the same card is a lot in my books.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jan 5, 2016)

nice review, i actually see that between my 2 rigs at home, albeit the fact that they don't use the same GPU and not the same gen but tinkering a bit the settings affirm the i3 as a viable gaming CPU
at my place it's i3-4130T 2.9ghz 2 core+HT versus i5-6600K 4 cores (at a mere 4.4) for CPU and GT860m 2gb (basically a underclocked GTX750Ti but i clocked it back, all slider to the max, is the only way to be! ) and a GTX 980 for GPU

(just the same cost efficiency of a X99 + 5820K versus my Z170 + 6600K ...  increase the price but not the performances, far from that in reality    )


----------



## Estaric (Jan 5, 2016)

I know @rtwjunkie has a test system with a i3 4160 in it paired with a gtx 960 and he seems quite happy with its performance.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jan 5, 2016)

GigabyteFanBoy said:


> I know @rtwjunkie has a test system with a i3 4160 in it paired with a gtx 960 and he seems quite happy with its performance.



'Tis true.  I tested quite extensively, going over results with @GigabyteFanBoy as I went along, and I am pleasantly shocked and amazed.  

Although my methodology was nowhere as well done as @Artas1984 (excellent testing, btw!), I have to say I am with @jboydgolfer on this.  The higher end i3 CPU's are perfectly adequate for gaming when paired with a decent GPU.  

I suspect the HT is actually very useful on them and would feel comfortable recommending them for the next couple years or so.  Yes we are an enthusiast site, but I think too much emphasis has been placed on MOAR Cores.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Jan 5, 2016)

Ferrum Master said:


> I want to see GTA5(a lot of stuff) and Witcher 3(because it does physx mostly CPU) here actually. There should be the 10FPS diffence also... and 10FPS for the the same card is a lot in my books.



i dont have the time to do what the OP did, but if my word is any good, Im willing to share my experiences with gta5. the build was as follows.

i3 4160
Asrock H97 Pro 4
Corsair Vengance 1600 8Gb's
Diamond HD 7870Ghz ed
Panasonic blah, blah 1080 PC display
Win 10 & Win7 Both 64Bit
850Evo 250Gb

frames were consistantly near or @ 60 FPS + or - 10 to 15fps (scene depending). GTA5 has a LOT of "area" where strain can dip, and increase, but I have been gaming since there was gaming, and I could see NO studder, lag, frame dropping, or the like.

here is a comparable system running GTA5 with a VERY similar build. I got better FPS than this gentlman did, but that may be due to the 750 he was running, i cant say for sure though.
i hope you find this informative enough.
 VIDEO LINK

here is a bit More similar system to my own. The guy is running GTA5 @ max settings , i dont see why, but my point is illustrated just the same in this video. He is running mid 30fps, and higher, on MAX settings. if he dropped them down like i did, he would be comfortably in the 50's & 60's . Its HERE i didnt get to see his settings in the vid tho, im not sure ifi missed it.


----------



## cdawall (Jan 5, 2016)

So in CPU bound games the CPU made a difference and in the GPU bound games they performed the same. Thanks for benchmarking this I guess? You can actually show the same basic graph comparing an FX 4350 and 5960x, with the same results.


----------



## Ferrum Master (Jan 5, 2016)

My friend has a G3258 and R9 290, he gamed witcher 3. So WQHD and... using stock 3.2Ghz... a complete stutter fest when entering combat and Skellige is also tough. The FPS actually jumps around ~20-50. So Haswell 3.2GHz dual core is not enough!

Did a delid, OC rock stable 4.6GHz, way less stutters, you can game it... just same as console experience  around 30-60FPS(mixed same settings).

Well... on this site in the middle is also TW3 CPU FPS table... well it says that it TW3 likes multiple cores a lot.

For GTA5 bechmark on the same site we see a AMD card and see the rubbish DX11 CPU TAX.

Well actually I believe in those results.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jan 5, 2016)

rtwjunkie said:


> I suspect the HT is actually very useful on them and would feel comfortable recommending them for the next couple years or so.  Yes we are an enthusiast site, but I think too much emphasis has been placed on MOAR Cores.


indeed i concur totally for a dual core HT is useful for a quad: it seems to be a hindrance sometime 
i also have a 4770K system at home but it's a hackintosh atm  almost want to grab another Win 8.1 and do some comparison too ... just to prove that my i3 is still up to the task (well that thread prove it already ) and my i5 still the "gaming recommendation for budget bound enthusiast" since the price difference between a 6600K and a 6700K 

hummm ... i'm almost tempted to go X99 and 5820K ...
















just kidding ... 6 core 12 thread for  834chf versus my actual mobo/cpu/ram combo at 634chf is not a bargain for 1 to 5fps more (more 1 than 5 ) well ok it has 3 time the thread count for 200chf more, but does all the thread count? i know that thread count
(i know i am persistent in pushing the 2011-v3 platform down ... sorry  )


----------



## jboydgolfer (Jan 5, 2016)

see this Video for some Really interesting i3 results in HIGH end gaming applications.the video speaks for itself.they DO touch on last gen platforms as well as the newest

The author took the Highest power single Chip GPU, and paired it with a Skylake i3 to see where, or If there were any significant bottlenecks in gaming applications where the i3 is concerned.
They also did some Memory overclocking in regards to use with the i3, and the results of Those tests were (to Me) extremely) interesting. some significant performance jumps when RAM Overclocking was done, which used to not be the case so much.See for yourselves.

HERE


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Jan 5, 2016)

jboydgolfer said:


> see this Video for some Really interesting i3 results in HIGH end gaming applications.the video speaks for itself.they DO touch on last gen platforms as well as the newest
> 
> The author took the Highest power single Chip GPU, and paired it with a Skylake i3 to see where, or If there were any significant bottlenecks in gaming applications where the i3 is concerned.
> They also did some Memory overclocking in regards to use with the i3, and the results of Those tests were (to Me) extremely) interesting. some significant performance jumps when RAM Overclocking was done, which used to not be the case so much.See for yourselves.
> ...



Quite interesting, most people think anything above 1600mhz RAM for gaming has no performance increase, though when you are able to puish 2666mhz+ it actually makes a big difference, suppose people weren't really able to push ddr3 up that far to realise? maybe I'll go Skylake and DDR4 2666+ this year


----------



## peche (Jan 5, 2016)

NdMk2o1o said:


> But yes, i3's are known to be very capable gaming processors


despite many people here call them crap...

i have done several i3 bassed rigs for budget builds...they are performing pretty well...


----------



## cdawall (Jan 5, 2016)

peche said:


> despite many people here call them crap...
> 
> i have done several i3 bassed rigs for budget builds...they are performing pretty well...



Pretty much any modern processor games well AMD, Intel doesn't matter. Games worth mentioning (ones that sit in the lower FPS realm that you can actually see) are GPU bound not CPU bound.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jan 5, 2016)

NdMk2o1o said:


> Quite interesting, most people think anything above 1600mhz RAM for gaming has no performance increase,



Before Skylake yes.  Now with Skylake, we are back to RAM overclocking again, it appears.


----------



## cdawall (Jan 5, 2016)

rtwjunkie said:


> Before Skylake yes.  Now with Skylake, we are back to RAM overclocking again, it appears.



Ram overclocking is my favorite so this is awesome.


----------



## EarthDog (Jan 5, 2016)

I wouldn't call an i3 crap either. What saves it is the hyperthreading. The others without? Im going to call them barely serviceable for gaming. 

Looking at other tests for DDR4, I wonder why this is different. Overclocking ram didn't matter on 6700K, why would it matter on an i3 if it isn't using the iGPU?

EDIT: Those results though... I can't wrap my head around why it is so... Perhaps because DDR4 2133 at CL14 is slower than DDR3 2133 MHz CL9? There is a reason I suggest people to hit the DDR4 sweetspot (2800-3000 CL15).

But yeah, it honestly makes no sense at all that the i3 2c/4t responds to memory speeds but the 6600K/6700K does not. Perhaps bigger cache?


----------



## cdawall (Jan 5, 2016)

EarthDog said:


> I wouldn't call an i3 crap either. What saves it is the hyperthreading.
> 
> Looking at other tests for DDR4, I wonder why this is different. Overclocking ram didn't matter on 6700K, why would it matter on an i3 if it isn't using the iGPU?



Cache limitation? Just spitballing here though.


----------



## EarthDog (Jan 5, 2016)

Ha, ninja'd... thought the same thing!

LOL @ some of the comment in that youtube video.. dear lord are people clueless....


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Jan 5, 2016)

rtwjunkie said:


> Before Skylake yes.  Now with Skylake, we are back to RAM overclocking again, it appears.



That's kinda what I said before you cut out the rest of my post 

And yea most modern processors do game well though i3's beat out a lot of AMD's CPU's even some of their higher priced quad/hex cores in gaming? so I think you should have said most modern processors game, some better than others..


----------



## cdawall (Jan 5, 2016)

NdMk2o1o said:


> That's kinda what I said before you cut out the rest of my post
> 
> And yea most modern processors do game well though i3's beat out a lot of AMD's CPU's even some of their higher priced quad/hex cores in gaming? so I think you should have said most modern processors game, some better than others..



The beat the crap out of AMD in specific games. They also happen to be games when we are talking about 150FPS vs 200FPS.


----------



## peche (Jan 5, 2016)

cdawall said:


> Pretty much any modern processor games well AMD, Intel doesn't matter. Games worth mentioning (ones that sit in the lower FPS realm that you can actually see) are GPU bound not CPU bound.


im talking about intel .... AMD i far far far far away... and topic apart...


----------



## jboydgolfer (Jan 5, 2016)

NdMk2o1o said:


> Quite interesting, most people think anything above 1600mhz RAM for gaming has no performance increase



ikr? 
thats why  i figured it fit in this thread perfectly, a huge jump in performance of 10-15 % with higher clocked RAM is impressive, it even translated into perf jumps on older cpus too,.


----------



## cdawall (Jan 5, 2016)

peche said:


> im talking about intel .... AMD i far far far far away... and topic apart...



When talking about low end, AMD comes up pretty consistently. Saying current CPU's are more powerful regardless of brand is on topic...very on topic in fact.


----------



## EarthDog (Jan 5, 2016)

jboydgolfer said:


> ikr?
> thats why  i figured it fit in this thread perfectly, a huge jump in performance of 10-15 % with higher clocked RAM is impressive, it even translated into perf jumps on older cpus too,.


It would be telling to include that there isn't a different with higher end CPUs... this is going to send people to buy ZOMG DDR4 4000 I HAZ TO HAVE BECUZ THAT VIDEO.... LOL!


----------



## Artas1984 (Feb 3, 2016)

Here is a video by a russian hardware review group comparing Haswell Core i3 vs Core i5:










In most of the same games our results match, and they have additional games, that i have not tested. However our results do not match in:

Hitman Absolution (according to them Core i3 = Core i5, which is not true im my test (*same benchmark*)).

PS: as a lover of fusion jazz, r&b, and art rock music, i found their cheap pop techno soundtrack completely irritating - you are warned!


----------



## Caring1 (Feb 4, 2016)

That's ok, I find jazz completely irritating.


----------



## Kanan (Feb 5, 2016)

Caring1 said:


> That's ok, I find jazz completely irritating.


Are you vulcan?


----------

