# Intel Core i3 530 and i3 540



## Omega (Feb 7, 2010)

After the imbalanced and overpriced Core i5 600 series Intel is making yet another step to deliver their Westmere architecture to the average user via Core i3 processors. Packed with Hyper Threading with lower frequencies and no Turbo Boost compared to i5 600 models, Core i3 530 and 540 got a tough task replacing Core 2 E7x00/E8x00 and put some pressure on AMD's cheap quad and triple core processors.

*Show full review*


----------



## mlee49 (Feb 15, 2010)

Wow, great little chips.  Good numbers on the standard benchmarks, but wow those chips overclocked really pack a punch.


----------



## johnnyfiive (Feb 15, 2010)

Great value for anyone on a tight budget moving up with 775. Those overclock sooooo well.


----------



## caamsa (Feb 15, 2010)

Nice processors if you are building a new system. If I had an old 775 system with a dual core I would probably just pick up a quad for it, a much cheaper route. Overclocking gives a nice boost in most apps. I have to say in gaming you are better running them at stock. You get a boost but is it worth the extra power and heat to get a few more frames when you are already getting well over 60?


----------



## xrealm20 (Feb 15, 2010)

amazing overclock out of the "value" line - just wish they would have kept the memory controllers integrated into the cpu die for the added bandwidth and reduced latency.

But overall, a good set of value processors.


----------



## Omega (Feb 15, 2010)

caamsa said:


> I have to say in gaming you are better running them at stock. You get a boost but is it worth the extra power and heat to get a few more frames when you are already getting well over 60?



One game benchmark cannot be a reference to CPU's performance in other 100 games when overclocked. MW2 scales badly, but other games could be benefiting from extra clock. Anyways it would be interesting to pair up i3 540 with high end cooler, overclock the hell out of it and then run a full barrage of benchmarks


----------



## caamsa (Feb 16, 2010)

Omega said:


> One game benchmark cannot be a reference to CPU's performance in other 100 games when overclocked. MW2 scales badly, but other games could be benefiting from extra clock. Anyways it would be interesting to pair up i3 540 with high end cooler, overclock the hell out of it and then run a full barrage of benchmarks



How many threads can they add to these dual core processors? Why not just do that instead in adding physical cores. Plus I heard with Sandy bridge Intell will be adding a new socket LGA1155. If this is the case are they going to keep both 1155 and 1156 sockets or will they be compatible?


----------



## Omega (Feb 16, 2010)

caamsa said:


> How many threads can they add to these dual core processors? Why not just do that instead in adding physical cores.



Going past two threads per core would make no sense. Remember, threads don't process themselves, it's the actual physical processor core that does the processing of threads. Think of HyperThreading as of way to optimize resources that physical cores have.

If you've noticed, Intel's dual core Core i3 processors can work four threads, but they don't double up on performance and they sure can't match true quad core performance. It's just that Hyper Threading makes sure all the resources (or horsepower if you will) one core has are utilized.



caamsa said:


> Plus I heard with Sandy bridge Intell will be adding a new socket LGA1155. If this is the case are they going to keep both 1155 and 1156 sockets or will they be compatible?



I tried avoiding this topic in reviews as I feel it would bring nothing but confusion, but now that you've opened Pandoras box we can get this out the open.

Lynnfield based processors (Core i7 800 and i5 750) use LGA 1156 socket.
Clarkdale based processors (Core i5 600 and i3 500) already use LGA 1155 socket, which is what you get when you buy H55/H57 motherboard. For now LGA1156 processor is compatible with LGA1155 motherboard and vice verse, and I believe that it will stay that way for all of the current Intel processors on the market.

As for Sandy Bridge... little details are known so far, but word is that Sandy Bridge processors will require new chipsets to work. So even if you buy an LGA1155 (H55/H57) motherboard now, you may end up short with chipset support when Sandy Bridge comes. This is yet to be confirmed but it makes sense since Sandy Bridge will be very different from today's Clarkdale (ie IMC, IGP, PCI-E bus integrated with CPU cores on one die piece)


----------



## caamsa (Feb 16, 2010)

Thanks for the info. I was a little familiar with the intell netburst hyperthreading of the past which if I remember correctly was pretty bad. 

I tell you Intell is good at confusing the heck out of people with all these releases. Their chips certainly are the best and beat the hell out of AMD in the mid and high end though. 

But I am pretty much an AMD fan all the way.


----------



## niksi_2s (Apr 20, 2010)

Great review !
I've read all of it and I'm facing a big dilemma here...
I wonder are the Phenom X3 720 cores faster as individuals in none multicore supporting games like Counter Strike source (a friend of mine told me that it doesn't use all of the CPU cores... maybe he is wrong ... )  or intel's HT is really doing the job for thoes type of games !


----------



## runevirage (Apr 22, 2010)

Nice review, but next time when you do the gaming tests can you put them at the same settings as you do in your GPU reviews while using at least a 5870? Your current method is good for ranking them in an absolute sense but we get no idea of "real world" performance in games, i.e. at 1920x1200/1080 and 4xAA. That way we can see where bottlenecks start to occur.


----------

