Intel Pentium Gold G5600 3.9 GHz

[W1zzard]

Intel's Pentium Gold G5600 processor features HyperThreading, which turns its two cores into four threads. The result is one of the most affordable entry-level CPUs that is fit for gaming. Tough competition comes in form of the AMD Ryzen 2200G, which is similarly priced, but offers four real cores.

Show full review

 

[dj-electric]

Chip's DOA.
I'm not one to give super-harsh judgement on any piece of hardware, but this one belongs to an era before Ryzen came out.
And for budget gaming with a dedicated card, the 2300X should absolutely blast this one to the moon for the same price.

This CPU should cost 60-65$ at most, and i really hope that next gen intel would do something about the pricing of pentiums.

 

[Disparia]

Heh, haven't even powered up my 4600T yet... but I'm glad I have it and not a G5600.

 

[Vya Domus]

• Hyper-Threading, turns two cores into four threads

Honestly that shouldn't be listed as a plus but rather as a negative , Intel is still keen on selling overpriced dual cores.

 

[dirtyferret]

I could see this as a decent blizzard budget gaming CPU for WoW, Diablo III, SC2, etc.,

 

[Upgrayedd]

I went R3 2200G for home PC instead of G5600. It was cheaper at Microcenter, had 4 real cores and AM4 should be around longer.

 

[dj-electric]

I went R3 2200G for home PC instead of G5600. It was cheaper at Microcenter, had 4 real cores and AM4 should be around longer.

Not to mention the vastly superior iGPU

 

[kastriot]

I wonder how far can intel go with this kind of arrogance.

 

[Darksword]

Intel Inside.

Sucker Outside.

 

[jabbadap]

Chip's DOA.
I'm not one to give super-harsh judgement on any piece of hardware, but this one belongs to an era before Ryzen came out.
And for budget gaming with a dedicated card, the 2300X should absolutely blast this one to the moon for the same price.

This CPU should cost 60-65$ at most, and i really hope that next gen intel would do something about the pricing of pentiums.

Well yeah, these pricier pentiums are quite dumb buys. Comparing this to g4560(2c4t @ 3.5GHz) is quite moot point though, g5400(2c4t @ 3.7GHz) is a direct replacement for it at the same $64 msrp. And probably the only pentium one should even considering. I don't think that even media PC has anything to benefit from that bit faster intel igpu.

 

[GoldenX]

The Ryzen Athlons should be similar or cheaper, right?
It's not a bad product, but it's an old idea with an old price. At the very least Intel could have added AVX to it.

 

[TheGuruStud]

The Ryzen Athlons should be similar or cheaper, right?
It's not a bad product, but it's an old idea with an old price. At the very least Intel could have added AVX to it.

Do they still have virtualization disabled? Intel are scum bags even beyond their normal beahvior. V is/was turned off on most consumer CPUs since forever. MEANWHILE, AMD has had it enabled on every SKU afaik.

I won't think to check, not bothering to own their garbage much, and try running a simple VM only to get the error... Literally rage inducing. It's a good thing Intel and m$ HQs are far away from me...

 

[ShurikN]

Wish we could have seen how well it compares to an ocerclocked 2200G at reasonable speed of... let's say 3.9

 

[Raendor]

I’ve got G4560 in node 202 secondary rig running on rog z270i paired with 1050ti connected to 1080p g-sync monitor. Though it’s a nice combo for secondary machine and I’ll move my main rig’s 6700k to it when next upgrade comes (which was the intent), I would’ve never chose it if g2200 or g2400 were available at the time (though b450 should be more refined than b350 I’d had to use then). I’m seriously looking forward to something newer than same old skylake refresh and 14nm and so far Zen 2 looks more promising than Intel’s roadmap and long platform support.

 

[GoldenX]

Do they still have virtualization disabled? Intel are scum bags even beyond their normal beahvior. V is/was turned off on most consumer CPUs since forever. MEANWHILE, AMD has had it enabled on every SKU afaik.

I won't think to check, not bothering to own their garbage much, and try running a simple VM only to get the error... Literally rage inducing. It's a good thing Intel and m$ HQs are far away from me...

They have normal virtualization, but I think it's missing on the most advanced features.

 

[EatingDirt]

This CPU... doesn't make much sense at $95.

At $100 the 2200g is a better value because of the added option of an actual usable GPU for the casual gamer. The small 2.7% disadvantage at 1080p for the 2200g in gaming can easily be made up for by the ability to overclock it.

 

[Upgrayedd]

Not to mention the vastly superior iGPU

Figured it was a given since Llano. Lol mine is at 1400x900 VGA.

 

[Emu]

This CPU... doesn't make much sense at $95.

At $100 the 2200g is a better value because of the added option of an actual usable GPU for the casual gamer. The small 2.7% disadvantage at 1080p for the 2200g in gaming can easily be made up for by the ability to overclock it.

Unless I missed something, they didn't even test the iGPU, all of the gaming tests were done with a GTX1080. The iGPU in the 2200G blows away any of Intel's HD iGPUs in terms of performance. If you want a cheap-as-chips light gaming machine with no discrete GPU then the 2200G wins hands down over the Pentium Gold.

 

[GoldenX]

Plus the driver benefits, Intel doesn't offer enhanced sync or video recording on their software, just a simple control panel without profiles.
It's time for more than just good hardware, Intel will have to (gasp!) spend money on software.

 

[GorbazTheDragon]

I wouldn't bother with this crap... either a quad core ryzen or if you can spare the money, an i3 8100 are both infinitely better value at this point.

That said, the 4 thread ryzens are pretty weak, especially for quad cores, probably the combination of low frequency and the bad latency due to still being dual CCX.

 

[Tsukiyomi91]

this isn't a terribly bad processotr if you're building a NAS system. But yes, AMD's Ryzen APU is the better pick, which is already obvious so let's not bash Intel or AMD for their decisions coz they have the final say, not us consumers.

 

[Ruru]

With a little lower price tag this would be an excellent budget gaming CPU like the G4560 was. I even ran 970 SLI with it and it had a nice boost over one 970, even with that G4560.

 

[GorbazTheDragon]

this isn't a terribly bad processotr if you're building a NAS system. But yes, AMD's Ryzen APU is the better pick, which is already obvious so let's not bash Intel or AMD for their decisions coz they have the final say, not us consumers.

Agree but I would personally just look for a SB-HSW era dual core if that is the use case. You aren't really going to get much use out of the better connectivity on any of the newer chipsets and the per core performance is only up by around 20% since then. Meanwhile you shouldn't have trouble fishing them out of disused office PCs or on the used market for under $40...

 

[Nuke Dukem]

all of the gaming tests were done with a GTX1080.

Nah fam, it's the 1080 Ti, check out the "Test Setup" page or compare the FPS results vs any other recent CPU review. I'm guessing @W1zzard was a bit hungry while he wrote the review, so he ate that Ti bit from the graphs

 

[Caring1]

Pointless gaming tests are pointless.
People that buy basic CPU's like this aren't going to install a top tier GPU to game.
Tests should have been done based on Integrated graphics alone, why list integrated as a positive if it's not tested!