Question / Help Anyone got G3258?

T

thatwasonce

New Member
Has anyone tested using quicksync to stream with a G3258?

I am building a newer pc to replace my aging one and im stuck between buying a G3258 or a fx6300!~





searched it on forum and found no threads containing "G3258"
 
D

DryRoastedLemon

Member
If you searched on this forum, then that should not be surprising, as this isn't a hardware specific discussion forum.

It's actually quite difficult to make that comparison. The G3258 is an interesting processor, and it actually makes for an interesting choice for a light gaming rig. Interestingly, when it comes to single core performance the G3258 actually beats the FX-6300. However, the G3258 only has two cores with no hyperthreading support, whereas the FX-6300 has six cores. This means that when it comes to multi-core performance, and multi-threaded applications in general, the FX-6300 will butcher the G3258. Or in simple English: the G3258 isn't going to cope well when dealing with multi-tasking and programs that use multiple threads (AKA "divide their work" over multiple cores). However, in terms of single-core performance (that is, when an application uses one core/thread only) it's going to beat the FX-6300.

So, while you could probably game fairly well on this (granted you use a dedicated video card), I am unsure whether you could use this for livestreaming. That is, normal CPU-based video encoding is out of the question (for livestreaming, anyway). However, you mentioned that you wanted to use QuickSync, which is indeed a technology this processor supports. This will take a lot of the load off the CPU. However, I do not have any personal experience with QuickSync, so I can't help you there.

What do you want to use your future rig for?
 
H

hansmuff

New Member
In addition to what DryRoastedLemon said, the Pentium does not have AVX instructions, the AMD FX does.
There are other CPU instruction features (AES-NI for encryption) that Intel cut from the Pentium that you may or may not care about. In particular though, OBS' software X.264 encoder will use AVX instructions when they are available, and without them, encoding will be slower.

Personally the Pentium feels like a disappointment for the lack of those CPU features. I'd go with the AMD if the choice is between those two.
 
D

DryRoastedLemon

Member
Ahh, thanks for the addition. Those are exact technicalities I don't know about :) Indeed, from the looks of it it looks like the FX-6300 is a well-rounded processor.

Imagine how I feel, thatwasonce :p I'm running on a i5 750, a processor that was released in 2009. It's still a very good processor, and to this day there really hasn't been a reason for me to upgrade when it comes to gaming. If I want to upgrade, I have to go for a i5. Most things under that (with the exception of the i3 4xxx's, surprisingly) perform similar to my processor, or sometimes even worse. Moral of the story: just because something is new, doesn't mean it's better.
 
H

hansmuff

New Member
All new CPUs have been rather disappointing in the past 3 years. Intel did the Sandy Bridge launch and I went to a 2600K and to this day I have exactly 0 reason to upgrade. AMD is focusing strongly on combining CPU/GPU (APU) and their CPU performance is, well, lacking.

thatwasonce:
AMD just released a bunch of new chips that all major tech sites are reviewing, A10-7xxx. Nice chip for its purpose, but majorly lacking CPU performance.

Both Intel and AMD are aiming for lower power consumption because the mobile space is so huge right now, so no surprise there. I am not sure if I mind or not; my 2600k still runs new games like a pro and my professional applications are happy with it too. I'm saving my money for now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top