bit-tech.net

Scan overclocks Pentium G3258 to 4.5GHz

Scan overclocks Pentium G3258 to 4.5GHz

The new Pentium G3258 looks set to be popular with budget overclockers, with can managing a 1.3 GHz overclock on this £54 CPU

Scan has succeeded in overclocking Intel's new Pentium G3258 from 3.2GHz to 4.5GHz

We were pretty excited to hear about Intel's plans to introduce a multiplier-unlocked Pentium a few months back and Scan seems to have been too. It's been playing with samples of the new CPU for a few weeks and the results are good.

Using a decent air cooler, the company managed to push the 3.2GHz Anniversary Edition chip to 4.5GHz. Yet Scan has listed the CPU for just £54 on its website.

This appears to be a somewhat of a bargain, especially as in their testing with an Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 , the Pentium-based system kept pace with its more expensive K-series siblings in Battlefield 4, with a minimum frame rate of 47fps and average frame rate of 64fps.

This is fantastic news for overclocking enthusiasts, system builders and budget-conscious consumers alike - buying a cheap CPU and overclocking it hasn't been on the cards for several generations of Intel's CPUs, with AMD gaining much of the budget ground here.

For system builders, the CPU means lower potential system prices if they're willing to do a bit of tweaking, while budget-conscious home PC builders can save over £100 on the cost of a K-series CPU.

Scan overclocks Pentium G3258 to 4.5GHz

It remains to be seen just how the Pentium performs elsewhere - clearly with only two CPU cores and two threads, with anything multi-threaded it's going to lag behind but the extra grunt from a 1.3GHz overclock will certainly mean that in the right hands, it's the most potent sub £150 CPU Intel has released in quite a while.

You can read more on Scan's Facebook page or on its 3XS System Blog. Let us know what you think in the comments.

33 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
Teelzebub 5th June 2014, 12:52 Quote
Shouldn't that be in not i

Scan has succeeded i overclocking Intel's new Pentium G3258 from 3.2GHz to 4.5GHz
Combatus 5th June 2014, 12:55 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teelzebub
Shouldn't that be in not i

Scan has succeeded i overclocking Intel's new Pentium G3258 from 3.2GHz to 4.5GHz

Indeed it should. You'd think I'd spot it in bold wouldn't you? :(
Pookie 5th June 2014, 13:01 Quote
This chip is going to fly off the shelves.
Deders 5th June 2014, 13:16 Quote
Those charts look oddly GPU limited, I expect if they benchmarked in the multiplayer where CPU grunt is needed more the results would be more varied.

Still a great result for the price.
Spreadie 5th June 2014, 13:19 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoda
Strong is the spirit of the 300a in this one. Hmmm.
Bungletron 5th June 2014, 13:28 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teelzebub
Shouldn't that be in not i

Scan has succeeded i overclocking Intel's new Pentium G3258 from 3.2GHz to 4.5GHz
Quote:
Originally Posted by Combatus
Indeed it should. You'd think I'd spot it in bold wouldn't you? :(

Burn.
Combatus 5th June 2014, 13:59 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deders
Those charts look oddly GPU limited, I expect if they benchmarked in the multiplayer where CPU grunt is needed more the results would be more varied.

Still a great result for the price.

Yep, they probably are although it basically points to you not needing anything faster if you're using up to a GTX 770. There's always going to be a difference between single and multiplayer testing too but the latter is practically impossible to test repeatably.
bawjaws 5th June 2014, 14:02 Quote
I'd have liked to have seen the results for the G3258 at stock speed, to compare against the overclocked result. As it stands, we know that Scan have managed to get a G3258 from 3.2GHz to 4.5GHz, but we don't know what actual impact that overclock has on performance, which seems a little bit pointless.
Impatience 5th June 2014, 14:23 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by bawjaws
I'd have liked to have seen the results for the G3258 at stock speed, to compare against the overclocked result. As it stands, we know that Scan have managed to get a G3258 from 3.2GHz to 4.5GHz, but we don't know what actual impact that overclock has on performance, which seems a little bit pointless.

+1 with that.. Bit-tech review? It seems it may be worth swapping my i3-4130 for one of these..?
Harlequin 5th June 2014, 14:35 Quote
was that BF4 multiplayer? nope, not looking at those results - try MP and you`ll be in for a different numbers game
Combatus 5th June 2014, 15:06 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Impatience
+1 with that.. Bit-tech review? It seems it may be worth swapping my i3-4130 for one of these..?

As soon as we get our mits on one yes - we're hoping review samples will be with us soon. So long as you have a Z87 or Z97 board then yes, it's potentially faster than a Core i3-4130 but I'd wait for the review of course to see the whole picture ;)
ChaosDefinesOrder 5th June 2014, 16:01 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harlequin
was that BF4 multiplayer? nope, not looking at those results - try MP and you`ll be in for a different numbers game

Try running a scientifically sound, repeatable and comparable benchmark run on a multiplayer server where the results are as much dependant on the other (human) players as on the fact it is multiplayer...
Deders 5th June 2014, 16:03 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChaosDefinesOrder
Try running a scientifically sound, repeatable and comparable benchmark run on a multiplayer server where the results are as much dependant on the other (human) players as on the fact it is multiplayer...

True, but the Single player isn't exactly CPU heavy.
Impatience 5th June 2014, 16:04 Quote
From the 3XS Site..
Quote:
Like a K edition Core i5 or i7, the G3258 has an unlocked bus multiplier.
This means, that although it runs at a comparatively slow 3.2GHz out of the box, it can be easily overclocked to 4.5GHz.
Despite only officially support 1333MHz DDR3 we’ve also had no problems running at the G3258 with 2133MHz Corsair Vengeance DDR3.
At these sort of overclocked frequencies the Pentium G3258 makes mincemeat of most games, running them at the same frame rate as a £200 more expensive Core i5 or i7.

Here's hoping that carries across the board! Could be THE perfect budget gaming chip! (Well, at least for the next few years untill everything turns heavily multi-thread..)
rollo 5th June 2014, 16:53 Quote
Bf4 multi is not a repeatable benchmark only way would be closed server with bots. Also not sure its CPU limited on the Gpu in question. As that Gpu will run out of legs before the CPU will.

For the cost if these figures go across a range of games then there's no douting the potential it could have at the low to mid range of the market. Could give Intel an advantage in a segment they have been behind in for long periods of time.

Would prefer to see crysis 3 used if using FPS games over any of the 2 bf games.

Competition at the low end is never a bad thing, choice is always nice to have.
bawjaws 5th June 2014, 17:14 Quote
I know Scan have said that they used some 2133MHz RAM, but it'd be interesting to see if this actually makes any difference to performance. Come on Bit, get a chip and get reviewing!
TheMadDutchDude 5th June 2014, 17:49 Quote
The chip may match an i7-4770K in games that do not require more than two threads. However, you cannot say that it keeps up with it, as it simply won't in all circumstances.

I'm keeping my eye out for a cheap, but good Z87 board so that I can a few Pentium chips to have a play with. They seem like cheap fun, but I got rid of my Z87 board and 4770K not too long ago.
[-Stash-] 5th June 2014, 17:50 Quote
Definitely interested to see the power figures on this sort of overclock, whether different RAM speeds make any noticeable difference (they don't usually) and across a variety of SP and MP games.

It's somewhat telling that the stock 4GHz i7 is no faster than the stock 3.5GHz i5 – definitely a completely GPU limited test. Need to see the stock scores for the Pentium as well… look forward to a proper test.
xaser04 5th June 2014, 17:57 Quote
Can they re-test in a game that makes use of more threads, Crysis 3 for example. The Pentium will most likely get walked all over by even the i3 let alone an i7.
rayson 5th June 2014, 18:04 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Combatus
Yep, they probably are although it basically points to you not needing anything faster if you're using up to a GTX 770. There's always going to be a difference between single and multiplayer testing too but the latter is practically impossible to test repeatably.

not impossible
just hard
cause linus overclocks all his gpu and make his camera man play bf3 until he gets consistent results
TheMadDutchDude 5th June 2014, 18:11 Quote
In a multiplayer, in other words online game, where the players are always different? It's nigh on impossible.
ArthurB 5th June 2014, 18:35 Quote
Doesn't anyone at Scan know how to save Excel charts in PNG format? That image is awful!
jrs77 5th June 2014, 18:41 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spreadie
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoda
Strong is the spirit of the 300a in this one. Hmmm.

Was running a Celeron 400A @ 600MHz back then... good old times indeed.

Only having two cores in the G3258 makes this chip useless for alot of applications tho, despite it running at 4.5GHz.

Nevertheless it's quiet impressive.
Spreadie 5th June 2014, 19:30 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by From the article
The new Pentium G3258 looks set to be popular with budget overclockers, with can managing a 1.3 GHz overclock on this £54 CPU

I can't speak proper England like I used to could...

I bet Ant hates me at times. :)
mi1ez 5th June 2014, 22:22 Quote
They don't need multiplayer to produce more CPU-limited results, just pick a different game!
Harlequin 5th June 2014, 22:56 Quote
http://www.techspot.com/review/734-battlefield-4-benchmarks/page6.html


loads of cpu scaling ......

single player BF4 is gpu limited - go record a random game on a 64 player mp to see a real difference.
rollo 6th June 2014, 09:51 Quote
What you just linked does show some differences though between 2 threads and 4 threads. Bf series are bad test games in general. Crysis 3 which can be tested in single player correctly is a better test due to a much more scalable engine that does not rely on a tonne of other players to theory test.
SpAceman 6th June 2014, 12:12 Quote
I kinda want one just because it seems like a cool thing to have. A bit of a collectible.
theshadow2001 6th June 2014, 12:33 Quote
Waste of time benchmark. Scan are aware of this as well. It's just a way to take advantage of less knowledgeable customers to get the chips out the door.(oh look this cheap cpu is as good as the top end ones)

One way around inconsistent multi player benchmarks is to collect lots and lots of data for each chip. A trend will emerge eventually.
Fizzban 7th June 2014, 09:41 Quote
My interest went out the window once I knew it wasn't a quad core. Tis a nice cheap chip though.
rollo 7th June 2014, 10:54 Quote
If Intel released a quad core for £53 that can hit the speeds scan has hit it would kill the market for themselves and anyone else as nobody would buy the i5 series or the fx series for 2-4 times the price. Intel would have to want to destroy AMD for a chip like that to ever see a launch.

And it would like be MAD as they would both suffer the consequences of such a thing.
mrbungle 11th June 2014, 10:42 Quote
Will be getting a budget 1150 set up for one of these bad boy dualies.

Reckon 5ghz has to be possible?
rollo 11th June 2014, 11:08 Quote
On air or all in one water coolers be chip dependent. On water I'd imagine it will be pretty simple stuff.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums