Intel Pentium K Anniversary G3258 - Overclockers UK £47.90 incl p&p - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HUKD, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HUKD app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit
With the recent release of Devil's Canyon CPU's this was definitely a head turner in the computing community. The blistering speeds that this CPU is able to achieve at the price was certainly astonishing for everyone.

This is the cheapest I have seen at 43.99 with an OcUK forum account!

(First deal please go easy :D)

Specification:-
- Lithography Process: 22 nm
- Cores: 2
- Threads: 2
- Frequency: 3.20GHz
- Integrated HD Graphics
- Cache: 3MB shared L3
- Memory Controller: Dual channel DDR3 1600/1866/2133/2400/2666+ MHz
- Socket: LGA1150
- Memory compatibility: All DDR3 1333MHz and above is compatible
- PSU compatibility: Check out our range of Haswell compatible PSU's - http://www.overclockers.co.uk/productlist.php?groupid=701&catid=123&subid=2597
- 3yr Warranty
- Nbaker
More From Overclockers:

All Comments

(39) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
#1
Since its your first deal and you said please, I have voted hot.
#2
Yeah being polite goes a long way so some heat from me
#3
40.79 on scan today only page + 4 quid (choose cheaper) delivery. I think if you spend over £60 you get free delivery if got that forum membership
#4
OC this to 4.8GHz and you have a seriously good gaming chip
#5
Lots of heat from me. But on multi threaded games it loses out but who cares at this price should still be better then anything from amd. Really want one may get one to do a mini itx build.
#6
Devils canyon is a misleading [email protected] take from intel
#7
tomwatts
OC this to 4.8GHz and you have a seriously good gaming chip
You can't be serious, right?
#8
Can I oc it with h97 board?
#9
What is this? Is it really a good option for PC gamers? Surely it isn't a comparable alternative to a decent (and much more expensive) i5?

I ask because I'm currently looking to upgrade my old FX6100, which is bottlenecking my R9-280X.
#10
GoatzRus
tomwatts
OC this to 4.8GHz and you have a seriously good gaming chip
You can't be serious, right?

Found this:

"We actually managed to overclock this 3200 MHz processor, towards 4800 MHz!"
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/pentium-20th-anniversary-series-g3258-processor-review,1.html
#11
iwo
GoatzRus
tomwatts
OC this to 4.8GHz and you have a seriously good gaming chip
You can't be serious, right?


Found this:

"We actually managed to overclock this 3200 MHz processor, towards 4800 MHz!"
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/pentium-20th-anniversary-series-g3258-processor-review,1.html


Gotta say it OC's nicely but 4.5 is more reliable as above is unstable.

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/pentium-g3258-overclocking-performance,review-32974-2.html
#12
I had this chip but sold it on. Tons of horsepower for the price and amazing value but multi-core games stutter somewhat with it if you're pushing the higher settings. Still, you really can't argue with the value!

I had 4.5GHz on the stock cooler (!) but couldn't get anything better from it with a Hyper 212 Evo. Same old Haswell - you're at the mercy of the gods as to whether you'll get a good overclocker or not. Maybe I just need a better cooler or a bit more OCing know-how.

Edited By: Easy2BCheesy on Jul 13, 2014 08:21: Updated info
1 Like #13
#14
GoatzRus
tomwatts
OC this to 4.8GHz and you have a seriously good gaming chip
You can't be serious, right?

3.2 to 4.8 is about typical for a good Intel OC'ing chip. Although of course not all of them will got that far. My i7 920 D0 stepping oc's by about the same amount happily - from 2.66 to 4ghz with a locked multiplier. Most of the 920's did. My own chip does 4.4 stable with sensible voltages but gets a tad warm for my liking for 24/7 use at that speed.



Edited By: capriboycraig on Jul 13, 2014 08:46
#15
Heres the Tech Specs:

- Lithography Process: 22 nm
- Cores: 2
- Threads: 2
- Frequency: 3.20GHz
- Integrated HD Graphics
- Cache: 3MB shared L3
- Memory Controller: Dual channel DDR3 1600/1866/2133/2400/2666+ MHz
- Socket: LGA1150
- Memory compatibility: All DDR3 1333MHz and above is compatible
- PSU compatibility: Check out our range of Haswell compatible PSU's - http://www.overclockers.co.uk/productlist.php?groupid=701&catid=123&subid=2597
- 3yr Warranty

It's certainly not the fastest, but for the money you pay i think it's a great little chip, most people will be able to run most games to a great standard when combined with a decent dedicated graphics card.

Voted how by the way :)

Edited By: Nbaker on Jul 13, 2014 08:52
#16
I'd like to upgrade my old Intel CDC 775 setup. What board can I use with this CPU, and I'd like to keep my HD 4770 card for now too?
#17
GoatzRus
tomwatts
OC this to 4.8GHz and you have a seriously good gaming chip
You can't be serious, right?
It's actually pretty decent when overclocked.

Overclocking Intel's Pentium G3258 'Anniversary Edition' processor « The Tech Report

https://cdn.mediacru.sh/YEYEMnqLRL3U.png

https://cdn.mediacru.sh/18HTE2qbcb1S.png
#19
More game play with a GTX 660:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gzReaFZUIE

FPS in top right corner.
#20
I wonder why intel dont oc it themselves, call it an i7 and charge £250.
#21
foes4you
I wonder why intel dont oc it themselves, call it an i7 and charge £250.
It's just 2 cores, two threads
1 Like #22
foes4you
I wonder why intel dont oc it themselves, call it an i7 and charge £250.

i7 is a much better CPU than this one, 4 cores / 8 threads, this is all Celeron 300A going to 450MHz malarky, fun for overclockers but really not that great especially as it's not really that cheap to overclock this CPU.
2 Likes #23
fishmaster
foes4you
I wonder why intel dont oc it themselves, call it an i7 and charge £250.

i7 is a much better CPU than this one, 4 cores / 8 threads, this is all Celeron 300A going to 450MHz malarky, fun for overclockers but really not that great especially as it's not really that cheap to overclock this CPU.


Not to bad a price £40 for a motherboard and then CPU £45 = £85 seems a good price to over-clock. Gigabyte B85M-D2V

http://www.guru3d.com/news_story/asus_adds_overclocking_for_h97h87b85_and_h81_series_motherboards.html

Edited By: m600 on Jul 13, 2014 12:00
#24
Got mind the other day, solid chip. Definitely the best price/ performance ratio in the business. Despite what the naysayers proclaim about AMD winning on multi threaded games, guess what? This beat an 8350 in Crysis 3. Get this, upgrade to Broadwell in 2015. Get FX, upgrade to nothing. Ever.
#25
tomwatts
OC this to 4.8GHz and you have a seriously good gaming chip

I loled so much at this............
#26
seanmorris100
tomwatts
OC this to 4.8GHz and you have a seriously good gaming chip

I loled so much at this............

For £41, you definitely do. I take it you've simply looked at the comment and not benchmarks/real life performance?
#27
iwo
What is this? Is it really a good option for PC gamers? Surely it isn't a comparable alternative to a decent (and much more expensive) i5?

I ask because I'm currently looking to upgrade my old FX6100, which is bottlenecking my R9-280X.


That's not a bottleneck. That's just an inconvenient reduction in performance; compared to something like e.g. an i5.
#28
Got 1 a few days ago, gotta say I'm seriously impressed. Straight up to 4 ghz with no tinkering on stock hsf.

Should keep me happy till broadwell
#29
Sf2rox
Got 1 a few days ago, gotta say I'm seriously impressed. Straight up to 4 ghz with no tinkering on stock hsf.

Should keep me happy till broadwell

Can I ask which motherboard did you get for this CPU?
#30
Be a little cautious with benchmark bar graphs - if you take a look at the many forums, some users are reporting frustrating stuttering with their high end graphics cards, especially with games that can take advantage of quad cores. Though to many that's not a surprising finding, it isn't necessarily evident to someone who is starting out who has been solidly staring at bar graphs. One of the more balanced reviews is Richard Leadbetter review in Eurogamer, which came out today, testing with a high end, mid range and budget graphic cards. The short of it was that this is an excellent pairing with a GTX 750TI at medium settings.
#31
My reservation at buying from some dealers who build their own overclocked PCs is that they cherry pick out the best samples for themselves so that their builds fare well in the so-called silicon lottery where some samples overclock much better than others, so (and I've no idea if this applies to Overclockers so this isn't aimed at them) make sure you are getting a factory sealed retail box.

Someone mentioned Scan at £40.79 and I found that deal but that with shipping at checkout it comes up at £46.27, for me?
#32
ArchBomb
iwo
What is this? Is it really a good option for PC gamers? Surely it isn't a comparable alternative to a decent (and much more expensive) i5?

I ask because I'm currently looking to upgrade my old FX6100, which is bottlenecking my R9-280X.

That's not a bottleneck. That's just an inconvenient reduction in performance; compared to something like e.g. an i5.

TBH if you play anything other than 10 year old games you want an I5k atleast, dualcores are crap, end of.

The guy saying it will be great for games is an idiot, ive been building PCs for over 20 years now, look at any gaming PC it will have an I5k minimum 9/10 these cheap dualcores are not for games.

Edited By: seanmorris100 on Jul 13, 2014 21:52
#33
ordered. in my low profile case with hardly any airflow 54w is the highest I can go with a 750ti in there. even undervolted this should feel as quick as the phenom ii x4 975 its replacing.
#34
Thanks op
#35
aceuk
GoatzRus
[quote=tomwatts] OC this to 4.8GHz and you have a seriously good gaming chip
You can't be serious, right?


Actually the TR preview/review is a load or rubbish.

He links to the part he tests(video).

Look at the settings and also the comments in the thread.

He plonks global settings down to medium(lol) and then tests a part of the game which pushes a less multi-threaded load since there is grass animation in the other parts. Look at where the overclocked Core i7 is for example(not much better than the Pentium dual core).

Yet,every single review which has properly tested Crysis3 has shown it needs more threads.

http://gamegpu.ru/images/stories/Test_GPU/Action/Crysis%203%20The%20Lost%20Island/test/crysis3%20proz%202.jpg

http://gamegpu.ru/images/stories/Test_GPU/Action/Crysis%203%20The%20Lost%20Island/test/crysis3%20intel.jpg

http://gamegpu.ru/images/stories/Test_GPU/Action/Crysis%203%20The%20Lost%20Island/test/crysis3%20amd.jpg

The medium settings push less of a CPU load. It said so in the comments.

The reviewer was notified by multiple users,and kind of deflected data like this:

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Crysis-3-PC-235317/Tests/Crysis-3-CPU-Test-1068140/

The game scales with HT and cores especially with the max settings.

A Core i7 is 30% faster than the equivalent Core i5!!

Its in a section called "Welcome to the Jungle".

Here are some more results:

http://pclab.pl/zdjecia/artykuly/radek/2014/pentium_g3258/charts/c3_j1920a.png
http://pclab.pl/zdjecia/artykuly/radek/2014/devil/charts/def/c3_j1920a.png

In the comments it seems,the TR review is even worse,and is fudging the results on purpose.

Look at the video encoding results.
http://techreport.com/r.x/pentium-g3258-oc/cine-single.gif

Hilarious.

From the renowned site xbitslabs:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/core-i5-4670k-4670-4570-4430/x264.png
http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/core-i3-4340-4330-4130/Charts-1/x264.png

http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/core-i5-4670k-4670-4570-4430/x264.png
http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/core-i3-4340-4330-4130/Charts-1/x264.png













Edited By: KITTYBOTS on Jul 14, 2014 08:29: Typo!
#36
KITTYBOTS
Look at the video encoding results.
http://techreport.com/r.x/pentium-g3258-oc/cine-single.gif

Hilarious.
Cinebench isn't a video encoder though. x264 is:

https://cdn.mediacru.sh/DLuVpjh8R2BT.png

Also, wouldn't the speed of the video encoding depend a lot on the settings used?
#37
aceuk
KITTYBOTS
Look at the video encoding results.
http://techreport.com/r.x/pentium-g3258-oc/cine-single.gif

Hilarious.
Cinebench isn't a video encoder though. x264 is:

https://cdn.mediacru.sh/DLuVpjh8R2BT.png

Also, wouldn't the speed of the video encoding depend a lot on the settings used?

Put the wrong picture in.

Yes,but the settings look very weird. Do you really believe than an FX8350 is only 20% faster than an A10 7850K???

Xbitslabs tested Kaveri too.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/amd-a10-7850k/charts/cpu/x264.png

The A10 7850K barely gets out of 3.7GHZ base clockspeeds. Yes,it has IPC improvements,but that is against an FX8350 running at 4GHZ minimum,having double the cores and loads of L3 cache.

The X264 benchmarks scale well with HT and cores. Go back to the first P4 CPUs with HT and video encoding was helped by it.

Look at the xbitslabs results.

They use the latest versions of the x264 encoder which supports AVX2.

The xbitslabs results show roughly a doubling of results with double the threads,and the AMD chips show a similar result.

The TR results don't. The G3258 is 50% the performance of a Core i7 4770 and the latter has more L3 cache per core,higher clockspeeds,HT and doubled the cores.

This is what a forum review thread using HandBrake 0.9.6. showed(nicked from Hexus):

http://i.imgur.com/KqDhHwr.png

It is probably one of the biggest forum tests of HandBrake at the time,with over 80 test results.

Its with some older CPUs,but look at the core and HT scaling. Its near perfect. THREE different video file types were re-encoded to 1920X1080(HD).

Its almost like they found some settings that made the G3258 look the best,and its very worrying indeed!!

The TR results are very dodgy indeed,especially with them decreasing Crysis3 settings,testing a lightly threaded part which also it is GPU limited. Does anyone really think that a Pentium dual core matches a Core i7 clock for clock in Crysis3?? Look at the forum threads on the game,especially in MP and the testing from German websites like pcgameshardware. I upgraded to a Core i5 since my Core i3 struggled!! Its almost like they are selling the G3258 and the sad thing is since TR went to a subscription model things have started to slip. For instance the reviewer got confused and stated board power consumption was the same as actual power consumption in his GTX750TI review,while ignoring what his own review said!! The someone told him this,and he deflected it.





Edited By: KITTYBOTS on Jul 14, 2014 09:01: Typo!
#38
Actually the The TechReport test results look even weird for the Intel CPUs.

The Core i7 4770K is only 20% faster than a lower clocked Core i5 2500K?? So two generations of IPC improvements,more agressive Turbo and more L3 cache,accounts to nearly nothing??

Extremetech tested the Core i7 4770K with a similar AVX2 video encoder too:

http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/x264-e1370108391842.png

http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/x264-e1370108391842.png

Look at the improvements just from IPC improvements and AVX2 over Ivy Bridge.

The xbitslabs results show improvements too. The TechReport review shows barely a 10% improvement,whereas other reviews shows 20% to 30% improvement,when the Core i7 3770K and Core i7 4770K are compared.

There is something not right here.

Edit to post!!

From an earlier The TechReport review:

http://techreport.com/r.x/core-i7-4770k/x264.png

http://techreport.com/r.x/core-i7-4770k/x264.png

They used an AVX2 enabled encoder.

New review:

http://techreport.com/r.x/pentium-g3258-oc/x264.gif

http://techreport.com/r.x/pentium-g3258-oc/x264.gif

It looks like the new review has a typo too - the Core i5 2500K should be a Core i7 2600K,unless of course they have changed the settings,since the Cinebench results seem to indicate otherwise.




Edited By: KITTYBOTS on Jul 14, 2014 09:19: Added more info.
#39
foes4you
I wonder why intel dont oc it themselves, call it an i7 and charge £250.

Because it would be a giant turd for that price with 2 cores and no HT. Intel know there is a limit to how dumb some people are (obviously there are the exceptions it seems) and what they will pay.

Good price for a decent performing gaming chip that can be highly overclocked, the complete opposite of what Intel have been doing with the price gouging of the k series all these years.
I think they are just mocking AMD with a chip like this at this price point.


If this had been around before I bought my 3570k I would of gone for this at instead of being price gouged on the I5.
Intel could easily release a 4 core version for £20 more but that would pretty much screw over their entire range of over priced overclocking chips.
Intels complete monopoly is the worst thing since... the prescott P4

I wonder if Amazon will let me return my I5 and motherboard....

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Top of Page
Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!