INTEL CORE I3-7350K 4.20GHZ (KABY LAKE) SOCKET LGA1151 PROCESSOR - RETAIL £98.99 @  OCL
286°Expired

INTEL CORE I3-7350K 4.20GHZ (KABY LAKE) SOCKET LGA1151 PROCESSOR - RETAIL £98.99 @ OCL

£98.99£15034%Overclockers Deals
23
Found 23rd Mar
BX80677I37350K, Dual Core Technology, 4.20GHz clock speed, 14nm Process, 4MB L3 Cache, Dual Channel DDR4 Controller, Integrated Iris DX12 Graphics, 3 Year Warranty
Community Updates

Groups

23 Comments
Am I right that Kaby Lake i3's are only duel core? Not great for £100 when you can get a Coffee Lake i3 for around the same that are quad core. Only issue is more expensive motherboards.
McTabish9 m ago

Am I right that Kaby Lake i3's are only duel core? Not great for £100 when …Am I right that Kaby Lake i3's are only duel core? Not great for £100 when you can get a Coffee Lake i3 for around the same that are quad core. Only issue is more expensive motherboards.


Correct. But cheaper boards are releasing soon.


videocardz.com/new…and
Stick with Ryzen.
Hamza_Aslam6 m ago

Stick with Ryzen.


um no, think I3 8100 is a much better bet
Cold. Time hasn't been kind to the chip hailed as the most pointless CPU of all time on its release.
At the low end I would much rather get a 2200g with RX Vega graphics for 80 quid at Amazon. Better and cheaper.
Lol dual core
shareef13 h, 36 m ago

um no, think I3 8100 is a much better bet


Umm...! As a paperweight perhaps...
Am i missing something, dual core? £99?
I feel like ive stepped into a time machine and rolled back 20 years.
How the hell is this hot when you can get a ryzen quad core for less, absolutely crazy.
Isn't it dual core hyperthresding to 4?
hotsa9 h, 56 m ago

Umm...! As a paperweight perhaps...


Agree, with new i3, Ryzen probably does make a good paperweight
shareef24th Mar

Agree, with new i3, Ryzen probably does make a good paperweight


You seem to have misquoted me based upon your lack of knowledge. Of course you're welcome to buy an i3 - you know what they say about fools and their money...
Gormond23rd Mar

At the low end I would much rather get a 2200g with RX Vega graphics for …At the low end I would much rather get a 2200g with RX Vega graphics for 80 quid at Amazon. Better and cheaper.



It's disingenuous to call it 'RX Vega' graphics. People could mistake that for 'a machine that can play games at competent levels'.

The APU on the 2200g can play 720p LOWEST settings at 30-40 FPS, or 1080p LOWEST settings at sub 30 FPS.

If you want graphics card technology that is over 10 years old, then go for it.

On the budget gaming end, you should stick with the 1050 and either low end i3 8100, or, if you really like Ryzen at the low end, take the cheapest 4 core Ryzen, it could be the 2200g, but never touch the APU, it is awful for *gaming*. Far worse than a console, if you are looking for gaming, this is not the entry point.
Nate14922 h, 13 m ago

It's disingenuous to call it 'RX Vega' graphics. People could mistake that …It's disingenuous to call it 'RX Vega' graphics. People could mistake that for 'a machine that can play games at competent levels'.The APU on the 2200g can play 720p LOWEST settings at 30-40 FPS, or 1080p LOWEST settings at sub 30 FPS.If you want graphics card technology that is over 10 years old, then go for it.On the budget gaming end, you should stick with the 1050 and either low end i3 8100, or, if you really like Ryzen at the low end, take the cheapest 4 core Ryzen, it could be the 2200g, but never touch the APU, it is awful for *gaming*. Far worse than a console, if you are looking for gaming, this is not the entry point.


That's what it's called... Nothing disingenuous about it. Also I was comparing it to the built in graphics in the i3 posted above not a dedicated card for an extra £100+.
Gormond18 m ago

That's what it's called... Nothing disingenuous about it. Also I was …That's what it's called... Nothing disingenuous about it. Also I was comparing it to the built in graphics in the i3 posted above not a dedicated card for an extra £100+.


Comparing it to another, also completely worthless, APU in terms of gaming is also disingenuous. It can be called that, but it is trying to equate itself to the real Vega lines that actually work well. They don't put a number or anything on their APU, just call it 'RX Vega graphics!' It's a terrible description

If you want a cheap computer that can display video, the 2200g is a good bargain, if you want to play old games, on low settings, it does the trick. But you may have to reduce the resolution to get acceptable frames.

Just don't combine the idea that this is a 'low end gaming rig' as it isn't. This is far below 'low end'.

This CPU with it's APU can make an affordable PC, but as soon as we say the word 'gaming' we should move on to discrete cards. It's not even in the same discussion.
Nate14922 h, 22 m ago

Comparing it to another, also completely worthless, APU in terms of gaming …Comparing it to another, also completely worthless, APU in terms of gaming is also disingenuous. It can be called that, but it is trying to equate itself to the real Vega lines that actually work well. They don't put a number or anything on their APU, just call it 'RX Vega graphics!' It's a terrible descriptionIf you want a cheap computer that can display video, the 2200g is a good bargain, if you want to play old games, on low settings, it does the trick. But you may have to reduce the resolution to get acceptable frames.Just don't combine the idea that this is a 'low end gaming rig' as it isn't. This is far below 'low end'.This CPU with it's APU can make an affordable PC, but as soon as we say the word 'gaming' we should move on to discrete cards. It's not even in the same discussion.


You're the one that brought up gaming, I didn't mention it at all so get off your high horse... you even mention In quotes 'low end gaming rig', something I didn't even say!

I just said that not only is the Ryzen APU cheaper but it has four cores and better integrated graphics. Not to mention the motherboard has better future upgrade potential. It's just a better deal IMO.
Edited by: "Gormond" 27th Mar
Gormond4 h, 57 m ago

You're the one that brought up gaming, I didn't mention it at all so get …You're the one that brought up gaming, I didn't mention it at all so get off your high horse... you even mention In quotes 'low end gaming rig', something I didn't even say!I just said that not only is the Ryzen APU cheaper but it has four cores and better integrated graphics. Not to mention the motherboard has better future upgrade potential. It's just a better deal IMO.


The motherboard does not have an upgrade path in memory.

Take a look at how terrible 4x sticks of RAM peform in dual channel mode has a max freq of 1866.

tomshardware.co.uk/rav…tml

Basically, you can't buy any more than 2 sticks of RAM otherwise you will suffer huge performance loss as Ryzen is very very sensitive to memory speeds.

But hey, they don't tell people that in any plain language, you just get hit with it after you buy it and 'upgrade' later.
Nate149210 h, 0 m ago

It's disingenuous to call it 'RX Vega' graphics. People could mistake that …It's disingenuous to call it 'RX Vega' graphics. People could mistake that for 'a machine that can play games at competent levels'.The APU on the 2200g can play 720p LOWEST settings at 30-40 FPS, or 1080p LOWEST settings at sub 30 FPS.If you want graphics card technology that is over 10 years old, then go for it.On the budget gaming end, you should stick with the 1050 and either low end i3 8100, or, if you really like Ryzen at the low end, take the cheapest 4 core Ryzen, it could be the 2200g, but never touch the APU, it is awful for *gaming*. Far worse than a console, if you are looking for gaming, this is not the entry point.


Actually no your wrong there. And another thing is it depends what game you're talking about. You can't compare how good it will run Crysis and Roblox, it just doesn't make sense.
Hamza_Aslam9 m ago

Actually no your wrong there. And another thing is it depends what game …Actually no your wrong there. And another thing is it depends what game you're talking about. You can't compare how good it will run Crysis and Roblox, it just doesn't make sense.


You are right, this can run frogger just fine. But the memory thing? I'm completely right.
Edited by: "Nate1492" 27th Mar
Nate149249 m ago

The motherboard does not have an upgrade path in memory.Take a look at how …The motherboard does not have an upgrade path in memory.Take a look at how terrible 4x sticks of RAM peform in dual channel mode has a max freq of 1866.http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/raven-ridge-memory-scaling-benchmarks,review-34228.htmlBasically, you can't buy any more than 2 sticks of RAM otherwise you will suffer huge performance loss as Ryzen is very very sensitive to memory speeds.But hey, they don't tell people that in any plain language, you just get hit with it after you buy it and 'upgrade' later.


Why is that a major issue? In a worse case in Civ VI it managed 42fps at 720p on med setting's. Now to help the Intel boys as best as I can a 7700k (twice a as many cores and threads) and DDR4-3200 so as not to hold the game back it only manages 29fps at 720p on low!

So AMD are actually discouraging you from wasting money on overpriced ram when the logical thing to do is buy a GPU with the money!

Back to the real world. If you have a specific program that requires fast single core performance (once overclocked) then this will be the cheapest way to do it. For most people a Ryzen or current gen Intel i3 will be a better bet.
GAVINLEWISHUKD31 m ago

Why is that a major issue? In a worse case in Civ VI it managed 42fps at …Why is that a major issue? In a worse case in Civ VI it managed 42fps at 720p on med setting's. Now to help the Intel boys as best as I can a 7700k (twice a as many cores and threads) and DDR4-3200 so as not to hold the game back it only manages 29fps at 720p on low!So AMD are actually discouraging you from wasting money on overpriced ram when the logical thing to do is buy a GPU with the money!Back to the real world. If you have a specific program that requires fast single core performance (once overclocked) then this will be the cheapest way to do it. For most people a Ryzen or current gen Intel i3 will be a better bet.


Civ VI 720p 42fps? What part of this is against what I said? That sounds awful and I would never suggest that to someone.

Say it again. 720p.

The last time I watched/played/experienced 720p was 2011. I laughed people trying to sell a 720p TV in 2013, as it was 'so out of date' and they laughed and agreed, but said 'we gotta sell it, before people never touch it again.'.

That was 5 years ago.

Why would anyone play a modern game on an APU? a 1050 2gb can handle basically any game 1080p at near 60 FPS for most titles.

I just could never suggest 720p low (or medium) gaming to anyone. I'd feel like a horrible person sticking them back 10 years in gaming technology.

Now, don't take this wrong. There is a place in the market for the 2200g, it is a good price for something that can play non modern games (not a bad thing) and can watch shows and perform as a desktop.

You can even transition into a new GPU.

But AMD have done some shoddy things, with things like RAM, that makes me even leery about suggesting it.
hotsa27th Mar

You seem to have misquoted me based upon your lack of knowledge. Of course …You seem to have misquoted me based upon your lack of knowledge. Of course you're welcome to buy an i3 - you know what they say about fools and their money...


No, I was being facetious, slight difference. However, I lack knowledge on many a thing, however I thought I purchased a decent CPU for the price point in an I3 8100... therefore...

What would your alternative be to an I3-8100 then may I ask?
Edited by: "shareef" 28th Mar
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text