Best CPU for gaming

Best CPU for gaming

The best CPU for gaming is not automatically the most expensive one, nor is it the one with the most cores or threads. The $1,700 Core i7 6950X might well still be the number-crunching übermensch, but all the threads in the world won't amount to much in-game if you can't nail high-speed, single core throughput. I'm looking at you too, Mr. Ryzen...

Check Amazon for the latest deals and specs on CPUs.

That’s because gaming is still rather reliant on single-threaded CPU power in terms of performance. Despite the dominance of quad core CPUs, or above, in today’s gaming rigs the difficulty of coding for multi-core processors has meant we’re not seeing many modern game engines taking full advantage of the powerful CPUs many of us have in our machines.

But that could be set to change with an increased number of DirectX 12 (and to a similar extent, Vulkan) games offering a more streamlined method for delivering all that processing power into the hands of gamers. It’s been a long, slow march, but CPU power may soon become a vital component of gaming performance once more.

We’re already seeing the green shoots of this revolution now that the new Ryzen 5 range has arrived from AMD. The six-core, 12-thread Ryzen 5 1600X manages to keep up with the Intel K-series i5, but with three times the thread-count has got it beat in any CPU intensive game or app. Even when a game’s not CPU-bound though that higher core- and thread-count brings up the minimum frame rates, smoothing out performance on the AMD processor.

We’ll not only tell you what the outright best gaming CPU is, we’ll also help you figure out exactly what sort of processor is best for you - click on the quick links below to jump to each specific section.

Best CPU for gaming

Best CPU for gaming - AMD Ryzen 5 1600X

AMD Ryzen 5 1600X

Cores: 6 | Threads: 12 | Base clock: 3.6GHz | Turbo: 4GHz | Socket: AM4

Approx. $265 / £249

They’ve only gone and done it. AMD have created a mid-range Ryzen that’s knocked the Intel K-series i5 off its throne as the go-to gaming processor. I genuinely didn’t think I’d see the day, but the Ryzen 5 1600X manages to deliver gaming performance which is generally at least on-par with the Core i5 chips and in modern, multi-threaded titles it’s capable of putting some distance between them.

The R5 1600X also makes the Ryzen 7 1800X look a little pointless for our needs. The extra two cores of the much more expensive CPU don’t really offer anything else when it comes to gaming and with the multi-core chops it’s got the 1600X is a very capable productivity chip too.

For the most part though the i5 K-series chips will offer slightly higher average frame rates in standard game engines, but the massive difference in the thread count does give the AMD chip the edge when it comes to minimum and 99th percentile frame rates. The Intel chips are also slightly cheaper right now, which might give you pause for thought, but when you consider the extra multi-threading performance sitting underneath that unassuming heatspreader the level of future-proofing the Ryzen 5 1600X can offer makes it very difficult to recommend the resolutely quad-core i5.

With the R5 1600X you’re getting three times the thread-count of Intel’s equivalently priced Core i5 7600K, and despite the fact you can stretch the Intel’s clockspeed well beyond that of the Ryzen chip the core limitations of the Intel means it can’t pull that far ahead in gaming terms.

With the six-core, 12-thread Ryzen 5 1600X on the shelves at almost the same price the non-HyperThreaded quad-core really struggles to make a case for itself. Arguably the real contest for the 1600X though is the non-X variant which retails for $219 (£220) and likely still retains similar overclocking potential. If you’re happy to tamper with the BIOS and run the cheaper chip with a light overclock, to the same levels as this ‘X’ CPU, and you could save yourself some cash.

Read the full AMD Ryzen 5 1600X review.

The best AMD Ryzen 5 1600X prices we've found today:

If you can't see the price widget it's because your browser is running ad-blocking software. If you pause it you can check out the latest deals.

Best CPU for gaming runner-up

Best CPU for gaming - Intel Core i5 7600K

Intel Core i5 7600K

Cores: 4 | Threads: 4 | Base clock: 3.8GHz | Turbo: 4.2GHz | Socket: LGA 1151

Approx. $229 / £218

It was almost inevitable that when the new Kaby Lake range of processors released the K-series Core i5 would become our go-to gaming CPU. Though when we first saw the ultimately uninspiring Core i7 7700K I’ll admit my convictions wavered. But the i5 7600K proved to be a more interesting slice of silicon and replaced the old Skylake i5 as our pick of the processors. And then AMD dropped the hexcore Ryzen 5...

The 7600K is still able to post higher gaming frame rates in general, but only really by a few frames per second on average. With three times the thread-count of the i5 though the minimum gaming fps levels are generally higher with the AMD chip.

You can still overclock the i5 like a champ, and it games on current and legacy titles impressively, but with the prices being so close and with much greater future-proofing on offer with a six-core, 12-thread CPU, the Ryzen 5 chip has taken the win.

Read the full Intel Core i5 7600K review.

The best Intel Core i5 7600K prices we've found today:

If you can't see the price widget it's because your browser is running ad-blocking software. If you pause it you can check out the latest deals.

Best CPU for gaming runner-up

Best CPU for gaming runner-up - Core i7 6700K

Intel Core i7 6700K

Cores: 4 | Threads: 8 | Base clock: 4GHz | Turbo: 4.2GHz | Socket: LGA 1151

Approx. $308 / £305 

While I’ve recommended the Kaby Lake i5 update to replace our previous Skylake pick for the overall best CPU for gaming I’m going to stick with the 6700K as the runner-up. There is practically nothing the Kaby Lake i7 7700K can offer that the 6700K can’t do. Sure, it has a higher clockspeed out-of-the-box, but it takes no time at all, with some light CPU overclocking, to get this Skylake chip running at the same speed, and it’s also possible the 6700K might end up cheaper too. In gaming terms the extra four threads of processing power don’t add much to the mix compared with the i5, but if you’re into your game streaming and video editing it might well be worth going for the i7 step up if you can afford it.

The best Intel Core i7 6700K prices we've found today:

If you can't see the price widget it's because your browser is running ad-blocking software. If you pause it you can check out the latest deals.

________________________________________________

Best high-end CPU for gaming

Best high-end CPU for gaming - Core i7 6800K

Intel Core i7 6800K

Cores: 6 | Threads: 12 | Base clock: 3.4GHz | Turbo: 3.8GHz | Socket: LGA 2011 v3

Approx. $388 / £368

Intel processors unquestionably have the top CPU silicon in them, but the full range is a bit of a convoluted mess at the moment. The 6th Generation Core architecture - the artist formerly known as Skylake - is their most advanced CPU design, but it's not the architecture used in their most powerful processors. Those are still running on the last-gen Broadwell-E silicon, with the updated Skylake-X successor and its X299 platform not pencilled in to arrive until late 2017.

But the high-end desktop (HEDT) market is the only place you’ll find Intel CPUs going beyond the mainstream’s quad-core stagnation. At the top is the ludicrously-priced, $1,700 Intel Core i7 6950X, their first ten-core, 20-thread consumer chip, but there are more relevant parts lower down that range. 

The Core i7 6800K is actually only around $85 (£70) more expensive than the Core i7 6700K but comes with another two full Intel cores and four extra processing threads and is arguably the best-value six-core CPU ever made. It’s also got another 12 PCIe lanes available to the CPU itself - that means you can have both a high-speed PCIe SSD connected directly to the processor as well as a graphics card using the full bandwidth of a 16 lane PCIe 3.0 slot. It's also cheaper than the flagship R7 1800X from AMD's Ryzen range, and while it can't match the octa-core chip's computational prowess has got it beat in gaming performance.

The 6800K comes with a weaker core clockspeed than either of the Skylake K-series chips, but because it too has an unlocked multiplier you can easily push it above 4GHz without too much effort at all. You also get the added memory bandwidth that quad-channel memory delivers too - so if you want your gaming rig to be a serious workstation machine as well as a gaming beast the 6800K is a great shout.

Read the full Intel Core i7 6800K review.

The best Intel Core i7 6800K prices we've found today:

If you can't see the price widget it's because your browser is running ad-blocking software. If you pause it you can check out the latest deals.

Best high-end CPU for gaming runner-up

Best high-end CPU runner-up - AMD Ryzen 7 1700X

AMD Ryzen 7 1700X

Cores: 8 | Threads: 16 | Base clock: 3.4GHz | Turbo: 3.8GHz | Socket: AM4

Approx.  $386 / £360

If you're not comfortable with running your brand new processor overclocked out of the box then the Ryzen 7 1700X is possibly a better option for you rather than the cheaper Ryzen 7 1700. And chances are you're looking at the Ryzen processors because you're after their high core and thread counts for productivity tasks over and above gaming performance.

For general rendering and encoding you're going to want your chip to be as stable as possible and still run at a high clockspeed. The R7 1700 is a great choice if you're willing to overclock, but the safer option is this 'X' suffixed version of AMD's octa-core range.

In terms of gaming performance you are leaving some of your GPU's potential frame rate in the box when pairing it with an AMD processor, at least you are for the time being. But with the multi-threaded performance on offer, at this price, if you're interested in using your PC for anything outside gaming this Ryzen is a great option.

Read the full AMD Ryzen 7 1700X review.

The best AMD Ryzen 7 1700X prices we've found today:

If you can't see the price widget it's because your browser is running ad-blocking software. If you pause it you can check out the latest deals.

Best high-end CPU for gaming runner-up

Best gaming CPU runner-up - AMD Ryzen 7 1700

AMD Ryzen 7 1700

Cores: 8 | Threads: 16 | Base clock: 3GHz | Turbo: 3.7GHz | Socket: AM4

Approx. $320 / £309

Though if you are happy with carrying out a little light overclocking on your new processor then the Ryzen 7 1700 is a great choice with a heady mix of fantastic 8-core pricing and still impressive number-crunching chops. At the same price as Intel's quad-core i7 7700K the 1700 will be a rather tantalising prospect for anyone that isn't primarily going to be gaming on their PC.

By pushing the somewhat miserly stock clocks up to the same levels as the other Ryzen 7 chips you can get pretty much the same overall performance out of the 1700 for a lot less cash. It's still not a dedicated gaming chip, but it's got the multi-threaded performance that might make those lower frame rates more palatable .

Read the full AMD Ryzen 7 1700 review.

The best AMD Ryzen 7 1700 prices we've found today:

If you can't see the price widget it's because your browser is running ad-blocking software. If you pause it you can check out the latest deals.

Best high-end CPU for gaming runner-up

Best high-end CPU for gaming runner-up - Core i7 6850K

Intel Core i7 6850K

Cores: 6 | Threads: 12 | Base clock: 3.6GHz | Turbo: 4GHz | Socket: LGA 2011 v3

Approx. $599 / £562

There are four processors in the Broadwell-E line-up with the 6800K sitting at the bottom of the stack offering the best mix of value and multi-threaded performance. If you want to look a little further upwards the similarly six-core i7 6850K comes with a slightly higher base clockspeed and a 3.8GHz Turbo speed, but it’s the extra PCIe lanes that make it relevant in gaming terms.

With the full 40 lanes of CPU-attached PCIe 3.0 connections the 6850K will allow you to run a dual-GPU system with the full bandwidth of a pair of x16 PCIe 3.0 slots and still have capacity left over for a couple of PCIe-based SSDs too.

The Ryzen R7 1700X though is still a tantalising option if you don't necessarily want to get the most out of your GPU and would rather put the emphasis on better multi-core performance for productivity tasks. But the Intel single-threaded performance still makes them the money-no-object gaming chips.

The best Intel Core i7 6850K prices we've found today:

If you can't see the price widget it's because your browser is running ad-blocking software. If you pause it you can check out the latest deals.

________________________________________________

Best budget CPU for gaming

Best budget CPU for gaming - Core i3 6100

Intel Core i3 6100

Cores: 2 | Threads: 4 | Base clock: 3.7GHz | Turbo: N/A | Socket: LGA 1151

Approx. $110 / £108

It’s probably not much of a surprise to see that Intel are able to take a clean sweep of the processor prizes with their latest Skylake CPU architecture. It’s powerful, efficient and modern - AMD’s competing FX chips are getting incredibly long in the tooth and I struggle to recommend anyone start a fresh build using outdated AMD kit. The mainstream Ryzen R5 chips - their hex-core and quad-core CPUs - are still a little bit outside of the realms of budget processors, but we'll see what the Ryzen 3 chips offer when they arrive later in the year.

The Core i3 6100 though is a dual-core processor, but it comes with HyperThreading enabled to give it four threads of processing power. That’s not going to suddenly put it on par with the superior i5 6600K, but it’s not far off especially considering it’s around half the price. The i3 range of CPUs, however, don’t come with Turbo mode turned on, nor do they come with unlocked multipliers either. Does that mean the 3.7GHz baseclock is your lot?

Well, no. If you pair the i3 with Intel’s top chipset, currently the Z170, you will still have access to some baseclock tweaks with select motherboard vendors. That means you can bump up the initial clockspeed above 4GHz with relative ease. Coupled with access to higher memory speeds with the top chipset (something which can help in CPU-limited scenarios) it means you’d ideally want to pair the i3 6100 with a low-end Z170 if possible.

Unfortunately that does mean you’re adding considerably to the build costs, but does give you a great little platform from which to iterate upon. Dropping an i5 or i7 into the mix later on down the line will keep your rig relevant for a good length of time.

I was hoping the release of the Intel Core i3 7350K would mean my budget CPU choice would change, but the $190 ($180) K-series i3 is a bit of a disappointment and not just because of that high price. The much-vaunted overclocking potential still isn't enough to give it a meaningful gaming performance delta over the similarly priced (and occasionally slightly cheaper) Core i5 7400.  The R5 chips start at quad-core, eight-thread and should be very competitively priced compared with the Core i3 range. We're still hopeful Ryzen can make a big splash in the mainstream market.

But, for now, the Skylake i3 6100 remains our budget pick. It's cheaper than its Kaby Lake replacement yet still delivers similar levels of gaming performance. But I'd probably recommend holding off on a low-end CPU purchase right now, at least until AMD have dropped their R5 silicon load - the lower-spec R3 chips aren't happening until the second half of this year and that's a long time to wait.

The best Intel Core i3 6100 prices we've found today:

If you can't see the price widget it's because your browser is running ad-blocking software. If you pause it you can check out the latest deals.

Best budget CPU for gaming runner-up

Best budget CPU for gaming runner-up - AMD FX 6300 Black Edition

AMD FX 6300 Black Edition

Cores: 6 | Threads: 6 | Base clock: 3.5GHz | Turbo: 4.1GHz | Socket: AMD AM3+

Approx. $75 / £77

The six-core AMD FX 6300 was my favourite budget CPU for the longest time. It’s got a great line in multi-threaded performance for such a cheap chip and you can seriously crank its clocks to produce breakneck frequency speeds. I’ve hit a solid 5GHz on my sample with some basic voltage tweaking and decent cooling.

That makes it impressively competitive with the Intel i3, but it’s the dead-end platform which is now holding it back, making it only worth a look if you're desperate for a budget build right now. The AM3+ base is still running on DDR3 and the you’re rather limited in upgrade terms too - spending big on an eight-core FX processor makes little sense with the AM4 platform and more budget-oriented Ryzen CPUs not far away now.

The best AMD FX 6300 prices we've found today:

If you can't see the price widget it's because your browser is running ad-blocking software. If you pause it you can check out the latest deals.

________________________________________________

How to buy a processor

How to buy a processor

While picking the right graphics card is probably the most important choice for any gaming rig, selecting the right CPU for gaming can arguably have a greater impact on your system as a whole. By choosing a particular processor you are locking yourself into a specific company’s ecosystem and upgrade path, and you’re inevitably limited as to what motherboard chipsets are available to you too.

The price you’re willing to pay is still going to be the single biggest factor in picking your processor - pricing can jump quickly from one chip to the next. This isn’t like the GPU world where there's probably a graphics card available for whatever spare change you’ve got in your wallet at any given time; because there are only two companies making x86 processors to go into our gaming rigs there are few real options available at each price point.

The GPU will be where you want to spend the largest part of your rig budget, but it doesn’t pay to completely unbalance your machine. A cheap, quad-core AMD CPU isn’t going to let you get the most out of your GTX 1080; your two key components need to be better matched than that. Of course if you’re Billy Big Budget then you can happily drop over three grand on an i7 6950X with a new Titan X to keep it company, but if money’s a little tighter than that you need to play it a little smarter. 

AMD processors

Intel processor or AMD processor?

AMD and Intel took different paths with the processor designs. Intel carried on resolutely working to get the most single-threaded performance it could out of one core while AMD bet the house on multi-threaded performance being the key to the future.

AMD lost. Particularly in gaming, where it’s still mostly a question of how much raw performance you can get out of your primary CPU core and on that count AMD’s processor design is lacking compared with Intel’s Core architecture. So for a serious gaming PC right now it’s Intel or nothing.

AMD had been the go-to guys for budget CPUs, though since they’ve left their FX range of processors twisting in the wind for years without any meaningful update they’re looking increasingly irrelevant. You can still build a well-priced machine with an AMD processor, but the dead-end AM3+ platform gives your PC no room to grow and you’re hobbling the performance of your GPU by hitching it to the AMD carthorse.

The new Ryzen CPUs have launched at the high-end, offering eight-core, 16-thread chips with insane multi-threaded performance for the money, but pretty limited single-core - and therefore gaming - performance. That's thanks to their still off-the-pace IPC levels compared with Intel. We're hoping that further optimisations, of what is still a brand spanking new CPU platform, might be able to close the gap and give AMD's Ryzen chips a bit of a gaming boost.

10 core Intel processor

More cores = more performance

How many cores do you need for a gaming machine? Realistically you can make do with a dual-core CPU so long as it’s HyperThreaded to offer four threads of processing power. But beyond four threads the returns quickly diminish, and in fact the difference between the Core i7 and Core i5 Skylake is utterly negligible. 

If you make the step beyond four physical cores though you will start to see a performance increase - the deca-core 6950X is able to offer incredible levels of gaming performance so long as you’ve got a powerful GPU strapped to it. That’s a crazily-priced CPU, however, but the six-core 6800K is only another $100 (£100) on top of the 6700K and can deliver genuinely tangible performance improvements.

That should only increase too as the promise of DirectX 12 and its core optimisations start to bear fruit. We’re still a little way away from celebrating proper multi-threading support in games, but thread count could become an important factor for gaming of the future.

The best chipset for your CPU

Overclocking and upgrading

To get the most out of your graphics card you need a good CPU, but to get the most out of that you need a decent motherboard. And your choice of motherboard holds the key to both what you’ll be able to do to push your processor to its limits and to your PC’s future upgrade path. And maybe you might even appreciate a little advice from your favourite hardware prodders on how to overclock...

Intel offer multiple chipsets which offer compatibility for different processors. For Skylake there’s the top-end Z170 chipset, followed by the more-mainstream H170 and H110 chipsets. If you’ve no interest in overclocking, or high-speed memory, then the H-series motherboards will be fine, but if you want to squeeze a little extra out of your CPU then the Z170 is the go-to platform for you Intel processor. It's the exact same situation with Kaby Lake's 200-series boards too.

Not only will the Z170 or Z270 boards get you the highest overclock from a K-series processor, but they will also give you a better chance of accessing baseclock overclocking for the locked down CPUs like the Core i3 6100.

There is a new line of 200-series Intel chipsets to accompany the Kaby Lake refresh which happened at the start of this year, but they're only really bringing support for the new Intel CPU line rather than anything particularly different in motherboard terms, a few extra PCIe lanes aside.

On the AMD side the new AM4 motherboards offer overclocking support in their X370, small form factor X300 and mainstream B350 chipsets. Ryzen also has a new dedicated AMD application to help smooth out the rough edges of overclocking from the comfort of Windows. No more getting elbow deep into the BIOS then? Well, I think you'll still get better results getting familiar with the blocky text of your motherboard's BIOS, but so far the overclocking performance of Ryzen has been rather limited.

In terms of the future though AMD are making a lot of noise about the future-proofing of their AM4 boards. AMD have said that Ryzen is a four year architecture so that socket will cater for all their CPU refreshes for at least that long. And we're not just talking about straight processors either - AMD have unified their motherboard platforms so that both their CPUs and upcoming Zen-based APUs will operate using the same socket and chipsets. So it probably makes sense to spend a healthy chunk of cash on your AM4 motherboard as it's likely to be around for a while - according to AMD, at least.

________________________________________________

Check Amazon for the latest deals and specs on CPUs.

Try these free to play games
?

These are affiliate links - clicking them and playing the games directly supports PCGamesN

Sign in to Commentlogin to comment
0V3RKILL avatarStreetguru avatarEwok avatarDave James avatarelites2012 avatarsintheticreality avatar+3
0V3RKILL Avatar
284
7 Months ago

all AMD system here with an 8350 clocked at 4.5GHz, 16GB at 1600Hz on a MSI 970 Mobo with a 290x MSI twinfrozer clocked at 1040Hz. I happily play everything I've purchased at maxed in 1080p, exept GTA5. There I only have grass in high & reflection sharpening on 0X. I play Deus Ex at max with 40fps. Never goes lower than 35fps. Waiting for Zen at the moment. Got my money's worth out of this system I got to be honest.

5
Ewok Avatar
7
6 Months ago

5 years on and I'm still not feeling the need to upgrade from my 2500k. Still playing new releases 1080p on Ultra without a hiccup at stock settings - with plenty of overclocking potential if I ever need to.

5
sintheticreality Avatar
109
3 Months ago

I've had a 2500K for 4 years and unless Ryzen benchmarks are amazing and cost-effective, I'm not bothering to upgrade.

2
U take teethwash then take job Avatar
2

im in the same boat, I kinda pulled a weird move though. I bought a razer blade (late 2016, 1060gtx/6700hq.) and the core, slapped a 1080gtx FTW in it, and thought that I was going to slam my desktops performance to pieces. Well... I'm starting to wonder if I really did. UNFORTUNATELY, I can't think of a good way to test this.... any ideas?

2
Dave James Avatar
265
6 Months ago

It's interesting how long-lived Intel's CPUs have been using the Core architecture. If AMD had been more competitive over the last five years, or if game engines took advantage of faster CPUs, would their processor performance have stagnated so much?

My office machine has an old Ivy Bridge chip and have no need to upgrade it. Though there is a Skylake in the test rig for up to date benchmarking purposes...

1
Streetguru Avatar
10
6 Months ago

Don't go AM3+ if you aren't getting an 8 core CPU, in addition you forgot about how the i7 6700 lets you get a more budget motherboard compared to an overclocking i5 + Z170 board

1
Dave James Avatar
265
6 Months ago

Personally I'd say just don't go AM3+ if you're buying fresh at all. It's a dead-end with new AMD chips coming in a few months.

And you're right about the budget boards; it's why I recommended the H170 as a decent option for those not looking to overclock their processors or needing high-performance memory.

1
Streetguru Avatar
10
6 Months ago

AM4 is taking far too long, but I think as far as new parts go an FX 8300 + ASrock 970A board that has USB 3.1 is pretty cheap for pure multi-threaded performance, or it's alright for certain kinds of servers

1
elites2012 Avatar
2
5 Months ago

intel R & D along with their convincing payouts, have lot more than AMD has. whats the point of a multi core cpu, when all you do is boost a single core to do all the work. why not go back to a single core and clock it to 5ghz or higher?

1
Danteska Avatar
6
3 Months ago

Why FX 6300 over 6350 and over 8350?

1
Dave James Avatar
265
3 Months ago

In terms of a budget CPU option the FX 6300 is a fair chunk cheaper than either the 6350 or 8350, and still offers a similar level of performance. The FX 6300 can also overclock like a hero if you want to squeeze some more performance out of it.

1
Tenshinai Avatar
2
2 Months ago

Written about the 6800K:

"and is arguably the best-value six-core CPU ever made"

Hardly, the AMD Thuban CPUs were awesome for its day, far beyond current Intel hexacores, and my friend is still running his 1090T, he has talked about upgrading for 2 years now, but because it keeps on being still "good enough", he´s now waiting for Ryzen before he decides. And that is despite his system being cheapskate to the point where he can no longer run with the turbo activated(both PSU and cooler was saved on heavily, against my strong advise not to, hehe).

1
Dave James Avatar
265
2 Months ago

I did say it was arguable ;)

But yeah, I loved the old 1090T! If AMD had kept on shrinking the Hammer architecture instead of shifting to the abortive Bulldozer designs they'd have a better shot at single-threaded performance. Still, roll on Ryzen, eh?

Anyways, back to the point, with the HyperThreading on the 6800K, and the quad-channel memory support, it delivers 12 threads of workstation performance for a great price. The 1090T was around $400 at launch too, so there's not a huge difference in that regard.

1
Tenshinai Avatar
2
2 Months ago

Oh, and BTW, you only talk about cores and threads in the article?

Some games totally adore having more or better cache, it´s the primary reason i went for a 4790K instead of 4690K, as Starcraft 2 get´s a noticeable improvement even when turning off hyperthreading and running those two at same clockrate.

1