Random Thoughts Thread. (Clean version)

Discussion in 'Open Discussion' started by Phil, Apr 9, 2009.

  1. Strike105X

    Strike105X ヒットハード&高速 Award Winner!

    Messages:
    19,108
    Likes Received:
    784
    I find it quite satisfactory myself, then again I'm looking at it from a price per performance ratio, if we take out the cooler i didn't really pay much more for this build then my g3258 one, and the performance is awesome.
  2. resolutespider5

    resolutespider5 I mustache you a queshtion

    Messages:
    1,825
    Likes Received:
    232
    I think there is a good reason why more than 4 core/thread CPU gaming will take off: the ps4 and xb1.

    Developers usually develop for the consoles first, and then port to PC unoptimized ports with the minimum of effort. Since they are developing for 8 core consoles, when they port to PC they are also likely to be optimized for 8 core processors too. This means that 4 core/thread processors like most intel i5s may not be adequate for new releases.

    So in the past high IPC for 2 cores was necessary, meaning that intel processors had a huge advantage over amd. But with newer games, 8 cores plus may make amd a far better choice. Hyperthreading helps to some degree, and if intel starts allowing this on their cheaper processors then this will help their competitiveness.

    With ryzen, they may catch up to intel in IPC, but I feel they will probably always be behind to some extent. But their multicores are likely to be far more cost effective, meaning that they may become a better choice for gaming. Unless intel decide to radically cut prices on their 8 core cpus, which I suppose is a possibility.
  3. Strike105X

    Strike105X ヒットハード&高速 Award Winner!

    Messages:
    19,108
    Likes Received:
    784
    Well i just tried battlefield 1, 56% to 67% overall CPU usage, stable 60 FPS, i did get during the game loading screen when loading operations a 97% spike to CPU but in game it was between 56 to 67%.

    I thought that to but apparently it takes more to optimize a game for multicores then dual or quads, games at least started using quads more, but generally speaking few invest in multicore suport, titanfall 2 is to my surprise mostly uses 2 cores with the rest just being used as hyper threads, for preparing data, so it runs nicely on i3's.
    Last edited: Feb 17, 2017 at 10:47 AM
  4. resolutespider5

    resolutespider5 I mustache you a queshtion

    Messages:
    1,825
    Likes Received:
    232
    Yeah but if they'd already optimized for the xb1/ps4 then this work will already be done.
  5. Strike105X

    Strike105X ヒットハード&高速 Award Winner!

    Messages:
    19,108
    Likes Received:
    784
    XB1 and PS4 are just two systems, you optimize for one XB1 and one PS4 you pretty much optimized it for all of them, but PC's come in a dime and dozen, not to mention Intel is still dominant, and well... most intel's used out there are at best quads (i7's coming with hyper threading).
  6. Thanakil

    Thanakil NGemu Award Winner Award Winner!

    Messages:
    5,242
    Likes Received:
    655
    In Operations 64? Damn. That's very fucking nice.

    My 4690k @ 4.5ghz is just straight 90-100% in that mode. Much closer to 100% than 90%. I imagine DICE did a good job using 8 threads, compared to me which is 4 cores 4 threads.
    I'm running it higher than 60fps, but not THAT much higher.
    If you still have it installed, you can always test it with unlimited framerate and low/medium quality preset to see how much farther it'll go. This is the game that got my CPU the hottest.
    Strike105X likes this.
  7. Strike105X

    Strike105X ヒットハード&高速 Award Winner!

    Messages:
    19,108
    Likes Received:
    784
    I tried a lot of maps for operations and conquest 64, and that's what i got on all of them, i uninstalled the game unfortunately... both it and battlefront, they weren't fun for me and eating away over 100 GB of HDD space...

Share This Page