Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Since next-gen consoles have 8 cores, would an i5 struggle when those 8 core games come out on PC?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
October 8, 2013 10:25:17 AM

Title speaks for itself.
a b à CPUs
October 8, 2013 10:37:02 AM

Only time will tell. Keep in mind that IPC is much higher on Haswell than it is on Jaguar. I don't think it will make a difference for a while yet.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 8, 2013 10:38:53 AM

I seriously doubt it. First, those cores on the consoles have really low clock speeds. Second, I'm skeptical most developers will put all that to work. Games already have a long development cycle as it is. Every new gen promises great leaps in things like AI, but look how little it has advanced over the years. They never have the time they need.
m
0
l
Related resources

Best solution

a b à CPUs
October 8, 2013 10:50:02 AM

JustinXCIV said:
Title speaks for itself.

Not really. Console cores run at 1.75-2.0GHz. Intel i5 cores usually run at +3.4-4.6Ghz speeds with much higher IPC (efficiency per MHz). From what I've read it's also "recommended" that only 6-7 cores are actually used on consoles, allowing 1-2 free for background tasks. Example:-

"CPU usage show off 5 main threads, and one “orchestrator” thread. This means that 6 CPU's are being used, when the Playstation 4 has 8. The AMD Jaguar inside the Playstation 4 has 8 cores, each handling one hardware thread each. It’s possible that right now Sony are still nailing down the exact resources that are being reserved for the Operating System, and are therefore asking developers to work with only 6 of the CPU cores, just in case they need a little extra for the Operating System".
http://www.redgamingtech.com/killzone-shadow-fall-demo-...

With past console "cycles", the new consoles were typically based on top-end PC hardware at time of release. This time around they seem to be based more on mid-range hardware (eg, GFX are also only mid range typically on par with a 7850 card). 4x 4GHz i5 quad-cores are hardly being made obsolete vs 8x 1.75GHz cores :D 
Share
October 8, 2013 12:19:43 PM

I know and realize what you guys are talking about (@Bsim and clona) and totally agree with you, but dont you think that watch dogs leaked sys reqs are blowing intel cpus out of the water, when it compares an i7-4770k to an fx-8350 which in my opinion is better than the fx-8350 an superior to it and thus more expensive(logic), NO OFFENSE towards AMD buyers or the owners of this cpu, dont you think that these are going to flip the situation upside down? A month ago, an i5-4670k was the max cpu you could get for gaming, now an i7-4770k being recommended for the first next-gen game, this is a bit scary for new buyers of i5(haswell or IB) as me..... i was shocked by these leaked ones :/  I think they are proving that 8x1.75 are going to compete with the i5 4x4 as you might be forced to set the game to medium (in near future) to be able to play it smoothly.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 8, 2013 12:33:55 PM

No, because 4 fast cores will offer better performance then 8 slow cores.

Likewise, a superfast single-core would outperform any amount of cores.

The point is that the power of cores matters just as much as how many there are to use. That's why i5's generally perform about the same as faster clocked 8-core chips from AMD.
m
0
l
October 8, 2013 12:40:57 PM

Welp, I just purchased my 3570k 10min ago so I hope I'm good LOL.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 8, 2013 12:47:17 PM

rubidium said:
I know and realize what you guys are talking about (@Bsim and clona) and totally agree with you, but dont you think that watch dogs leaked sys reqs are blowing intel cpus out of the water.

"These following WatchDogs specs were published on Ubisofts sales site, Uplay. But were taken down again after a handful of hours. They have since been said to not be the official WatchDogs System Requirements. We will update as soon as the new requirements are passed through to us, for now though we will let you see what they mistakenly put up on the web."
http://www.game-debate.com/news/?news=9204
m
0
l
a c 478 à CPUs
October 8, 2013 1:12:17 PM

As wanderer11 stated, the consoles use the Jaguar core.

Jaguar is a successor to Bobcat and I believe benchmarks have shown that overall there is a 15% performance improvement from Bobcat. That is a pretty good performance increase. However, it is still much slower than the Richland APUs / FX CPUs performance.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 8, 2013 1:27:45 PM

When the game actually drops, I'm pretty positive we'll see Tom's benchmarks with this title running on everything from Pentiums, to i3s, Phenoms, FX's, and the i7's up to the Extremes.
m
0
l
October 8, 2013 1:38:21 PM

BSim500 said:
rubidium said:
I know and realize what you guys are talking about (@Bsim and clona) and totally agree with you, but dont you think that watch dogs leaked sys reqs are blowing intel cpus out of the water.

"These following WatchDogs specs were published on Ubisofts sales site, Uplay. But were taken down again after a handful of hours. They have since been said to not be the official WatchDogs System Requirements. We will update as soon as the new requirements are passed through to us, for now though we will let you see what they mistakenly put up on the web."
http://www.game-debate.com/news/?news=9204

I know these ones were fake, but they have been updated recently maybe today not sure http://www.game-debate.com/news/?news=9204 So thats what im talking about

clonazepam said:
When the game actually drops, I'm pretty positive we'll see Tom's benchmarks with this title running on everything from Pentiums, to i3s, Phenoms, FX's, and the i7's up to the Extremes.

Hope so, although i doubt it. I didnt imagine the devs will manage to make a game that recommends an 8 core cu that fast, i highly doubt this game will use the 8 core cpu efficiently, they must have done a lot of errors at least at their 1st experience trying to make a WHOLE game code multi-threaded and optimized for 8 cores.
m
0
l
!