NextGen consoles=AMD, so will PC gaming gain from AMD tech?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
B

Bradley_

Honorable
Jan 14, 2014
24
0
10,510
So the next gen consoles use AMD tech.
Most of the bigger pc games coming out for the foreseeable future will be made for consoles specifically, then ported to pc. Some will be multi platform on release, but perhaps many of those will be more optimized for consoles at first. For some of those we'll just need to wait for driver updates/patches etc to get the full PC optimization that the consoles got right out of the gate, others we wont get optimizations at for at all.

Some ppl around these forums have been recommending going AMD for PC gaming because of this. Given that consoles dominate the gaming market, is this recommendation to go amd centric hardware (cpu & gpu) legitimate?

*edit*
I recently picked up an r9 270x gpu and I was previously leaning towards upgrading my intel Q6600 to an intel i5 - strictly for the extra gaming boost (now I'm thinking amd instead?). My old rig runs any work apps I need just fine but I believe my q6600(oc'd@3ghz) is bottle-necking me in certain games (I'm assuming mostly the big open-world types like Black Flag/Farcry3/new high-res skyrim, etc...).
 
Solution
mace200200
CPU's generally aren't like GPU's where certain games will favor one brand more than the other. It does still happen but to a much lesser extent and that usually comes down to, for instance, how Starcraft 2 only runs on two cores so having a higher clock rate for that game is better than having multiple cores. But then since Battlefield can use multiple cores, clock rate doesn't matter so much and it's better to have multiple cores.
Sort by date Sort by votes
ewok93

ewok93

Dignified
Mar 18, 2013
4,634
0
16,960
Consoles and PCs are very different, so while a game may be optimized for 8 console cores, it may be optimized for 3 PC cores. Currently, about 10% iirc of CPUs have more than 4 cores. It would not make sense for a developer to optimize games for an 8 core CPU while 90% of the people playing the game will only have 4 cores. This does not mean AMD is better or worse than Intel, just that consoles have little to no effect on PC gaming.

AMD is not exactly comparable to Intel, as they perform better than the other in different cases, and you should pick one based on what you do currently, and how it will currently perform for you, not what it will be like in the future.

Edit: I may have phrased that wrong, and I'd like to avoid an Intel vs AMD argument here. Intel generally performs better than AMD at a higher price, so AMD is generally better for a lower budget than Intel.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
mace200200

mace200200

Honorable
Jun 5, 2012
1,697
0
12,160
CPU's generally aren't like GPU's where certain games will favor one brand more than the other. It does still happen but to a much lesser extent and that usually comes down to, for instance, how Starcraft 2 only runs on two cores so having a higher clock rate for that game is better than having multiple cores. But then since Battlefield can use multiple cores, clock rate doesn't matter so much and it's better to have multiple cores.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
geofelt

geofelt

Titan
Oct 9, 2006
54,290
4,142
174,240
I suspect AMD FUD.

No game developer wants to unnecessarily limit their market by requiring many cores to run their games.

Today, for gaming, a AMD quad is a good choice if your cpu budget is $125 or less. Intel quad is better if your cpu budget is $185 or more. In between, take your pick.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom