Single core performance or more cores?

AMDRadeonHD

Honorable
Jan 10, 2013
1,087
0
11,660
What's better for games like Counter-Strike: Source with 64 players, 1920×1080, installed graphics mods with lots of grenades, explosions, zombies and action? More cores or a better single core performance? For example, Intel Pentium G3240 3.0GHz (Haswell refresh) vs AMD Athlon X4 740 3.2GHz.
 
Solution
The situation in game is irrelevant vs how the game is programmed. Older games are typically going to use less cores so you want more powerful cores, although not necessarily less. The pentium would be a better choice.
Athlon's are pretty decent gaming CPU's for the money. I recommend those for plenty of budget builds. But, older gamea, wont utilize the quad core. If the Pentium has better per core performance, you will get better performance. The Pentium will give you the better performance for "old school" gaming.
 

WhiteSnake91

Distinguished
It depends if you're playing CPU intensive stuff, anything that is a console port will basically play fine on an AMD. On MMOs, and large scale RTS fights, the AMD will suffer but should still be playable. Exactly what games are you wanting to play? If it's alot of MMO and RTS you'd be better off getting like a haswell i3 and cheap h81 motherboard and used the saved money to try and get a good GPU.
 

AMDRadeonHD

Honorable
Jan 10, 2013
1,087
0
11,660


Counter-Strike: Source is going to be played the most with big maps with 64 players, graphical mods, anti-aliasing modes, lots of action, for example, when you throw grenades on 30 zombies, they're lit on fire and it drops the frame rate significantly, so I don't know if for those situations it's better to have more cores or a better single-core performance.

P.S.: I'm not going to play modern games, old school is the best in my opinion, so, a single core performance should be better for alot of players, etc.?