Most heavily threaded games?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
J

jrgreed

Distinguished
Feb 21, 2010
71
0
18,630
What are some of the most heavily threaded games?

Not games that are CPU intensive, but games that are known to be specifically heavily threaded (I am under the impression that only DX 11 games really take advantage of threading?)

I know Intels per-core performance FAR exceeds AMDs, but with DX11 and DX12 and the fact that both the XB1 and PS4 use 8 core systems with super weak per-core performance, I see game developers putting a LOT more focus on spreading the weight out across as many cores as possible.

I would like to check out the most heavily threaded games in existance, and see how they perform when compairing a 8 core FX to a 4 core i5...

I just cant believe that Intels per-core performance will benefit in games as much as over the next 4-5 years while we see game developers intentionally trying to spread the weight across 8 weaker cores.
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
photonboy

photonboy

Titan
Jun 20, 2006
21,567
13
85,015
Your best bet is to use one of the Metro benchmarks since you need something repeatable.

BF4 is also well threaded in Multiplayer but finding repeatable scenarios is rather difficult.

Having said this, I'm not quite sure what your goal is. If I showed you an FX-8350 using about 60% of its processing compared to an i5 using 90% of its processing and both getting the SAME EXACT frame rate what is your conclusion?

I have no doubt that Intel's advantage will be reduced, on average, if comparing an i5-4440 and FX-8350 for example. And yes, in large part due to the influence of the consoles, and especially when we get DX12.

*The Intel CPU wins until the point that, on average, every game somebody plays is working better on the AMD CPU. Not just the latest games but what that person actually plays.

Put another way in terms of Passmark score. The i5-4690K scores 7740, and the FX-8350 scores 9018. The i5 has half the thread count.

That means that you don't benefit from the FX-8350 until the point you use more than 86% of its capability. Put again another way, you'd have to use 100% of the FX-8350's processing which is highly unlikely to be roughly 16% faster than an i5-4690K.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
babernet_1

babernet_1

Honorable
May 8, 2012
2,850
0
13,460
Don't bother. Already the 5820K Haswell that costs just a bit more than the 4790K has six screaming cores that can be overclocked well above 4GHz. In a couple years the next generation Broadwell E series will have 8 to 12 cores and AMD will be a footnote.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
L

LostAlone

Distinguished
Jan 3, 2011
296
0
18,960
In truth there are very very few games that are CPU bound in the modern age. There's a bunch of reasons for that - Graphics cards have gotten more powerful why CPUs have heavily flattened out; the major improvements in games being focused on graphics, and games just not being very CPU intensive tasks to begin with.

With more and more API's moving math from the CPU to the GPU (taking advantage of specifically built processor units that are highly efficient where general processors aren't - see tesselation, physx etc) the CPU isn't all that relevent. Sure, you want as much power as you can out of the CPU, because why not? More is better! Especially when you are going to spend way more on the GPU anyway, you may as well get a better chip too. But in truth there isn't a lot of effect in CPU power, and far far less on core count than you might think. Most games aren't well threaded anyway, leveraging only one core. Some are better, but not many.

Basically, game devs aren't spreading the load across more cores because there isn't a load to spread for most day to day tasks. Outside bench marks its really hard to see the difference in CPU alone. That's not to say that games won't tax your CPU at all, or that a better CPU can improve framerates, but it's a minor factor compared to GPU power most of the time.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
photonboy

photonboy

Titan
Jun 20, 2006
21,567
13
85,015


The i5-5820K isn't just slightly more expensive though. You need a more expensive motherboard and DDR4 memory. And, while it's reasonable for video editors there's no benefit for gamers currently.

Also, the point of the post was more about how something like an FX-8350 was likely to do in the future with its higher core count compared to an i5 but weaker performance per core. The thread wasn't aimed at discussing the best PC regardless of cost.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
J

jrgreed

Distinguished
Feb 21, 2010
71
0
18,630
despite all said, there have to be some games in existance that are heavily threaded.

Thats all im really asking for, is if there are any currently existing games that have the ability to use more than 4 threads/cores.

(again, not CPU intensive games, but games that take advantage of as many as 8 threads)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
J

jrgreed

Distinguished
Feb 21, 2010
71
0
18,630


Post was actually mainly about finding heavily threaded games, and I was looking to avoid CPU vs CPU discussion entirely... I shouldnt have included details I guess :p
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
babernet_1

babernet_1

Honorable
May 8, 2012
2,850
0
13,460


Battlefield 4 is faster on the 4770K than the 4670K so yes, it uses more than 4 cores. In four or more years, yes, more programs will use more cores.

 
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